Natural Environment Blog

More than 200 local farmers have expressed interest in growing Industrial hemp, which has now been legalized in the NSW state of Australia. Photo: Hendrike

While the United States still struggles with the idea of growing industrial hemp, Australia is pushing ahead with the environmentally friendly “super fiber”.

The New South Wales (NSW) state government has now passed a law that allows farmers to grow industrial hemp. The government had agreed to introduce the new legislation back in April this year.

The state government has already been inundated with farmers wanting to grow industrial hemp. 

“Already we’ve had over 200 farmers express interest in growing hemp across the state,” said Ian Macdonald, Primary Industries Minister.

Enormous Potential

Industrial hemp has long been known for its enormous versatility, and Mr Macdonald envisages a promising future for the crop. 

“It could become quite a significant crop in a very short period of time, particularly as various companies utilise the products of it for that broad range of products that can be created using industrial hemp as a base.” said Mr Macdonald.

But Barry Dugan, a hemp advocate, is concerned about the scarcity of hemp processing facilities.

“There’s not much point growing the stuff if there’s nowhere to have it treated,’’ he said.

“According to my research, a huge amount of energy and water is required to get all the good things out of hemp.” he continued.

Hemp vs Marijuana

One thing that had concerned the government was the potential for farmers to use their hemp plantations as a way of hiding (illegal) marijuana plants, which look very similar to hemp plants.  

But Mr Macdonald says that measures have now been put in place to prevent hemp crops from camouflaging marijuana crops.

5 Year Licences

The licences are renewable for 5 years under the new legislation.

“The licensing scheme is authorised by our Act of Parliament,” said Mr Macdonald.

“It’ll require farmers who wish to grow industrial hemp to register to get a licence.” he explained.

“That’ll mean that their properties will be then audited and inspected regularly to ensure compliance with the Act.”

The Hemp Industry Act 2008

The act that Mr Macdonald is referring to is the Hemp industry Act 2008, which allows a person to cultivate or supply low-THC hemp for any one or more of the following purposes:

• for commercial production
• for use in any manufacturing process
• for scientific research, instruction, analysis or study
• for any other purpose prescribed by the regulations

Further, the act explicitly states that “The possession of low-THC hemp is not an offence under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 if it is cultivated or supplied under the authority of this Act”.

Two North Dakota farmers fighting for the right to grow industrial hemp, have had their case heard in the United States court of appeals. 

The farmers sued the DEA in June last year because it was preventing them from planting hemp, despite the fact that they had received state licences to grow the plant. 

Although the state of North Dakota has granted the farmers with licences to grow hemp, the federal law claims that industrial hemp is a drug and therefore prohibits them from doing so.

Initial Ruling

The U.S. District Court of North Dakota had initially dismissed the farmers’ case in June 2007, ruling that that hemp and marijuana are the same.

Contrary to this ruling, scientific evidence actually shows that not only are oilseed and fiber varieties of Cannabis genetically distinct from drug varieties, but there are absolutely no psychoactive effects gained from eating it.

Wednesday’s Hearing

The farmers, represented by attorneys Joe Sandler and Tim Purdon, argued to the court that there is no possibility the hemp crop could be diverted into the market for drugs.

“Given North Dakota’s unique regulatory regime, nothing leaves the farmer’s property except those parts of the plant Congress has already decided should be exempt from regulation: hemp stalk, fiber seed and oil. The question is whether there is any rational basis for Congressional regulation of the plant itself growing on the farmer’s property. The answer is no — because industrial hemp is useless as drug marijuana and there’s no danger of diversion, so there’s no possible impact on the market for drug marijuana.” Mr Sandler argued to the court.

The government argued that the plaintiffs should apply to the DEA for permission to grow hemp and that the court didn’t have jurisdiction over the issues raised by the farmers.

