Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

Law The Cannabis Chronicles - Misc Cannabis News

Ban on marijuana users owning guns is unconstitutional, U.S. judge rules


(Reuters) - A federal law prohibiting marijuana users from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oklahoma has concluded, citing last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights.

U.S. District Judge Patrick Wyrick, an appointee of former Republican President Donald Trump in Oklahoma City, on Friday dismissed an indictment against a man charged in August with violating that ban, saying it infringed his right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.

Wyrick said that while the government can protect the public from dangerous people possessing guns, it could not argue Jared Harrison's "mere status as a user of marijuana justifies stripping him of his fundamental right to possess a firearm."

He said using marijuana was "not in and of itself a violent, forceful, or threatening act," and noted that Oklahoma is one of a number of states where the drug, still illegal under federal law, can be legally bought for medical uses.

"The mere use of marijuana carries none of the characteristics that the Nation's history and tradition of firearms regulation supports," Wyrick wrote.

Laura Deskin, a public defender representing Harrison, said the ruling was a "step in the right direction for a large number of Americans who deserve the right to bear arms and protect their homes just like any other American." She called marijuana the most commonly used drug illegal at the federal level.

The U.S. Department of Justice did not respond to request for comment but is likely to appeal.

The decision marked the latest instance of a court declaring a gun regulation unconstitutional after the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority in June ruled that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.

That ruling, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, announced a new test for assessing firearms laws, saying restrictions must be "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."

On Thursday, the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals cited that decision in declaring unconstitutional a federal law barring people under domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms.
 


You're flying from a state where marijuana is legal to a state where marijuana is legal. You think that means you're in the clear, but you'd be wrong. No matter your departure and arrival destinations, it's still illegal to fly with marijuana.
That's because marijuana possession still remains illegal under federal law, and when you fly, federal agencies are in charge.

98f5bd40-a331-11ed-bfd3-8cef115a77f0

A Transportation Security Administration agent checks a flyer through security at O'Hare International Airport in 2019. (Erin Hooley/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images) (Chicago Tribune via Getty Images)
 


You're flying from a state where marijuana is legal to a state where marijuana is legal. You think that means you're in the clear, but you'd be wrong. No matter your departure and arrival destinations, it's still illegal to fly with marijuana.
That's because marijuana possession still remains illegal under federal law, and when you fly, federal agencies are in charge.

98f5bd40-a331-11ed-bfd3-8cef115a77f0

A Transportation Security Administration agent checks a flyer through security at O'Hare International Airport in 2019. (Erin Hooley/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images) (Chicago Tribune via Getty Images)
Wow, in a lot of ways you guys have it better than us for access and legalisation

But in this instance we beat you
Our medical legalisation is federal
So I can fly domestically with my meds if I have it in the proper container with the label and my name on it etc

We have one state where it is recreationally legal and you can grow a couple plants outside (the laws here are a bit flaky but another yarn)
These laws are not universal to other states though and you couldn't expect the same treatment accross borders

But as for legally prescribed medical weed, I am allowed to travel the country state to state without prosecution
 

The 2023 U.S. Cannabis Policy Reform Horizon



There was great hope for U.S federal cannabis policy reform in 2022. As it turns out, the early 2022 optimism surrounding outright legalization or de-scheduling was never a reality, especially under a Democrat-led Congress and White House.

Nonetheless, we did see progress in the evolution of the debate from being an afterthought to entering the mainstream. Remember when then-Presidential candidate Mitt Romney dismissed even a discussion about this topic. Now, both parties have their cannabis reform champions. It was, after all, Sen. Mitch McConnell, who initiated the most significant federal cannabis policy reform in U.S. history via the 2018 Farm Bill. This is a dramatic departure from a decade ago when the issue was simply dismissed. Even the most insignificant mention of cannabis reform by a sitting federal elected official impacts cannabis capital markets and stock prices in real time.

That said, the SAFE Banking Act passed the House again, with the potential to be included in a $1.7 trillion omnibus spending bill, but did not advance through the Senate. It was blocked by, ironically, Sen. Mitch McConnell. While Safe Banking may not have, on its own, changed the economics of the cannabis industry, its companion bill, the CLIMB Act, would. For those of us who worked through the boom and bust of the Canadian public markets, it’s all but certain that the CLIMB Act would cause billions upon billions of dollars to be injected into the cannabis industry. This year will see the development of these two significant measures, but a split Congress will undoubtedly make them more challenging to advance.

Despite Joe Biden’s seeming hatred of the cannabis plant, he did something that no other sitting president has ever done. On December 2, 2022, he signed the “Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act,” H.R. 8454, into law. This bipartisan legislation is the first stand-alone cannabis reform bill to pass both the House and Senate, marking a significant milestone in the evolution of federal cannabis policy. Momentum is building.

While I do not expect the White House to be a leader on this issue in 2023, the recent scandals coming out of the Executive Branch may cause President Biden to pull an Andrew Cuomo and push the measure to distract from these other matters.

This year I expect to see further pushes for 280e tax reform and bankruptcy reform at the federal level. A bankruptcy reform measure could instill greater confidence in the lending around the cannabis industry. And of course, there will be state ballot measures, despite the few major failures we saw last year in North Dakota, Arkansas, and South Dakota. In the 2024 election cycle, I’d watch for decriminalization ballot measures in Wyoming, Nebraska, Idaho, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

Ultimately, federal cannabis legalization in U.S. is still missing its “why.” Every country legalizes cannabis for different reasons. Sometimes it’s for medical access. Sometimes it’s for social or criminal justice reform. Sometimes it’s for the economy and job creation. We still don’t know the “why” that will make federal lawmakers in U.S. push cannabis reform forward. Until we do, it’s anyone’s guess.
 

DEA Classifies Novel Cannabinoids Delta-8 And -9 THCO As Controlled Substances, Even When Synthesized From Legal Hemp


The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) says that two cannabinoids that have emerged in state markets do not meet the federal definition of legal hemp and are therefore considered illegal controlled substances.

Attorney Rod Kight inquired about the legal status of delta-8 THC-O and delta-9 THC-O with the federal agency last year and followed up earlier this month.

DEA sent a response letter on Monday, saying the two cannabinoids “do not occur naturally in the cannabis plant and can only be obtained synthetically, and therefore do not fall under the definition of hemp.”

“Delta-9-THCO and delta-8-THCO are tetrahydrocannabinols having similar chemical structures and pharmacological activities to those contained in the cannabis plant,” the letter from Terrence L. Boos, chief of DEA’s Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section, continued.

Kight responded to DEA’s letter in a blog post on Monday, writing that “although I do not always agree with the DEA’s view on cannabis matters, I agree with this opinion and, frankly, am not surprised. This is what I have been saying for a while.”

“I have been concerned about the proliferation of THC acetate ester (THCO) for a while. It has always been my view that THCO is a controlled substance under federal law,” he said. “Although it can be made from cannabinoids from hemp, THCO is not naturally expressed by the hemp plant. It is a laboratory creation that does not occur in nature, at least not from the hemp plant.”

There’s been substantial confusion within the cannabis industry since the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp containing up to 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis. Since that reform was enacted, the market for natural and synthetic cannabinoids has expanded in states across the country.

