Farmers suing DEA for right to grow industrial hemp

[Stampyhead]

Sounds like these guys have a pretty good case. Think they'll win?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/17/pip.hempregulation/index.html

The feds call industrial hemp a controlled substance -- the same as pot, heroin, LSD -- but advocates say a sober analysis reveals a harmless, renewable cash crop with thousands of applications that are good for the environment.

Two North Dakota farmers are taking that argument to federal court, where a November 14 hearing is scheduled in a lawsuit to determine if the Drug Enforcement Administration is stifling the farmers' efforts to grow industrial hemp. The DEA says it's merely enforcing the law.

Marijuana and industrial hemp are members of the Cannabis sativa L. species and have similar characteristics. One major difference: Hemp won't get you high. Hemp contains only traces of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the compound that gets pot smokers stoned. However, the Controlled Substances Act makes little distinction, banning the species almost outright.

Marijuana, which has only recreational and limited medical uses, is the shiftless counterpart to the go-getter hemp, which has a centuries-old history of handiness.

More... (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/17/pip.hempregulation/index.html)

[yellow]

Nope. They'll loose.

[skunk]

Besides which, claiming in the article that "Marijuana, which has only recreational and limited medical uses, is the shiftless counterpart to the go-getter hemp, which has a centuries-old history of handiness" is utter crap. The British Pharmacopeia of 1936 (before its demonisation) had eighteen pages on the medical uses of marijuana, used by the Victorians and their predecessors for everything from glaucoma to incontinence. The list of ailments it helps with is truly staggering. According to some, the laws prohibiting it only appeared because of the imminent threat hemp-based newsprint posed to the paper pulp businesses of various US newspaper magnates. I blame Randolph Hearst.

[yellow]

I fear that the Feds will claim an inability to tell the difference from hemp and regular pot without spot checks, which they are undermanned for. Therefore, to keep the ultradangerous gateway drug that is marijuana out of the hands of god fearing Americans.. no hemp. Damn hippies.

:rolleyes:

[Stampyhead]

Besides which, claiming in the article that "Marijuana, which has only recreational and limited medical uses, is the shiftless counterpart to the go-getter hemp, which has a centuries-old history of handiness" is utter crap.
True, but this is more or less the argument they are going to have to use if they want to get anywhere with their case. Industrial hemp will need to distance itself from marijuana, sort of like Al Gore did from Clinton in the 2000 election.

I fear that the Feds will claim an inability to tell the difference from hemp and regular pot without spot checks, which they are undermanned for. Therefore, to keep the ultradangerous gateway drug that is marijuana out of the hands of god fearing Americans.. no hemp. Damn hippies.
Gotta love a government that rules by laziness. Oh wait, they're all like that...

[yellow]

For a lot of issues like this, I always feel like the old guard needs to die off first. Once the Baby Boomers are the oldest generation.. and gas is $6.00/gallon in the US.. Hey.. let's give hemp a shot! Why didn't we think of this sooner?

[Ugg]

For a lot of issues like this, I always feel like the old guard needs to die off first. Once the Baby Boomers are the oldest generation.. and gas is $6.00/gallon in the US.. Hey.. let's give hemp a shot! Why didn't we think of this sooner?

You've got a good point. What's even more ironic is that the farmers of North Dakota are mostly very, very old and very, very conservative. The state's been fighting literally for its economic survival. Hemp is ideally suited for the area and would help diversify the economy.

It doesn't destroy the environment like cotton so often does, nor requires massive amounts of oil based fertilizer and water like corn.

The fear is that hemp fields would provide an ideal hiding space for marijuana. However, the reality is far different. An aerial survey would easily reveal the difference. Corn fields would be a much better place for illicit growers and I'm sure that they already do.

[Swarmlord]

For a lot of issues like this, I always feel like the old guard needs to die off first. Once the Baby Boomers are the oldest generation.. and gas is $6.00/gallon in the US.. Hey.. let's give hemp a shot! Why didn't we think of this sooner?

I"ll bet hemp produces more fuel per acre than corn or any of the other crops being grown for ethanol or biodiesel. It also doesn't deplete the soil, doesn't require expensive herbacides or extensive irrigation. Obviously something that should be written off as undoable when we can do it the hard way rather than risking acceptance of the evil weed. :rolleyes:

[ham_man]

I never quite understood the ban on hemp. It is a very versitile crop with very few drawbacks (its "link" to marijuana among them).

