🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <YmhTkHAkl3E2EwQU@upthorpe.demon.co.uk>, Oz wrote:
> Sorry, does that mean that you, presumably a non-farmer, would prefer
> farmers to use more chemicals?

As a non-farmer, but an interested consumer of what they produce, I am 
delighted that farmers use chemicals. Civilisation would hardly have advanced 
beyond the hunter-gatherer stage unless farmers had treated the land with the 
chemicals contained in lime, ash and animal manure, to name but three sources. 
Water is also quite a useful chemical in agricultural contexts.

The important questions, of course, are which chemicals and how much and 
how often and where and when and on what and in which combination. These are 
complex issues, not susceptible to such a simple response as "more" or "less". 
So, I'm afraid I must decline your kind invitation to participate in that sort 
of debate.

Regards,

Roger

PS Your tone suggests that you are a farmer. Are you?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
Roger Whitehead,
14 Amy Road, Oxted, Surrey RH8 0PX, England
(Tel +44 (0)1883 713074; fax +44 (0)1883 716793)