While there are many novel cannabinoids, one of the best known is delta-8 THC, which can be synthetically produced from CBD but also occurs in trace amount naturally in the cannabis plant. Several states have worked to regulate the product, which unlike CBD does have intoxicating effects.

DEA officials have indicated that delta-8 THC products are not controlled substances as long as they’re extracted from the natural plant, not synthesized.

A federal appeals court, meanwhile, ruled last year that delta-8 is not controlled because the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) only explicitly speaks to the natural delta-9 THC and because federal statute defines hemp as “any part of” the cannabis plant, including “all derivatives, extracts, [and] cannabinoids” that contains less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC by weight.

What about THC-O?​

DEA’s analysis concluded that, unlike delta-9 THC and delta-8 THC, THC-O is not a naturally occurring cannabinoid. Because it can only be produced through synthetic processes, it’s federally prohibited.

“DEA’s statement today adds one more layer of analysis to the already crowded patchwork of questions that must be answered to determine whether a hemp product is lawful,” Michelle Bodian, a partner at the law firm Vicente Sederberg told Marijuana Moment, adding that the agency’s position “requires a cannabinoid-by-cannabinoid analysis.”

“While the latest statement from DEA does not clarify the legal status of all novel hemp derived cannabinoids, it does clarify that DEA believes Delta-9 THCO and Delta-8 THCO are controlled substances,” Bodian said. “Hopefully, there is congressional action soon to address the legality of all hemp derived cannabinoids, so the industry is not left with a patchwork of law, regulation, policy and now, letter statements.”

(Vicente Sederberg supports Marijuana Moment’s work via a monthly pledge on Patreon.)

Interest in THC-O has grown significantly over the past year, and consumers have reported that it’s a particularly potent cannabinoid. Certain studies have raised concerns about its safety profile, and advocacy organizations like NORML have cautioned against the use of these lesser known, unregulated cannabinoids.

Advocates feel that the regulatory patchwork and resulting consumer and market confusion could be effectively addressed if the federal prohibition on marijuana is lifted and people are given the option to use natural cannabis products, removing demand for they grey-area cannabinoids, particularly in states where marijuana remains illegal.

“Whether they are synthetic or naturally occurring, psychoactive cannabinoids need to be regulated responsibly to protect public health and safety,” Aaron Smith, CEO of the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA), told Marijuana Moment. “The only way to successfully achieve that end is to finally end national prohibition, enact sensible regulations at the federal level, and allow state cannabis laws continue to work across the country.”

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for its part, has been looking to collect additional data to fill in gaps in evidence about the safety of cannabis-derived products.

Last month, FDA announced that it would not be creating rules to allow the marketing of CBD as dietary supplements or food items, leaving the massive industry without regulations despite repeated calls for administrative action from lawmakers, advocates and stakeholders.

The announcement came days after the agency released finalized guidance that focuses on developing cannabis-based drugs and outlined the process and unique considerations for scientists when it comes to hemp and marijuana.

The agency’s emphasis on working with Congress to address the issue legislatively also comes as the newly seated chair of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), says he is preparing to confront FDA over their failure to enact regulations for hemp-derived products like CBD.

Reps. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Brett Guthrie (R-KY) sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf in September, demanding answers over the continued lack of regulations for CBD for those purposes.

FDA also recently touted its role helping a state agency crack down on a company selling delta-8 THC gummies that they said are linked to “serious adverse events.”

Read DEA’s letter on the legal status of THC-O cannabis products.
 

DEA Classifies Novel Cannabinoids Delta-8 And -9 THCO As Controlled Substances, Even When Synthesized From Legal Hemp


The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) says that two cannabinoids that have emerged in state markets do not meet the federal definition of legal hemp and are therefore considered illegal controlled substances.

Attorney Rod Kight inquired about the legal status of delta-8 THC-O and delta-9 THC-O with the federal agency last year and followed up earlier this month.

DEA sent a response letter on Monday, saying the two cannabinoids “do not occur naturally in the cannabis plant and can only be obtained synthetically, and therefore do not fall under the definition of hemp.”

“Delta-9-THCO and delta-8-THCO are tetrahydrocannabinols having similar chemical structures and pharmacological activities to those contained in the cannabis plant,” the letter from Terrence L. Boos, chief of DEA’s Drug & Chemical Evaluation Section, continued.

Kight responded to DEA’s letter in a blog post on Monday, writing that “although I do not always agree with the DEA’s view on cannabis matters, I agree with this opinion and, frankly, am not surprised. This is what I have been saying for a while.”

“I have been concerned about the proliferation of THC acetate ester (THCO) for a while. It has always been my view that THCO is a controlled substance under federal law,” he said. “Although it can be made from cannabinoids from hemp, THCO is not naturally expressed by the hemp plant. It is a laboratory creation that does not occur in nature, at least not from the hemp plant.”

There’s been substantial confusion within the cannabis industry since the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp containing up to 0.3 percent delta-9 THC on a dry weight basis. Since that reform was enacted, the market for natural and synthetic cannabinoids has expanded in states across the country.

While there are many novel cannabinoids, one of the best known is delta-8 THC, which can be synthetically produced from CBD but also occurs in trace amount naturally in the cannabis plant. Several states have worked to regulate the product, which unlike CBD does have intoxicating effects.

DEA officials have indicated that delta-8 THC products are not controlled substances as long as they’re extracted from the natural plant, not synthesized.

A federal appeals court, meanwhile, ruled last year that delta-8 is not controlled because the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) only explicitly speaks to the natural delta-9 THC and because federal statute defines hemp as “any part of” the cannabis plant, including “all derivatives, extracts, [and] cannabinoids” that contains less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC by weight.

What about THC-O?​

DEA’s analysis concluded that, unlike delta-9 THC and delta-8 THC, THC-O is not a naturally occurring cannabinoid. Because it can only be produced through synthetic processes, it’s federally prohibited.

“DEA’s statement today adds one more layer of analysis to the already crowded patchwork of questions that must be answered to determine whether a hemp product is lawful,” Michelle Bodian, a partner at the law firm Vicente Sederberg told Marijuana Moment, adding that the agency’s position “requires a cannabinoid-by-cannabinoid analysis.”

“While the latest statement from DEA does not clarify the legal status of all novel hemp derived cannabinoids, it does clarify that DEA believes Delta-9 THCO and Delta-8 THCO are controlled substances,” Bodian said. “Hopefully, there is congressional action soon to address the legality of all hemp derived cannabinoids, so the industry is not left with a patchwork of law, regulation, policy and now, letter statements.”

(Vicente Sederberg supports Marijuana Moment’s work via a monthly pledge on Patreon.)

Interest in THC-O has grown significantly over the past year, and consumers have reported that it’s a particularly potent cannabinoid. Certain studies have raised concerns about its safety profile, and advocacy organizations like NORML have cautioned against the use of these lesser known, unregulated cannabinoids.

Advocates feel that the regulatory patchwork and resulting consumer and market confusion could be effectively addressed if the federal prohibition on marijuana is lifted and people are given the option to use natural cannabis products, removing demand for they grey-area cannabinoids, particularly in states where marijuana remains illegal.

“Whether they are synthetic or naturally occurring, psychoactive cannabinoids need to be regulated responsibly to protect public health and safety,” Aaron Smith, CEO of the National Cannabis Industry Association (NCIA), told Marijuana Moment. “The only way to successfully achieve that end is to finally end national prohibition, enact sensible regulations at the federal level, and allow state cannabis laws continue to work across the country.”

