>Is there any evidence to back this up?  Studies previously posted on this
list show that use/no use of neonics don't affect crop yield significantly.

The author, Jon Entine, is a prolific pro chemical industry writer.  His
excellent books and blogs are a good balance to the fear-mongering anti
chemical crowd.  However, he has a clear pro-industry bias, and as such,
his opinions should be taken with the same grain of salt as those of the
anti-chemical extremists.  One difference though, is that Entine's comments
are usually based upon actual science and citations.

For a more direct answer to your question, read the actual Humboldt paper.
The situation in Europe is very different than that in the U.S., as they
are not allowed to plant genetically engineered Bt crops, which in the US
may have more effect against WCR than do the neonic seed treatments.  It
appears to me that the projected losses are likely in the right ballpark.

Agriculture is certainly possible without the neonics, but it may be less
profitable, and other insecticides may need to be used to replace them.
For some crops, such as maize, rotation helps, but the farmer's profits may
suffer.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html