I find many of the arguments for "traditional" cultivars to be specious.
Every traditional cultivar was at one time a cutting-edge improvement over
the previous "traditional" cultivar--going clear back to wild types (which
were often toxic to humans).

There is no inherent difference between a crop bred for virus or fungus
resistance, or lower phytotoxin levels, or higher vitamin content by
precision genetic engineering than one bred by hit-or-miss mutation and/or
hybridization.

Today's most advanced cultivars will be considered to be "heritage"
varieties in coming years.

The adoption of disease- or pest-resistant cultivars by traditional
farmers, all other things being equal, would be a huge plus for them.  The
engineered crops breed true, wouldn't cost any more, and could change
subsistence farmers' lives for the better, since as James points out, they
wouldn't need to export their meager surpluses.
-- 
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