Register ICMag Forum Menu Features Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
You are viewing our:
in:
Forums > Talk About It! > Hemp > Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill, United States)

Thread Title Search
Post Reply
Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill, United States) Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-13-2019, 03:28 AM #11
PDX Dopesmoker
Senior Member

PDX Dopesmoker's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: higher than you
Posts: 1,935
PDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by art.spliff View Post
An agreed upon list of companies including budweiser or philip morris or pepsi or pfizer or monsanto should not be allowed anywhere near food cultivation including cannabis. Leaving our food with these guys is equivalent to leaving children at an outed offending Catholic priest day care.

We talk about laws and regulations almost as if they are theoretical sometimes. In truth I have a pro-regulation stance in the form of monitoring fossil fuel use and energy consumption as a prime factor to consider.

In addition to nutrient content and toxin presence, evidence of toxin harm to human health, and sustainable production with equitable reasonable fairly compensated human labor.

The 0.3 number is only written as a minor detail, like a distraction to give people something to talk about. All it means is the feds still want a law that says they can arrest people for growing a plant, only allowing monsanto or mcdonalds to grow and make the big bucks as it were.

People can debate about taxes and alcohol prohibition and many other things but arresting or jailing people is against human rights unquestionably with regards to cultivating edible medicinal herbs. All reports are coming out in favor of this plant; there are no reports of risk or harm.

Example - cite former alcohol or opiate or prescription drug users and their experiences, accounts with rehab, etc. Now go look for that group with cannabis.

This alters the concept of good and evil in a sense some people have been taught because if you look in the mirror it is difficult if not impossible to be on both sides if that makes sense.

How many in the history of criminal justice shouldn't have been arrested in the first place? That is a quite a dark past to expect any level of respect or trust. A 180 degree stance is unexpected, unbelievable, won't happen overnight, etc.
Your desire to offer fantastic new authority to elected officials with a horrible track record and expectations of getting a good result is so diametrically opposed to observed reality and recent history that I question your sanity. Do you live on Earth or do you live on Fantasy Island?
PDX Dopesmoker is online now Quote


2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-13-2019, 03:31 AM #12
geneva_sativa
Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,508
geneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant futuregeneva_sativa has a brilliant future
de plane ! de plane !

fantasia, boss !!!
geneva_sativa is offline Quote


Old 02-16-2019, 04:06 PM #13
ronbo51
Member

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 745
ronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to beholdronbo51 is a splendid one to behold
So, this very topic came up at the warehouse after I came home and read this. So I brought it up the next morning and here is what I was told by our two managers, who talked to more than a few people, including two vendors that sell prerolls, the guy who is selling us our raw CBD bud to make our own prerolls, who is also very connected to the political/law enforcement side of hemp here in South Carolina, as well as a lawyer connected to Hemp Garden ( out of NY, sells grams and prerolls ). Hemp Garden was raided by the DEA at a Myrtle Beach store last year for hot products and had all inventory confiscated and all the nightmare.

In the end the DEA apologized, returned the products, and were given the guidance to not include the A in THCa. I don't know why. Obviously all the acid is converted upon combustion. It really opens up the door though on the available varieties. We are launching our inhouse prrolls next week. This past two days at work we played with a 120 hole cone filler and a grinder. It was fun. I bought a big can filter and made a workstation in our lab and we knocked out 120 in 30 minutes.

It is amazing how CBD flower has exploded. All our stores run out or need reorders almost immediately. These new strains blow away the stuff we already get from 3'rd part vendors. and I expect when it hits the shelves next week it's gonna be big.
ronbo51 is offline Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-19-2019, 12:04 AM #14
GrowingHigher
Member

GrowingHigher's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: oregon
Posts: 148
GrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura about
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronbo51 View Post
In the end the DEA apologized, returned the products, and were given the guidance to not include the A in THCa. I don't know why. Obviously all the acid is converted upon combustion. It really opens up the door though on the available varieties.
I mean, really it opens the door to selling flower with enough THCa to get people high. If, say, 90-95% of THC is present as the acid, then 3-6% total THC could test legal. Thereby, (low potency) marijuana is legal? It also opens up the door for much lower ratio strains with significant THC content, but that are still CBD dominant.

Although, if the bust occurred last year, it would have been under the 2014 wording, which didn't include the word decarboxylation anywhere.
__________________
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels…upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" -Mario Savio

Last edited by GrowingHigher; 02-22-2019 at 05:48 AM.. Reason: numbers were wrong
GrowingHigher is offline Quote


Old 02-28-2019, 09:28 PM #15
GrowingHigher
Member

GrowingHigher's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: oregon
Posts: 148
GrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura about
For those who may be paying attention to this:

The USDA has given some explicit answers to my questions of when the 2018 farm bill rules will take effect, and it is apparently one year after they formulate the regulations. 2019 season proceeds under the 2014 bill. So, regardless of where the delta 9/decarb question lands, states that have chosen to interpret the 2014 bill as delta-9-THC only are good to go for ignoring THCa (since no decarb wording is in the 2014 bill) for at least 2019 and maybe 2020, depending on how on top of issuing regulations the USDA actually is.

https://www.ams.usda.gov/content/hem...uction-program

https://www.ams.usda.gov/publication...ns-and-answers

https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regul.../farmbill-hemp

Quote:
Excerpt from USDA:
"It is USDA’s intention to issue regulations in the Fall of 2019 to accommodate the 2020 planting season. The rulemaking will provide for the publishing of a proposed rule, comment period, and a final rule.