Melissa Patterson, representative for the Justice Department, said “The plaintiffs should await the DEA’s decision on their application,”

In response, Judge Michael Milloy asked, “Isn’t it true the DEA will not rule on the farmer’s applications to grow hemp, you’ve had eleven months?”

Ms. Patterson answered, “The DEA has not replied out of respect to the pending proceedings.”

In response to the jurisdictional objections made by the DEA, Judge Lavenski Smith said, “When there is a legitimate constitutional issue brought before us we can hear the case.”

The court is expected to make a written decision next year.

Benefits of Hemp

Hemp is an environmentally friendly fiber, often referred to as a “super fiber” due to it’s enormous versatility.

Two North Dakota farmers fighting for hemp legalization will continue their fight in the federal appeals court on Wednesday. 

The farmers, who renewed their annual hemp licences almost a year ago, are still not legally allowed to grow hemp because of the federal law.

The lawsuit, which has been funded by Vote Hemp, has cost approximately $100,000 since it began in June last year. 

State Law Says “Yes”, Federal Law Says “No”

Although the state of North Dakota, recognizing the difference between hemp and marijuana, has allowed the farmers to grow industrial hemp, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has a different view.

“The level of THC in the plant doesn’t matter. If there’s any THC in the plant, it’s illegal,” DEA spokesman Garrison Courtney says, referring to the farmers’ argument that industrial hemp contains extremely low levels of THC, and therefore shouldn’t be classified as a drug.

“To get those pieces of stalk that are legal, you have to grow a marijuana plant.”

Case Initially Dismissed

The case was initially dismissed by U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland in Bismarck, N.D in November last year.    

The farmers’ lawyer, Tim Purdon says that they appealed that ruling, hoping for a new ruling that hemp “is not subject to regulation by the DEA and that our farmers aren’t going to be charged with a crime.”

He also says that the district judge should not have dismissed the case without hearing evidence about the differences between hemp and marijuana, adds Washington lawyer Joe Sandler, who will argue the farmers’ case before the appeals court.

To learn more about this case, and to view all court documents, view the North Dakota Case section of the Vote Hemp website.

A bill has finally passed through the senate in Vermont that would allow hemp to be grown in the state.

The bill has been hanging around in one form or another for many years now. And the current version has taken three years to get it to it’s current state.

Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee commented:

My concern with the bill is that it basically requires the federal government to agree with it, and the federal government is not going to agree with it, I don’t want our farmers having drug busters coming in from the feds and making an example. That’s been my concern about this all along. I understand the support for it, but we are still part of the United States. We’re sworn to uphold the Constitution.

After receiving over 150 letters and calls urging him to support the bill, Sen. Sears said he decided to move the bill through his committee after making an amendment to satisfy the above concern. This amendment requires the federal government to change the definition of marijuana. By doing so, there would be a clear distinction between hemp and marijuana.

Source: BenningtonBanner.com

A new bill supporting industrial hemp production in Minnesota has been introduced to House committees.

The bill, authorized by Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, has already been given the thumbs up by the House Public Safety and Civil Justice. They voted 7-6 in favor of keeping the bill moving.

Unfortunately, Bob Bushman of the Minneasota Peace/Police Officers Association, isn’t so keen on the idea. He thinks that, legalizing industrial hemp will open the doors to all sorts of drugs being legalized. He’s also concerned that the laboratories that test drugs that have been seized by police, will become over-burdened.

Personally, I doubt that it will open the doors to the legalization of drugs. I mean, what the bill intends to do is make a clear distinction in the law between industrial hemp and drugs. And that’s all that is needed. The reason the law needs to have a clear distinction is because there is a clear distinction between industrial hemp and drugs.

Furthermore, unless drugs share the enormous benefits to the environment that industrial hemp does, it’s unlikely that we’ll see those being legalized any time soon.

As far as the burden on the drug labs goes, I don’t think the burden will be that great. Anyone with a trained eye can tell the difference between industrial hemp and marijuana.