I recognize, and I could have explained that. I appreciate you explained it. They are speaking about coatings and dust, and those are important things to talk about. They're talking about neonics, but the studies weren't done here. They were done elsewhere. So it's not to say that they're not valid, I'm simply saying, would it not be helpful to our industry if someone was actually doing the studies here? It doesn't invalidate these studies at all. They're quite valuable obviously, and they pointed to some things. But my guess is—and I haven't read these studies and we'd have to go and look at them—the EU decided to place a moratorium, did they use these references to actually develop the moratorium?
I don't know. I don't know whether you know, but if we were doing our own.... We're looking at short-term and long-term solutions. Some of the short term are best management practices—and you've answered that question. Some of the longer-term issues are seed coatings and some other things that perhaps we can do, polymers and those sort of things.
So I guess the question I would ask is this, and maybe I should have asked CropLife but we ran out of time. Is there a timeline that you see that needs to be associated with this sense of where we go forward? Notwithstanding that I believe the industry is actually trying to do it quickly, but in your view should this be something that needs to be done quickly?