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for its part, has been looking to collect additional data to fill in gaps in evidence about the safety of cannabis-derived products.

Last month, FDA announced that it would not be creating rules to allow the marketing of CBD as dietary supplements or food items, leaving the massive industry without regulations despite repeated calls for administrative action from lawmakers, advocates and stakeholders.

The announcement came days after the agency released finalized guidance that focuses on developing cannabis-based drugs and outlined the process and unique considerations for scientists when it comes to hemp and marijuana.

The agency’s emphasis on working with Congress to address the issue legislatively also comes as the newly seated chair of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), says he is preparing to confront FDA over their failure to enact regulations for hemp-derived products like CBD.

Reps. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Brett Guthrie (R-KY) sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf in September, demanding answers over the continued lack of regulations for CBD for those purposes.

FDA also recently touted its role helping a state agency crack down on a company selling delta-8 THC gummies that they said are linked to “serious adverse events.”

Read DEA’s letter on the legal status of THC-O cannabis products.
And just how are these assholes authorized to just add things to banned lists without any accompanying legislation. Nobody voted for a single one of these motherfuckers.
 

Where Presidential Candidate Nikki Haley Stands On Marijuana



The 2024 presidential election cycle is already heating up, with former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) announcing that she’s seeking the Republican nomination. So where does she stand on marijuana policy issues?
That’s a question that will be asked of all major candidates over the coming months as the circle of prospective nominees inevitably widens.

Haley, who also served as United Nations (UN) ambassador under President Donald Trump, doesn’t have an especially extensive cannabis background. But she did sign limited reform legislation into law during her time as governor. And she’s expressed openness to continuing conversations with advocates and lawmakers about the issue.
In general, it appears that she’s supportive of state-based reform action, at least on a limited basis, and is sympathetic to patients who’ve benefitted from medical cannabis. But her record is light, and she hasn’t yet indicated whether she’d seek to broadly end federal prohibition if elected.
Haley will be running against Trump for the nomination, as the former president announced his candidacy back in November, about two years after losing re-election to President Joe Biden.

Here’s where Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley stands on marijuana:

Legislation And Policy Actions​

During her time as South Carolina’s governor from 2011-2017, Haley signed two pieces of modest cannabis reform legislation into law.
First, in 2014, Haley signed a bill from Sen. Tom Davis (R) to allow doctors to prescribe cannabidiol oil to patients suffering from severe epilepsy and for whom conventional therapies proved ineffective.
The measure from Davis, who has also championed broader medical marijuana legalization in the state, also called for a clinical trial at the Medical University of South Carolina to further explore the medical potential of CBD to treat the condition.

The same year, Haley put her signature on a bill to legalize industrial hemp in South Carolina and remove the nonintoxicating form of the cannabis plant from the state’s definition of illegal marijuana.
Advocates and hemp stakeholders applauded these actions. Limited as they might have been, they represented progress in the deep red state. And each year since, Davis has worked to build on the medical cannabis reform.
The senator recently filed a revised version of his medical marijuana legalization bill for the 2023 session. Haley’s position on the broader policy change is unclear, though she indicated in 2014 that she didn’t feel the state was ready to go beyond limited CBD oil for patients.

On The Campaign Trail​

Haley does not appear to have weighed in on cannabis issues since announcing her candidacy.

Previous Quotes And Social Media Posts​

Asked about cannabis legalization in 2014, the then-governor said that the state has “tried to do some sentencing reform in the past and we’re in the process of analyzing whether that’s worked.”
“For marijuana reform, I’m not there,” she added. “I know the legislators have stated—there’s a bill coming through now that they’re starting to do, but I don’t get a sense from the people of South Carolina, nor do I feel that at this point, it’s a hot topic or something that is moving forward. We’re watching the other states do what they can—which, again, I appreciate that states can make those decisions,” she added. “While they are doing that in the best interest of them, we have not seen that as a priority and in the best interest of South Carolina.”

Haley also met with medical cannabis advocates in 2016, including a girl named Dixie Pace who suffered from severe epilepsy and whose mother pushed the legislature to enact reform.
The governor was “very receptive and sweet to Dixie,” a person who attended the meeting told FITSNews at the time.
Marijuana is noticeably absent on Haley’s social media accounts, though she has commented on broader drug policy issues since leaving her position as a UN ambassador in 2018.
One of the more telling posts came as a reply to a person whose comment has since been deleted.
She wrote: “I have been to Afghanistan and am aware of how we have worked on replacing poppy production as well as trying to curb other drug production but it is not working. After all these years we haven’t dented what is happening there.”


While not an explicit endorsement of taking a different approach to prohibition and eradication, it signals an awareness of the ineffectiveness of the policy, at least as it’s been applied for poppy production—a perspective that could easily transfer to marijuana.
On the other hand, though, Haley has also suggested support for border crackdowns to stop the flow of drugs.

Days before announcing her presidential bed she tweeted that “to stop drugs pouring over the border, we need a president willing to defend the border.”


“Without borders, we aren’t a country. Biden’s failed policies have lit our southern border on fire and led to countless border deaths and drugs flowing throughout our communities,” Haley said in December. “If we don’t right this ship now, there’s no telling how bad it can get.”


Drug policy experts would likely criticize the candidate’s characterization of the issue as an oversimplification—and one that was repeatedly echoed by Trump during his campaign and presidency. But the comments nevertheless offer a window into Haley’s international drug policy stance and how it overlaps with her immigration position.
In 2019, Haley criticized federal spending on substance treatment in Afghanistan, arguing that money should instead “be going towards drug addiction in the US.”


Haley discussed drug policy issues a couple of times during her Senate confirmation process prior to becoming UN ambassador in 2017.
She told one senator who asked about the bloody “drug war” in the Philippines that extrajudicial killings of suspects by police there constitutes a violation of basic human rights, saying that she is “prepared to speak up on anything that goes against American values” and that “we have always been the moral compass of the world, and we need to continue to act out and vocalize that as we go forward.”
 

"Calling criminalization a "Failed Approach"​

Ok, so old Joe and I agree on something here....so, where is his initiative to legalize at the Federal level. Yeah, I haven't seen that yet either.

And, since cannabis is on Schedule 1 due solely to administrative fiat by the DEA, and since the DEA works directly for old Joe, where is his initiative to get cannabis off of this "no medical use" list while at the same time the Feds have approved big pharma cannabis derived drugs. I'm guessing that its not that much of a "failed" approach. sigh

Biden Signs Equity-Focused Executive Order That Touts Marijuana Clemency Actions, Calling Criminalization A ‘Failed Approach’


President Joe Biden issued an executive order on Thursday that touts the administration’s efforts to address the “failed approach” on federal marijuana policy.

The executive order doesn’t specifically build on any administrative cannabis reforms; rather it’s focused on promoting equity within federal agencies and the White House. But the president took the opportunity to connect the issue back to his marijuana actions.

Biden issued a mass pardon for people with non-violent federal cannabis possession convictions late last year and directed a multi-agency review into marijuana scheduling under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

“My Administration has taken action to strengthen public safety, advance criminal justice reform, correct our country’s failed approach to marijuana, protect civil rights, and stand up against rising extremism and hate-fueled violence that threaten the fabric of our democracy,” the president said in the new order.