Athough I can only imagine what would ever happen if a brush fire came into contact with a hemp field...:rolleyes:

[solvs]

Athough I can only imagine what would ever happen if a brush fire came into contact with a hemp field...:rolleyes:
Doesn't work like that.


So, are we all agreeing on this? Hm. How often does that happen?

[Stampyhead]

Doesn't work like that.


So, are we all agreeing on this? Hm. How often does that happen?

Wow, I think it's a first.

[Swarmlord]

Doesn't work like that.


So, are we all agreeing on this? Hm. How often does that happen?

Not to mention that there's no THC in industrial hemp, so it would have no more effect on people than a hay or straw fire.

[yellow]

I think there's still THC in industrial hemp, but in megaminute amounts in comparison to regular cannabis.

It does indeed seem like we've reached consensus that hemp might actually be a good crop to consider.

So, what keeps the Feds from allowing it as a test crop?

It's taint?
It's actual usability?
Old habits dying hard?

Is it odd he every time I type "hemp", I end up typing "help"? :confused:

[shu82]

It must be banned!!!! It comes from the same devil weed as the drug that is ruining our nation!!!!!!;)

Seriously though, we still import processed hemp. If we could grow our own it would even help a little in our trade deficit.

We still all agree, weird.......

[freeny]

For a lot of issues like this, I always feel like the old guard needs to die off first. Once the Baby Boomers are the oldest generation.. and gas is $6.00/gallon in the US.. Hey.. let's give hemp a shot! Why didn't we think of this sooner?

Those same god fearing baby boomers only breed more god fearing ignorant children.

[yellow]

Those same god fearing baby boomers only breed more god fearing ignorant children.

Agreed.. but it seems to me that successive generations tolerate more and more behavior that their ancestors might have termed "aberrant". And the contrary, not tolerate behavior that their ancestors saw as "normal".

I look at racism, sexism, and attitudes about homosexuality.

I would never say that there aren't real problems (still) will all 3, but it seems to me that all 3 aren't as cut and dried according societal mores that they were 20, 30, 40, 50+ years ago.

I believe that this is partially due to the "old guard" dying off, and partially due to changing perceptions of tolerance.

I can only hope that the market for hemp products and production follows this same vein. Hemp does a lot of amazing things, and would really help us deal with the lot of the environments & production issues that we are currently facing, and will surely face in the future. Plastics, fibers, fuel, etc.

[Swarmlord]

I think there's still THC in industrial hemp, but in megaminute amounts in comparison to regular cannabis.

It does indeed seem like we've reached consensus that hemp might actually be a good crop to consider.

So, what keeps the Feds from allowing it as a test crop?

It's taint?
It's actual usability?
Old habits dying hard?

Is it odd he every time I type "hemp", I end up typing "help"? :confused:

I've read and also had it confirmed by several law enforcement types that it all boils down to the inability for the DEA and local law enforcement to easily distinguish between industrial and recreational forms of weed. The methods that they use to locate and monitor growers and distributors would basically become useless without chemically analyzing any suspect samples.

[obeygiant]

I've read and also had it confirmed by several law enforcement types that it all boils down to the inability for the DEA and local law enforcement to easily distinguish between industrial and recreational forms of weed. The methods that they use to locate and monitor growers and distributors would basically become useless without chemically analyzing any suspect samples.

Well having seen both being grown I could tell the difference between the two. The Hemp is super tall while the pot plant is much shorter because its been "engineered" that way over generations much like corn has to yield a shorter stalk and a bigger ear.

Here is an interesting article:

Distinguishing Hemp from Its Cousin?
On one of your pages, you state: "While industrial hemp and marijuana may look somewhat alike to an untrained eye, an easily trained eye can distinguish the difference." I work for the sheriff's department in San Bernardino County in California and would like to know the difference - physically, microscopically and THC and other cannabinol concentrations.
To answer or comment: Click Here.

A#1. The difference in appearance and growing methods is akin to the difference between growing corn and roses. Industrial hemp and feral ditchweed are grown closely together (rows are as close as 4 inches apart), it is grown in large multi-acre plots, it grows thin and tall, as tall as 20 feet high in many cases, has few branches or leaves below the tops, and is grown 108-120 days.

