Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 31 May 2007 10:42:15 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
If you want to make a case for natural pollinators, it is not with their
lack.
Mankind exists on a surprisingly small number of cultivated crops and
the larger problem is that these crops have become more uniform with
time. Add to that, most all do not need pollinators but are either wind
pollinated or do-it-themselves.
Where insect pollinators come in is to cause diversity. They do not
operate by the rules and can cause diversity in outcome. That is what
"nature" wants since, with diversity comes survival. One plant may be
susceptible to a specific disease while another of the same species will
not, so the species survives. With mono-culture and no pollinators to
add diversity, you invite disease to spread unchecked.
So it is not the number of pollinators that is the real issue, but the
diversity you get from natural pollinators.
Unfortunately, there are trade-offs. With diversity you can get smaller
yields and more plants susceptible to disease, pollination fees, and
non-uniform ripening, just the opposite of what you want as a farmer.
There is a reason for mono-culture.
Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine
******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm *
******************************************************
|
|
|