A fact sheet that the White House released on the executive order expands on the president’s cannabis record.

“The President took bold action to address our failed approach to marijuana,” it says. “The criminalization of marijuana possession has upended too many lives—for conduct that is now legal in many states.”

The purpose of the mass pardon for marijuana offenses was to lift “barriers to housing, employment, and educational opportunities for thousands of people with those prior convictions.”

“The President also called on every state governor to follow his lead, as most marijuana prosecutions take place at the state and local level. And because this Administration is guided by science and evidence, he called on the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice to expeditiously review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.”

A separate new White House Domestic Policy Council report on equity efforts also includes a description of Biden’s cannabis actions.

Biden’s new executive order, “Further Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” directs federal agencies to produce an annual public Equity Action Plan to analyze barriers that underserved communities may face in accessing and benefitting from programs, among other steps.

The administration has routinely highlighted the cannabis clemency and review actions, often in the context of equity and racial justice. It was also mentioned in a preview ahead of Biden’s State of the Union address this month, but the president didn’t explicitly raise it in the speech.

On Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Biden described his marijuana pardons as a reflection of his commitment to “equal justice.”

Also, at the end of last year, the president granted a half dozen additional pardons, including for a handful of people with marijuana or other drug convictions on their records.

Domestic Policy Council Director Susan Rice said in December that the president’s broader cannabis clemency and directive for an administrative review into cannabis scheduling have helped address the country’s “failed approach to marijuana” and represent key parts of the administration’s “remarkably productive year.”

Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of 29 congressional lawmakers from both the House and Senate sent a letter to the president in December, asking that he formally back federal marijuana legalization as the administration carries out the cannabis scheduling review.

While the lawmakers didn’t request that Biden take administrative action to unilaterally facilitate legalization, it does underscore an eagerness among supporters for the White House to play a more proactive role in advancing reform.

U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra, who was CCed on the letter, tweeted a link to a Marijuana Moment article that discusses the president’s administrative cannabis scheduling directive.

“We’re going to take a look at what science tells us and what the evidence tells us,” Becerra, who has a considerable record supporting cannabis reform as a congressman and as California’s attorney general, said at the recent overdose prevention event. “That will guide what we do—and we hope that will guide what the federal government does.”

Following the president’s October announcement, the secretary said that the department would “work as quickly as we can” to carry out the scientific review. And he’s already discussed the issue with the head of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to that end.

Gupta said previously that the president’s action was “historic,” adding that there are “clearly” medical benefits of cannabis.

Like HHS, DOJ has similarly committed to quickly carrying out the separate scheduling review the president directed, which could result in a recommendation to place cannabis in a lower schedule or remove it altogether, effectively legalizing the plant under federal law.

The president also officially signed a marijuana research bill into law in December, making history by enacting the first piece of standalone federal cannabis reform legislation in U.S. history.

A series of polls have shown that Americans strongly support the president’s pardon action, and they also don’t think that marijuana should be federally classified as a Schedule I drug.
 

:BangHead: I guess good things take time.
I miss the bud being stored in the big glass containers on the shelf. Being able to smell before you buy. Always wanted to try Chocolope. Never see it in bud form in my area.
The above info had a nice picture, makes me remember back. Cannabis Farmers Markets I miss so much. Washington state has great cannabis and concentrates but with strict rules and regulations. Everything is prepackaged.

Cannabis lounges aren’t allowed. That would be a great place to meet people.
 
Last edited:

:BangHead: I guess good things take time.
I miss the bud being stored in the big glass containers on the shelf. Being able to smell before you buy. Always wanted to try Chocolope. Never see it in bud form in my area.
The above info had a nice picture, makes me remember back. Cannabis Farmers Markets I miss so much. Washington state has great cannabis and concentrates but with strict rules and regulations. Everything is prepackaged.

Cannabis lounges aren’t allowed. That would be a great place to meet people.
Just for you, Carol (and no, I didn't take this pic...I just clipped it from the interweb haha)

Oh, and don't know that much about WA state cannabis but I LOVE Oleum products which I have bought on the couple of trips out there that I made. THE best GSC cart and their dabbable stuff is outstanding also.

chocolope-cannabis.jpg
 
Artizen and Ravens Grass are awesome companies as well here in WA. @Baron23 thanks friend. Love that GSC!
Oh, and I should have been clear...that pic is of Chocolope.

Cheers
 

Federal Health Agency Issues CBD Warning, While Noting Dispensary Products May Be Safer Than Those Purchased Elsewhere


A federal health agency has published a new advisory on what it warns are the “potential harms, side effects, and unknowns” of CBD as more Americans use the popular cannabinoid. At the same time, the government body is also implying that products purchased from state-legal marijuana dispensaries may be safer than those found at gas stations and other retailers.

CBD has appeared on store shelves across the country following Congress’s legalization of hemp in the 2018 Farm Bill, and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) advisory notes that “the popularity of CBD products continues to grow.” It points to an array of form factors—including CBD-infused topicals, fabric, food and beverages—now on the market at an estimated 270,000 retailers nationwide.

“It is critical that the general public be made aware of the potential harms associated with CBD use,” the agency said in an announcement about the advisory on Thursday, “and parents, in particular, should be advised not to let their children use non-FDA-approved CBD products.”

As many as 1 in 3 Americans reported using CBD products in 2020, the report says, citing a survey conducted by the prescription discount plan SingleCare. Given the widespread use, the agency warns, “The public should be aware of the misconceptions surrounding CBD products as well as the potential harms and risks associated with their use.”

The brief advisory is not intended to be a comprehensive evaluation of CBD or its medical potential, with SAMHSA saying it “focuses on the risks and harms of CBD, especially those sold over the counter.”

Many of the dangers identified in the report—such as a lack of safety standards, poor accuracy in labeling and inconsistent quality control—result from the federally unregulated status of CBD products.

For instance, the SAMHSA advisory says that CBD concentrations “may be more or less than advertised and, because of a lack of quality control, the manufacturing process may introduce harmful biological and chemical contaminants, including the psychoactive [cannabinoid] THC.”

“The lack of safety standards, accuracy in labeling, and quality control,” the report continues, “may lead to additional concerns for unintended intoxication, particularly among children.”

Last month, FDA announced that it will not be creating rules to allow CBD to be marketed as a dietary supplement or food item despite repeated calls for administrative action from lawmakers, advocates and other stakeholders. Instead, the agency said that it wants to “work with Congress on a new way forward.” Officials also denied three citizen petitions requesting rulemaking for the marketing of CBD.

Other potential health and safety effects of CBD use, the SAMHSA report says, could include “adverse drug interactions, liver toxicity and reproductive and developmental effects.” It says more clinical research is needed to conclusively determine whether CBD products are safe and effective.

The advisory does not attempt to compare potential side effects of CBD to complications involved with prescription medications, for example opioids. A number of studies have indicated that easier access to regulated cannabis, which includes CBD products, can reduce patients’ reliance on opioids to treat conditions such as chronic pain.

So far the only FDA-approved CBD product is Epidiolex, a prescription medication that consists of purified CBD and is intended to treat a rare form of epilepsy in children.

