|
 
Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! Please  login or  register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
|
 EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,237
|
 Cannabis cultivation
#6838022 - 04/26/07 05:44 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Since there is a diverse group of people (geographically speaking, in this particular instance) who use this site, I am wondering about industrial hemp cultivation.
Who here is from a U.S. state or another country where it is allowed? If so please give a brief overview about it in your area (number of acres cultivated, uses for product, degree of public support, etc.).
If it is not legal where you're at, how prominent of an issue is it & how close/far is it to passing?
As for the state I live in... unfortunately, it's populated by a lot of ignorant people (really narrows it down, right?  ) who are ultra-reactionary & have an immediate & irrational prejudice if you simply bring up the word(s) cannabis, hemp, marijuana, etc. Initiated measures (or whatever they're called) have been brought to a popular vote, but it has yet to pass... though I think support has been in the 30s, maybe even lower 40s... can't remember offhand.
--------------------
"Every part of this earth is sacred to my people. Every pine needle, every sandy shore, every humming insect is holy... We are part of the earth and it is part of us... The earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth." - Chief Seattle
"...the role our nation has taken... of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments... we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values... When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered." - Martin Luther King Jr.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,237
|
|
Oh yeah, something else I wanted to ask... & I promise it's not sarcasm... is there a single logical & scientifically valid reason for not cultivating hemp? I honestly can't think of one off the top of my head, & was just wondering if one (or more) exists.
|
 phi1618
old hand
Registered: 02/14/04
Posts: 3,722
Last seen: 10 hours, 27 minutes
|
|
If you have an outdoor marijuana grow in the vicinity of a hemp farm, you run the risk of having your plants polinated by the hemp plants. This results in inferior weed with worthless seeds.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,237
|
 Re: Cannabis cultivation [Re: phi1618]
#6839011 - 04/26/07 10:12 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
LOL, I know! That is, in fact, an "anti-drug" argument in favor widespread hemp cultivation. That's why it's hilarious to hear someone put forth the propaganda that hemp cultivation would make it easy to conceal (female) plants yielding high-quality buds.
Although that's a (very shallow) agrument against hemp cultivation if you want to grow such plants outdoors, I was refering to it from a public interest standpoint... wondering if there is any legitimate reason for a (socially conservative) person to oppose hemp cultivation.
|
Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,969
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
|
|
There are legitimate reasons, but they're political, and politically it's the same as medical marijuana. If we prove cannabis has usefulness, then it will not be so easy to demonize and use as a scapegoat. This is why many social conservatives resist any use of the cannabis plant, whether for industrial, medical or spiritual reasons.
--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.
http://marceltagen.wordpress.com/
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,237
|
Re: Cannabis cultivation [Re: Ravus]
#6839203 - 04/26/07 10:52 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
There are legitimate reasons...
Such as? Remember, I'm asking as far as the average citizen is concerned, not the profits of those in power.
|
Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,969
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
|
|
With that restriction, there are no legitimate reasons. But for the lumber, cotton and paper industries, there are many. Looking at the history of why hemp was outlawed, you can see that it was simply the fact that the industries hemp threatened were more powerful politically and economically than the hemp industry itself.
--------------------
So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.
http://marceltagen.wordpress.com/
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar
Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 2,237
|
Re: Cannabis cultivation [Re: Ravus]
#6839383 - 04/26/07 11:45 PM (1 year, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Absolutely. Here's a real informative piece on this subject I got off Erowid:
{The actual story behind the legislature passed against marijuana is quite surprising. According to Jack Herer, author of The Emperor Wears No Clothes and an expert on the "hemp conspiracy," the acts bringing about the demise of hemp were part of a large conspiracy involving DuPont, Harry J. Anslinger, commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, and many other influential industrial leaders such as William Randolph Hearst and Andrew Mellon. Herer notes that the Marijuana Tax Act, which passed in 1937, coincidentally occurred just as the decoricator machine was invented. With this invention, hemp would have been able to take over competing industries almost instantaneously. According to Popular Mechanics, "10,000 acres devoted to hemp will produce as much paper as 40,000 acres of average [forest] pulp land." William Hearst owned enormous timber acreage, land best suited for conventional pulp, so his interest in preventing the growth of hemp can be easily explained. Competition from hemp would have easily driven the Hearst paper-manufacturing company out of business and significantly lowered the value of his land. Herer even suggests popularizing the term "marijuana" was a strategy Hearst used in order to create fear in the American public. "The first step in creating hysteria was to introduce the element of fear of the unknown by using a word that no one had ever heard of before... 'marijuana'" (ibid).
DuPont's involvment in the anti-hemp campaign can also be explained with great ease. At this time, DuPont was patenting a new sulfuric acid process for producing wood-pulp paper. "According to the company's own records, wood-pulp products ultimately accounted for more than 80% of all DuPont's railroad car loadings for the next 50 years" (ibid). Indeed it should be noted that "two years before the prohibitive hemp tax in 1937, DuPont developed a new synthetic fiber, nylon, which was an ideal substitute for hemp rope" (Hartsell). The year after the tax was passed DuPont came out with rayon, which would have been unable to compete with the strength of hemp fiber or its economical process of manufacturing. "DuPont's point man was none other than Harry Anslinger...who was appointed to the FBN by Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, who was also chairman of the Mellon Bank, DuPont's chief financial backer. Anslinger's relationship to Mellon wasn't just political, he was also married to Mellon's niece" (Hartsell). It doesn't take much to draw a connection between DuPont, Anslinger, and Mellon, and it's obvious that all of these groups, including Hearst, had strong motivation to prevent the growth of the hemp industry.
The reasoning behind DuPont, Anslinger, and Hearst was not for any moral or health related issues. They fought to prevent the growth of this new industry so they wouldn't go bankrupt...
An entire industry could be created out of hemp based products. The oils extracted from seeds could be used for fuels and the hemp fiber, a fiber so valued for its strength that it is used to judge the quality of other fibers, could be manufactured into ropes, clothing, or paper...
We can expect strong opposition from companies like DuPont and paper manufacturerss but the selfishness of these corporations should not prevent its use in our society like it did in the 1930's. Regardless of what these organizations will say about marijuana, the fact is it has the potential to become one of the most useful substances in the entire world. If we took action and our government legalized it today, we would immediately see benefits from this decision. People suffering from illnesses ranging from manic depression to multiple sclerosis would be able to experience relief, the government could make a fortune off of the taxes it could impose on its sale, and its implementation into the industrial world would create thousands of new jobs for the economy. Also, because of its role in paper making, the rain forests of South America could be saved from their current fate. No recorded deaths have ever occurred as a result of marijuana use, it is not physically addictive like alcohol or tobacco, and most doctors will agree it is safer to use.}
I was just wondering if there was a legitimate scientific/public interest reason for not permitting the cultivation of cannabis. I didn't think so, but I just wanted to confirm this & make sure I wasn't missing a valid point (which I've searched for, but have yet to find).
| |
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
