Along the lines of the agronomics, I would say ditto to what Rick is talking about on the soybean side of things, so I'm not going to get into that.
For growers, I think we look for choice to be competitive. That's what it's all about in this business of agriculture, being competitive with your neighbour, and your international neighbour too. I think choice is something we look for. Certainly biotechnology has offered us that choice in many different crops, and in a lot of complementary respects as well.
The big thing I think we've been able to do, and I think it's where we need to go, is how we manage it a bit better. I think in the soybean industry we've had a good track record over the last 15 to 20 years, and maybe even longer than that. We were actually segregating product before GM was even introduced.
I think the managing ability has also paid us huge dividends in the soybean industry. We've been able to capitalize on markets that will pay a premium for segregated product. As long as we have those low-level presence thresholds in place in these countries, as the soybean industry, we can work within those thresholds and we can deliver that product. That gives a huge advantage for our growers and our industry.
The rough mathematics--and I know Michelle always talks about the rough math.... We haven't had a real study on it, but given the premiums and the number of bushels of soybeans on the export side of things, it's not inconceivable that we're probably running between $75 million and $100 million in this country of extra income because we manage the system. The fact that we've been able to take a situation that's been good for all growers, manage it a little further, and capitalize on more returns to keep those growers profitable I think is quite critical.