Non-FDA approved products are marketed as a potential treatment for a wide range of other health conditions, only some of which are supported by research.

Citing survey data from 2019, the agency said that 40 percent of CBD users purchased products from marijuana dispensaries. About a third (34 percent) bought CBD from a different retail store, 27 percent shopped online and 12 percent obtained it from another source.

Cannabis retailers, which are typically licensed and heavily regulated at the state level, may offer better and more consistent CBD products than are available at national retailers, SAMSA said—a notable admission from the agency while marijuana dispensaries remain federally illegal.

“Although regulations and enforcement vary from state to state,” the advisory said, “CBD products purchased from dispensaries may be subject to some form of oversight and standardization.”

It also noted, however, that “products sold at cannabis dispensaries are not FDA-approved and may contain more than 0.3 percent THC, depending on the state’s definition of allowable CBD products.”

Consumers, businesses and even members of Congress have expressed frustration at the general lack of regulatory guidance on CBD from federal agencies. Last September, U.S. Reps. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Brett Guthrie (R-KY) sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf demanding answers over the continued lack of regulations. Earlier this year, a key Republican lawmaker, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), pledged to take FDA officials to taskwith his new House chairmanship for failing to enact CBD regulations.

At DEA, meanwhile, officials recently weighed on on two other cannabinoids that can be derived from legally grown hemp: delta-8 THC-O and delta-9 THC-O, which are not naturally found in the cannabis plant but can be produced from other natural cannabinoids. DEA said that because the two cannabinoids “do not occur naturally in the cannabis plant and can only be obtained synthetically,” they do not fall under the definition of hemp and are therefore considered illegal controlled substances.

FDA also recently touted its role helping a state agency crack down on a company selling delta-8 THC gummies that they said are linked to “serious adverse events.”
 
At DEA, meanwhile, officials recently weighed on on two other cannabinoids that can be derived from legally grown hemp: delta-8 THC-O and delta-9 THC-O, which are not naturally found in the cannabis plant but can be produced from other natural cannabinoids. DEA said that because the two cannabinoids “do not occur naturally in the cannabis plant and can only be obtained synthetically,” they do not fall under the definition of hemp and are therefore considered illegal controlled substances.
1677268368122.png
 

GOP Congressional Lawmakers Tout Poll Showing Republican Voters Back Federal Marijuana Legalization

Three Republican members of Congress are celebrating the results of a new poll showing that more than two-thirds of likely 2024 GOP presidential primary and caucus voters support federally legalizing marijuana so that states can make their own decisions on the issue.

The survey, released on Wednesday by the Coalition for Cannabis Policy, Education, and Regulation (CPEAR), found that 68 percent of respondents back ending federal marijuana prohibition. There was majority support across age, gender, educational and religious groups.

The overall level of backing for reform has increased by 10 points from a similar poll the group conducted a year ago.

The new survey from CPEAR, which is funded by several alcohol and tobacco companies, included a separate question similarly finding that 70 percent support “allowing individual states to decide whether cannabis will be legal in their state.”

GOP lawmakers who have championed marijuana reform in Congress are welcoming the results.

“The polling is clear: federal cannabis prohibition is in direct contradiction to the overwhelming will of the American electorate, including a notable majority of conservative voters,” Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH), who is a co-chair of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, said. “I hope more of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will heed the call of their constituents and join me in working towards a safe and effectively regulated legal marketplace that respects the rights of the over 40 states that have enacted some varying degree of legality. Continued inaction is no longer tenable.”

Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), who is another Cannabis Caucus co-chair, said that the survey result “isn’t surprising,” pointing to conservatives’ belief in states’ rights.

“At its core, cannabis is a state issue, and that’s what I’ll continue to advocate for: commonsense federal policy that lets 50 states decide on 50 solutions that are best for their constituents,” he said.

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who filed a comprehensive marijuana legalization bill in the last Congress called the States Reform Act (SRA), said that “it appears the only place where cannabis reform is unpopular is in Washington, D.C.”

“It is time we give states the power to make decisions around cannabis without fear of federal consequences,” she said. “The provisions found in the SRA strike a balance between what voters are asking for and what regulatory framework exists for other industries. The ball is in our court as members of Congress to bring this legislation across the finish line.”

A third question in the new survey found that 52 percent of GOP voters are more likely to support Republican presidential candidates who back ending federal cannabis prohibition. At the same time, however, it also shows that marijuana ranks second to last in a list of issues that voters may consider when deciding whether to vote for a candidate.

The poll involved interviews with 600 likely 2024 Republican presidential primary and caucus voters over the age 21. It was conducted January 20-25, 2023 and has a margin of error for +/- 4 percentage points.

Polling has consistently shown that Americans broadly back marijuana reform in recent years.

That perspective was represented in a recent survey from Data for Progress that found a strong majority of American voters—including most Republicans, Democrats and independents—support legalizing marijuana at the federal level.

Just one in ten Americans say that marijuana should remain completely illegal, according to another poll from the Pew Research Center that was released in November.

Meanwhile, a Gallup poll released last year also found that seven in 10 Americans say that marijuana should be legalized—including majorities of all political parties and age demographics.
 




It likely doesn't come as a surprise that Woody Harrelson is a weed fan. At The Woods, the cannabis dispensary he co-owns in West Hollywood, his dream has come true – a lush and welcoming space complete with a koi pond and macaws. "It's just a little dream of what a great dispensary could be," he said.
It is not a place young Woody Harrelson, raised by his mother in a deeply-religious Presbyterian household in rural Ohio, ever expected to be, let alone own. To hear him describe his mother, "She'd be sitting there, she'd have her coffee and cigarette and everything in the morning, you know. And she'd be like, 'Son, if I ever hear that you're smoking marijuana … it'll just kill me!'"

It sounds like an awesome place. Glad he still uses the golden herb.
 
Last edited:

CBD Could Reduce Craving For Nicotine And Help Tobacco Smokers Quit, Study Finds​


A new federally funded study has found that CBD may help tobacco users quit by reducing cravings.
Researchers at Washington State University (WSU) looked at the effects of the non-intoxicating cannabinoid on the metabolism of nicotine, the main addictive component of tobacco.

The study, published in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology last month, showed that relatively low doses of CBD significantly inhibited a key enzyme associated with the processing of nicotine in the body, which could stave off cravings.
“The whole mission is to decrease harm from smoking, which is not from the nicotine per se, but all the carcinogens and other chemicals that are in tobacco smoke,” WSU professor Philip Lazarus, senior author of the study, said in a press release. “If we can minimize that harm, it would be a great thing for human health.”

While researchers say more studies that involve human subjects are needed, the study that examined liver tissue and microsomes derived from specialized cell lines showed that cannabidiol inhibited multiple relevant enzymes—and that included CYP2A6, the main enzyme that metabolizes nicotine.
“This suggests that these cannabinoids may be inhibiting overall nicotine metabolism in smokers.”
CBD inhibited that enzyme’s processing of the chemical by 50 percent, even at the low dose concentration that was administered.
“In other words, it appears that you don’t need much CBD to see the effect,” Lazarus, whose team is actively pursuing a follow-up clinical trial involving tobacco smokers, said.


The research was conducted with support from the National Institutes of Health’s National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences.
Past studies have reached similar conclusions about the inhibitory effects of CBD on nicotine metabolism.

