> I do not understand how this trip down memory lane is relevant.


I look at this from a different angle: it shows you what your existing options are (or were). I believe that the prevailing wisdom is that farmers will use pesticides and herbicides, because they are needed to supply adequate crops on a commercial scale. And currently the options are the options. Of those options, applied properly, neonics provide the least collateral damage overall.

I think all would agree that "not treating" is currently not an option.

And let's not forget the dozen other threads in the past year that have detailed the compounding effects of other applications such as fungicides and additives like surfactants to overall toxicity loads and susceptibility.

> Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.


S

Skillman, NJ

Just thinking out loud


             ***********************************************
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