For the 2019 planting season, the 2018 Farm Bill provides that States, Tribes, and institutions of higher education can continue operating under authorities of the 2014 Farm Bill. USDA provided additional guidance to these programs in the August 2016 multi-agency Statement of Principles on Industrial Hemp (FR 53395). The 2018 Farm Bill extension of the 2014 authority expires 12 months after USDA has established the plan and regulations required under the 2018 Farm Bill."
It should be noted that there is some discrepency as to when the USDA regulations would take effect in the above quote; it says the 2014 bill authority extends one year after they issue regulations, but then also say they plan to release regulations this fall, less than a year before the completion of 2020 growing season.


Also the "statement of principals" mentioned in the quote that they issued in 2016 tried to claim all "isomers" of "tetrahydrocannabinols" are included in the 0.3 limit (which would include THCa), however this is not the wording of the actual bill and therefore is unenforceable as far as I can tell (in the same way the DEA claim that hemp derived CBD is still schedule 1 is incorrect under the wording of the law and therefore is toothless):
https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...ndustrial-hemp
__________________
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels…upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" -Mario Savio

Last edited by GrowingHigher; 02-28-2019 at 09:46 PM..
GrowingHigher is offline Quote


Old 03-01-2019, 01:52 PM #16
PDX Dopesmoker
Senior Member

PDX Dopesmoker's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: higher than you
Posts: 1,935
PDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant futurePDX Dopesmoker has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrowingHigher View Post
For those who may be paying attention to this:

The USDA has given some explicit answers to my questions of when the 2018 farm bill rules will take effect, and it is apparently one year after they formulate the regulations. 2019 season proceeds under the 2014 bill. So, regardless of where the delta 9/decarb question lands, states that have chosen to interpret the 2014 bill as delta-9-THC only are good to go for ignoring THCa (since no decarb wording is in the 2014 bill) for at least 2019 and maybe 2020, depending on how on top of issuing regulations the USDA actually is.

https://www.ams.usda.gov/content/hem...uction-program

https://www.ams.usda.gov/publication...ns-and-answers

https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regul.../farmbill-hemp



It should be noted that there is some discrepency as to when the USDA regulations would take effect in the above quote; it says the 2014 bill authority extends one year after they issue regulations, but then also say they plan to release regulations this fall, less than a year before the completion of 2020 growing season.


Also the "statement of principals" mentioned in the quote that they issued in 2016 tried to claim all "isomers" of "tetrahydrocannabinols" are included in the 0.3 limit (which would include THCa), however this is not the wording of the actual bill and therefore is unenforceable as far as I can tell (in the same way the DEA claim that hemp derived CBD is still schedule 1 is incorrect under the wording of the law and therefore is toothless):
https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...ndustrial-hemp
With regards to the new laws not taking effect until vague number of dozens of months into the future, thats the same shit they did in Oregon, the commercial industry wasn't allowed to start up until almost two years after the legalization law was passed. It takes that fucking long for the moneyed elites to get their shit together so they can horde even more wealth for themselves. Its gonna take them until summer of 2020 to figure out how to put a seed into the dirt and water it.
Can you imagine someone as officious and rat-faced as a federal bureaucrat claiming that it takes them over a year to make up new rules? Thats all those bossy bastards ever do is make up rules about fucking everything, but the first second it seems that there might some smidgen of value to their incredible work ethics and you might finally see some benefit from what those "public servants" do then suddenly it takes until a few months after the second coming of Jesus' less punctual younger brother to get anything done.
PDX Dopesmoker is online now Quote


Old 03-13-2019, 04:34 AM #17
GrowingHigher
Member

GrowingHigher's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: oregon
Posts: 148
GrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura aboutGrowingHigher has a spectacular aura about
On mailing hemp:

Quote:
According to the USPS, a mailing is compliant when it contains the following documentation:

“1. A signed self-certification statement, subject to the False Statements Act. Statements must be printed on the mailer’s own letterhead, and must include the text, “I certify that all information contained in this letter and supporting documents are accurate, truthful, and complete. I understand that anyone who furnishes false or misleading information or omits information relating to this certification may be subject to criminal and/or civil penalties, including fines and imprisonment.”

2. The industrial hemp producer possesses a license issued by the Department of Agriculture, for the state where the Post office/ acceptance unit is located, which includes documentation identifying the producer by name and showing the mailer is authorized by the registered producer to market products manufactured by that producer.

3. The industrial hemp, or products produced from industrial hemp, contains a delta-9 THC concentration of not more than 0.3% on a dry weight basis.”
More info:
https://cannabusiness.law/usps-issue...s&utm_campaign
GrowingHigher is offline Quote


Post Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:20 AM.




This site is for educational and entertainment purposes only.
You must be of legal age to view ICmag and participate here.
All postings are the responsibility of their authors.
Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.