This latest research indicates that such inhibition of the key enzymes leads to “increased plasma nicotine levels per cigarette smoked and a reduction in the number of cigarettes smoked, thus diminishing the adverse health effects of smoking.”
“Further investigations will be required to determine the potential for CBD and potentially other cannabinoids as agents for tobacco cessation therapy,” the study says.
From a harm reduction perspective, the implications of this studycould be significant. Nicotine is a highly addictive substance, and even offsetting craving by a small amount could have demonstrable public health impacts
 

Congressman Challenges Biden Administration Officials To Provide Evidence For Positions On Marijuana Scheduling


A Democratic congressman is circulating a sign-on letter challenging Biden Administration officials who are currently engaged in a review of marijuana’s scheduling status under the federal Controlled Substances Act to provide clear and compelling reasons for whatever decisions they reach.

“To ensure accountability in your conclusions—which has been absent in so much of the history of federal marijuana regulation— transparency is key,” the letter, led by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), says. “We urge you to make available for public review and comment any evidence cited to demonstrate marijuana is more prone to drug abuse than descheduled substances already regulated at the state level.”

The draft letter, circulated by Blumenauer’s office on Tuesday, is addressed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. It urges the administration to deschedule cannabis, removing it completely from the CSA and treating it more like other legal, regulated substances.

The congressman is currently seeking signatures from other lawmakers willing to sign on to the letter by next Tuesday.

“Please join me in urging the Biden-Harris administration to deschedule marijuana and ensure transparency in reflecting marijuana’s potential and the reality of the federal-state gap on cannabis policy,” says a separate message Blumenauer sent to colleagues about the sign-on letter. He noted that 37 states have already enacted medical marijuana laws and 21 allow for broader adult use.

“Following the lead of these states,” the note to other lawmakers says, “members from both parties have introduced legislation to fully legalize marijuana and help remedy the failed federal prohibition. The Democratic-led House has since twice passed legislation to deschedule marijuana. The Administration must also be a partner in the path forward.”

The draft letter to the federal cabinet members opens by referencing the administration’s review of cannabis scheduling, calling it “an opportunity to make honest assessment of the origins and implications of federal policy.”

“We know that marijuana was scheduled based on stigma not science,” the letter says. “It is time to address marijuana’s existing reality as a state-regulated legal substance.”

The letter, which includes Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Robert Califf as a CC, was first reported by Politico.

A bipartisan group of 29 congressional lawmakers from both the House and Senate sent a letter to the president in December, asking that he formally back federal marijuana legalization as the administration carries out the cannabis scheduling review.

While the lawmakers didn’t request Biden take administrative action to unilaterally facilitate legalization, their request underscored an eagerness for the White House to play a more proactive role in advancing reform.

Becerra, who was cc’d on the letter, tweeted a link to a Marijuana Moment article that discussed the president’s cannabis-scheduling directive.

For his part, the HHS secretary said at an event last year that he planned to conduct the review with an eye toward science.

“We’re going to take a look at what science tells us and what the evidence tells us,” said Becerra, who as a congressman and as California’s attorney general had a considerable record supporting cannabis reform.

Like HHS, the U.S. Department of Justice has similarly committed to quickly carrying out a separate scheduling review at the direction of the president, which could result in a recommendation to place cannabis in a lower schedule than its current Schedule I status or remove it altogether, effectively legalizing the plant under federal law.

Biden also signed a marijuana research bill into law in December, making history by enacting the first piece of standalone federal cannabis reform legislation in U.S. history.

Earlier this week, at an event commemorating the end of Black History Month, the president touted his move to pardon people for federal, low-level marijuana possession offenses.

“I’m keeping my promise,” he said. “No one should be in prison for the mere possession of marijuana.”

The mass pardon covers people who have committed non-violent federal cannabis possession offenses at the federal level and under Washington, D.C. law. It did not free anyone who is currently incarcerated and excludes people who were convicted of selling cannabis, among other groups that advocates are seeking relief for.

A series of polls have shown that Americans strongly support the president’s pardon action, and they also don’t think that marijuana should be federally classified as a Schedule I drug.

Read the full draft letter to federal officials below:

Dear Secretary Becerra and Attorney General Garland:

The Biden-Harris Administration’s formal review of the scheduling of marijuana is an opportunity to make honest assessment of the origins and implications of federal policy. We know that marijuana was scheduled based on stigma not science. It is time to address marijuana’s existing reality as a state-regulated substance.

President Biden’s action on October 6, 2022 instructing the U.S. Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice to review the scheduling of marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act was a necessary and overdue addition to the history of marijuana scheduling review. From the Schafer Commission’s report Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding (1972) to Justice Stevens’ note in Gonzales v. Raich (2005) to the 21 states with regulated adult use marketplaces and 37 states with medical marijuana programs, the substance is consistently recognized as inappropriately scheduled.

However, simply rescheduling marijuana would similarly fail to reflect marijuana’s existing reality as a state-regulated substance. The administrative review of marijuana’s scheduling should place the burden of evidence on maintaining marijuana’s status as a scheduled substance. To correct the failed war on drugs and cannabis prohibition, the assumption must be that, unless evidence undeniably indicates that marijuana is more prone to drug abuse than unscheduled substances already regulated at the state level, marijuana should be fully descheduled from the Controlled Substances Act

Descheduling does not negate Congress’ obligation to act on comprehensive federal cannabis reform. With proposals for such reform introduced from members of both parties, we are actively working to address the federal-state gap on cannabis policy. Each of these proposals works to respect the leadership states have demonstrated for 50 years in rethinking the failed and discriminatory war on drugs approach to marijuana. Given the scope of the federal government’s failure on marijuana, the Administration must also take meaningful action to deschedule marijuana and partner with Congress and the states in the work ahead.

To ensure accountability in your conclusions — which has been absent in so much of the history of federal marijuana regulation — transparency is key. We urge you to make available for public review and comment any evidence cited to demonstrate marijuana is more prone to drug abuse than descheduled substances already regulated at the state level. With the severe federal restrictions on cannabis research due to marijuana’s scheduling, it’s important that your departments review the full scope of research available. It is time to set the federal government on a better path for marijuana policy and engage transparently with the evidence.

Marijuana does not belong as a scheduled substance. This is especially apparent given its medical potential, existing state regulatory frameworks, and reduced harm and abuse compared to stimulants and depressants already regulated outside of the Controlled Substances Act. As the Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice expeditiously and intentionally conduct your reviews, we expect the Administration to proactively partner with Congress in the path forward.

[[CLOSING]]
[[SIGNATURES]]

CC: The Honorable Robert M. Califf, Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration
 
Marijuana does not belong as a scheduled substance. This is especially apparent given its medical potential, existing state regulatory frameworks, and reduced harm and abuse compared to stimulants and depressants already regulated outside of the Controlled Substances Act.
Not to even mention the fucking FDA has approved cannabis based drugs...can you say "Epidiolex, Marinol, Syndros, and Cesamet" ,children? Yes you can. Can you say "rank hypocrisy", children? Yes, indeed you absolutely can. Can you say ''influence of big pharma money vs the wishes of the actual citizens of this country"? Yes, indeedy...we all can.