Contrast that with medicinal cannabis: grown 6 feet apart, it is a shorter fatter bush with many branches, smaller plots with fewer plants, and is grown for 60-90 days. When ready to harvest, the corn vs. roses analogy is even more striking. I have pictures of medicinal cannabis grown legally in Europe, where it is next to an orchard and vineyard, and it is clearly very different from the industrial hemp pictures from Canada.

There are differences in leaf structure that are apparent even after harvest, as most medicinal cannabis plants are either broad leafed with a 5 or 7 leaf pattern (cannabis Indica) or a tight bud or nugget with orange "hairs" (from an Afghani strain, preferable to growers because it is ready to harvest quickest, and their customers prefer it). The cannabis Sativa that is typically industrial hemp matures the slowest, and Sativa is not preferred by most customers any more.

THC content in feral hemp is probably around 0-2 percent. Industrial hemp in Canada is 0.3 percent or less, and better commercial varieties of medicinal cannabis are up to 25 percent. Don't buy the argument that 1 percent THC in hemp is enough to get high, because industrial hemp also has high CBD (cannabidiol, a cannabinoid in hemp) that is essentially a THC antagonist. More CBD means the THC is less effective, and hemp is highest in CBD and medicinal is lowest. So even if there is 1 percent THC in hemp, the CBD makes it useless to smoke. As for extracting the THC from hemp: why bother? If you can buy pot (even in your jail) for as low as $100/oz., why try and extract it at great cost and hassle? Just go down to the local park and buy real pot and save the inconvenience. It's much like saying only people over 21 can buy potatoes, since kids might make vodka out of it!

And remember, industrial hemp pollens will make the sinsemilla (seedless, highest potency, requires an absence of cannabis pollen) downwind for many miles less potent.

Officer, please remember that you are among the finest, best trained police in the world. If every other police force in the industrialized world can tell the difference, I'm sure that when the time is appropriate POST or DEA or USDA or California AG or someone to whom it is important will provide the necessary information to show you the difference between the two. link (http://naihc.org/hemp_information/content/hempCharacter.html)

[freeny]

Agreed..

I think your statement was true but it will take much longer then the few years for the baby boomers to age.

[leekohler]

I've read and also had it confirmed by several law enforcement types that it all boils down to the inability for the DEA and local law enforcement to easily distinguish between industrial and recreational forms of weed. The methods that they use to locate and monitor growers and distributors would basically become useless without chemically analyzing any suspect samples.

So legalize it then.

[yellow]

I think your statement was true but it will take much longer then the few years for the baby boomers to age.

Quite true.

They've just hit "official" retirement age this month.

[Swarmlord]

So legalize it then.

I can't believe that it's illegal in the first place. It grows wild all over the state of Nebraska especially along all the rivers and creeks and essentially holds the banks intact preventing a lot of erosion.

That's it's lumped in with coke and heroin is just idiocy. That in this day and age it's still considered a third rail within politics for either side is even stupider.

[freeny]

Quite true.

They've just hit "official" retirement age this month.

My sister is the very tail end of the baby boomers and she is 42.

20 more years at least....

[MacNut]

That's it's lumped in with coke and heroin is just idiocy. That in this day and age it's still considered a third rail within politics for either side is even stupider.That would be a good question to ask at the next presidential debate.

[yellow]

My sister is the very tail end of the baby boomers and she is 42.

20 more years at least....

Technically I don't think she's a "baby boomer", almost, but not quite.

From the US Gov:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=4863&type=0&sequence=1

Having enjoyed historically high incomes over their working years, baby boomers (people born from 1946 to 1964) make up one of the most prosperous generations in U.S. history

I would think a the early boomers were in their 20s during 'free love' period and would have quite a different view on drugs and their effect on the population (as well as things like industrial hemp), when compared to their predecessors.

Damn hippes. :)

[IJ Reilly]

Previous thread on this subject:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=56198

It was only three and a half years ago, so why am I the only one who remembers it? Probably because I'm not smoking hemp! ;)

[skunk]

It was only three and a half years ago, so why am I the only one who remembers it? Probably because I'm not smoking hemp! ;)Paying for hemp is spending money for old rope.

[IJ Reilly]

Paying for hemp is spending money for old rope.

Why knot?

[ham_man]

Not to mention that there's no THC in industrial hemp, so it would have no more effect on people than a hay or straw fire.
Well it's not a matter of whether it will get you high (it won't), Swarm, but rather stoners think that it will get them high...;)