On cannabis legalization, ole Joe has been a political coward and the anti-drug warrior he has historically shown himself to be (look up his record in the Senate on this). Don't believe it....take a gander


Glad to see some pressure applied here.
 
Eh...putting this here...its more related to cannabis business but its its about legalization's impact on same.


Cannabis economy is tanking


Emerald Triangle communities were built on cannabis. Legalization has pushed them to the brink.​

HAYFORK — It’s shortly before 8 a.m. and a touch above freezing at the Trinity County Fairgrounds. The food bank’s February distribution won’t begin for another half hour, but the line of cars already stretches into a third row of the parking lot.

Joseph Felice, his red Dodge pickup idling with the heat cranked up, arrived around 7 to secure a spot near the front — eighth, to be exact — and ensure that he gets his pick of this month’s harvest: frozen catfish filets, eggplant, winter squash, potatoes, cans of mixed fruit, cartons of milk. Getting here early is crucial, because by the time the final cars roll through some two hours later — 210 families served — all that’s left are a few packages of diapers and noodles.

Things are getting desperate in this remote, mountainous community in far northern California, where cannabis is king — the economy, the culture, the everything. Over the past two years, the price of weed has plummeted and people are broke.

The monthly food bank distribution moved from a church to the fairgrounds last summer to accommodate surging demand. There’s only one sit-down restaurant left in town, a Mexican joint that closes every day at 6. Some residents have fled for Oklahoma, where it’s easier for cannabis cultivators to get licensed. Others are stuck, unable to unload their properties amid an abundance of supply and a dearth of demand.

“I don’t see the same faces that I did before,” said Felice, 67, who performed maintenance work for a local grower for five years, until they called it quits at the end of last season.

Felice lost not just his income, but also free housing on the farm. The food distribution is now a crucial bridge between Social Security checks and trips to Redding, 60 miles away, where he can get cheaper groceries.

“I had plenty of money working out there,” Felice said. “But now that it’s gone, you have to do something.”

Just what that something might be for Hayfork — and the rest of the famous Emerald Triangle of Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity counties — is unclear.

For decades before California legalized recreational cannabis in 2016, this rural region of about 245,000 people was the base of weed cultivation for the entire country. The effects of the price crash, which has been particularly acute in the past two years, can be felt throughout the three counties, both within the industry and far outside of it.

Cultivators who can barely make ends meet are laying off employees, slashing expenses or shutting down their farms. That means money isn’t flowing into local businesses, nonprofits are getting fewer generous cash donations in brown paper bags, and local governments are collecting less in sales and property taxes.

Cannabis growers are laying off employees and closing farms. As the impact cascades through surrounding communities, workers are trying to find their next jobs. But opportunities are scarce.

Workers who spent their whole lives in the cannabis industry are suddenly looking around for new careers that may not be there. Store clerks, gas station attendants and restaurant servers who relied on their patronage now find themselves with reduced hours, meager tips or out of a job altogether.

A sense of despair and heartbreak has taken hold in many communities. People whisper about friends who are thinking about divorce or who killed themselves because they could not handle the financial devastation. And the pain is compounded by a feeling that their suffering has been all but invisible, overlooked by most Californians and dismissed by government officials who have never made good on the promises of legalization.

“We’re constantly at war. That’s how it feels,” said Adrien Keys, president of the Trinity County Agriculture Alliance, a trade association for the local legal cannabis industry.

These communities have been here before, stuck in a boom-and-bust cycle that played out with gold mining and cattle ranching and fishing. The last time, when the timber industry collapsed in the 1990s, cannabis cultivation flourished after the legalization of medical marijuana and filled the void. Now it’s unclear whether there’s anything left to sustain the local economies.

Some imagine that growing tourism can be the salvation, or attracting new residents with remote jobs and a desire to live way off the grid, or perhaps a logging revival driven by the urgent need to thin out California’s wildfire-prone forests. Others hope that a cannabis turnaround might still be possible.

But for a small, isolated town such as Hayfork — population: 2,300; high school student body: 88; empty sawmills: two — the answers are not obvious. The fear that the community could ultimately wither away is real.

“Long-term, I’m worried about it,” said Scott Murrison, a 68-year resident of Hayfork who owns half a dozen local businesses, including the gas station and mini mart (revenues down 10-15% over the past few years), a grocery store (down by as much as a third), the laundromat (bringing in about half of what it did when it opened a decade ago), a bar (stabilized since adding food to the menu), a ranch (hanging on, because there’s still demand for locally-raised beef) and a couple of greenhouses (leased to his nephew, who is not growing cannabis this year).

Without any real opportunities for young people coming out of school, Murrison said, they will have to move away, leaving Hayfork without a future.
“A good, viable community needs those families and the young people,” he said. “A bunch of old people are just boring.”

Boom and bust​

It wasn’t supposed to go this way.

Cannabis should have been the sustainable alternative to gold and timber, a renewable resource that can be replanted each year. For a long time, it was.

Despite the challenges of growing an illegal crop, including enforcement raids that still scar residents, the “war on drugs” kept product scarce and prices high. The lure of easy cash attracted people from around the world to the Emerald Triangle, an annual flow of “trimmigrants” who could walk away from the fall harvest season with thousands of dollars in their pockets, much of which was spent locally.

“Everybody was making so much money it was insane,” Murrison said. “You could be here by accident, you could make money. Either trimming or growing or hauling water or if you had equipment, leveling spots or digging holes.”

Then came Proposition 64, the ballot initiative approved by California voters in 2016 that finally legalized recreational cannabis use and commercial sales in the state, though they remain illegal under federal law. Proponents including Gov. Gavin Newsom pitched it as both a social justice measure and a boon for tax revenues.

But the “green rush” that resulted has arguably harmed the Emerald Triangle more than it helped.

New farmers, sometimes licensed and often not, streamed in, flooding the market with cannabis. A cap on the size of farms intended to give small growers a head start was abandoned in the final state regulations, opening the door to competing cultivation hubs in other regions of California with looser restrictions. And with most local jurisdictions still closed to dispensaries, the legal market has been unable to absorb the glut, resulting in plunging prices and a vicious cycle in which farmers grow even more weed to make up for it.

Cultivators who might have commanded more than $1,000 for a pound of cannabis just a couple years ago said it is now selling for a few hundred dollars, not enough to break even with their expenses, taxes and fees.

Commercial cannabis sales in California actually fell by 8% last year to $5.3 billion, according to just-released state tax data, the first decline since it became legal in 2018 and a further cramp on the industry. State tax revenue dropped from $251.3 million in the third quarter of 2022 to $221.6 million in the fourth quarter.

“You can’t keep printing a dollar,” said Trinity County Supervisor Liam Gogan, who represents Hayfork and nearby Douglas City, where he said business at his grocery store is down an estimated 20%, a decline he expects is less than many other shops in town.

Some parts of the Emerald Triangle are better positioned to weather the cannabis downturn; the coast is a tourist draw, the newly rechristened Cal Poly Humboldt in Arcata is undergoing a major expansion and there are government jobs in the county seats.

But things are precarious in the vast rural expanses, which is most of Trinity County, where there are no incorporated cities. It has one of the smallest and poorest populations of any county in California — just 16,000 residents and a median household of about $42,000 a year. Outside of the Trinity Alps Wilderness in its northern reaches, there is little economy beyond weed.

“It’s what we got,” said Gogan, who dismisses the possibility of tourism or any other industry offsetting cannabis losses as delusional. “No one’s knocking the door down.”

Like many locals, he dreams that, with the exodus of cultivators and a drop in production, cannabis prices could rebound slightly. Some are noticing a modest recovery recently from the bleak depths of last year, when the most distressed farmers offloaded their product for fire-sale prices below $100 per pound, or simply destroyed crops they couldn’t sell.

There have been nascent efforts at the state Capitol to help small cannabis growers. Newsom and legislators agreed last year to eliminate a cultivation tax after farmers from the Emerald Triangle lobbied aggressively for relief. But the intervention is far from enough to ensure their future in a turbulent cannabis market.

State Sen. Mike McGuire, a Democrat who represents the north coast, blamed Proposition 64 for setting up family farmers for failure with a litany of “suffocating rules.” He is preparing to introduce legislation this spring that could undo some of those regulations for small growers, including an “antiquated, cockamamie licensing structure” that requires them to keep paying annual fees even if they fallow their land because of the price drop and a ban on selling cannabis directly to consumers, something that is allowed for other agricultural products.

“These are solutions that will help stabilize the market and lift up family farmers for generations to come,” McGuire said. “The state needs to have a backbone to get it done.”

Newsom, who once called himself the “poster child” for “everything that goes wrong” with Proposition 64, declined a request to discuss what’s happening in California’s historic cannabis communities. A spokesperson directed CalMatters to the Department of Cannabis Control, which did not make Director Nicole Elliott or anyone else available for an interview.

In a statement, spokesperson David Hafner said the department has “made a point of regularly monitoring and visiting the Emerald Triangle and engaging directly with licensees to understand their challenges in real time.”

Hafner said the department has advanced “several policies and programs that have directly or indirectly supported legacy growers in the Emerald Triangle,” including granting more than 1,000 fee waivers to cultivators in the region, revising regulations to more closely align with traditional farming practices and providing $40 million to bolster licensing efforts in the three counties.

“The Department stands ready to assist policymakers,” Hafner said, “in developing actions that improve the legal cannabis market.”

Though growers in the Emerald Triangle have been sharply critical of how the state has regulated cannabis, particularly its early decision to forgo a strict acreage cap, one recent development may be promising: In January, Elliott requested an opinion from the state Department of Justice about what federal legal risk California would face if it negotiated agreements with other states to allow cannabis commerce between them.

That could eventually open a pathway for growers to export their weed out of California, a market expansion that some believe is the kick-start that their operations need.

An increasing strain​

The escape hatch may be closing for those seeking a way out of the industry.

When the value of cannabis dropped, so did the worth of the properties where it’s grown — even more so for the many farmers who, because of environmental lawsuits and bureaucratic negligence, have yet to receive final approval for their state-issued cultivation licenses. After years of operating on provisional licenses, they still do not technically have a legal business to sell to an interested buyer, if they could even find one.

Some are simply abandoning the properties that they have built into farms with greenhouses and irrigation systems, though evidence of this dilemma is anecdotal. The Trinity County Assessor’s Office said it could not provide data on recent property sales levels or prices.

“There’s no way I could get out of my property now what I put into it,” said Keys of the Trinity County Agriculture Alliance, who figures he would be forced to walk away entirely if he stopped growing. “I don’t know if I could sell it at all.”

For those residents who stay, the strain is only deepening.

The number of people in Trinity County enrolled in CalFresh, the state’s monthly food benefits program, in December was 31% higher than the year before and more than 71% higher than the same period in 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic and inflation crisis, according to data compiled by the California Department of Social Services. That’s nearly three times the rate of increase for the entire state.

Jeffry England, executive director of the Trinity County Food Bank, said his organization is handing out two and a half times as much food as when he took over the position six years ago. He estimates that the food bank serves about 1,200 families per month, as much as a fifth of the whole county’s population. It has added three new distribution sites in the past year.

“It’s getting really bad,” England said. “There are some of them who are in line at the food bank who used to be our donors.”

Not everyone who is struggling dreams of leaving Hayfork behind.
Herlinda Vang, 54, arrived about seven years ago from the Fresno area, where she worked as a social worker at a nonprofit and grew vegetables near Clovis. Sensing the opportunity of recreational legalization, she moved months before the passage of Proposition 64 to start a cannabis farm.

Vang has come to appreciate how safe and quiet the community is compared to a big city, where she worried about her youngest children, now 14 and 11 years old. She can hear the birds when she wakes up in the morning.

“What I’m doing is also helping other people, saving other people’s life, too,” she said. “So that is something that I enjoy doing.”

But last year, Vang had difficulty getting county approvals and wasn’t able to start growing until mid-July, about six weeks later than she wanted. Her plants were small by harvest time, leaving her with less to sell at the already reduced prices.

Even as she is making less than a third per pound now compared to when she first started growing, Vang remains committed to her farm for at least another few years to see if things will turn around — especially if interstate trade opens up and expands the market.

Without many other skills or job prospects locally, she doesn’t expect she could make much more money than she does now trying to find more traditional work. She also loves that, on her farm, she sets her own rules and schedule, and is able to prioritize being a mother as well.

“I cannot give up. I have put everything I have in here,” Vang said. “I have to hang in there for a couple more years and see if I can make it work.”

That has meant sacrifices. Vang has stopped shopping online for new clothes and jewelry, sending money overseas and buying pricier groceries, such as seafood. She gave away three of her nine dogs and only takes her family out to dinner on rare occasions.

Like many of her neighbors, Vang now supplements her pantry with staples from the food bank, though like many of her neighbors, she is also doing her part to hold the community together, helping to coordinate a new distribution site in Trinity Pines, a mountain settlement of predominantly Hmong farmers. A Facebook group called Hayforkers has become a forum for people looking for assistance or giving away extra food and household items.

“I am a very tough person,” Vang said. “I’m happy that even though my income is not the same, but my family, my health remains the same and the people that I know, the community at large still love each other, still comfort each other.”

Ira Porter is also on a shoestring budget. He covers his $200 per month rent by collecting cans and bottles — there are fewer than there used to be — from people who don’t want to travel all the way to the county seat of Weaverville or Redding to turn them in.

Porter, 59, used to do maintenance and repair work on cannabis farms, fixing cars, water systems, and trimming machines. His wife was a trimmer.

“I’d be busy all year round, you know, because there’s always something to do,” Porter said through the window of his white Volkswagen sedan as he waited at the Hayfork food distribution with his pug Biggee in his lap. “I don’t know how many of these farmers left, but I’m not getting any calls this year as far as to do that.”

As the line of cars slowly worked its way through the parking lot of the Trinity County Fairgrounds, past the volunteers handing out boxes of vegetables and bags of noodles, Porter cataloged the things he loves about Hayfork: The open spaces. The fresh air. Hanging out at the creek looking for gold. Being able to leave the keys in his car at night and not having to lock the door to his house. Chopping wood for kindling in the winter.

“I moved up here to get out of L.A. because it’s a zoo down there, and there’s just too many people, and they’re all pissed off because they don’t got no elbow room,” Porter said. “Up here, it’s just beautiful. I love this place, you know? I mean, cannabis industry or not, I want to live here and die here.”
 

Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top