Left to Right: Patrick Goggin, David Bronner, Bob McFarland, Senator Mark Leno and David Piller

On May 18th the California Senate voted 22 to 14 to pass SB 676, the hemp farming bill. The bill has now been sent to the Assembly. On Tuesday SB 676 passed out of the Public Safety Committee on a 5 to 2 vote! There are several more committee hearings yet to come, but we are very optimistic that SB 676 will pass the full Assembly and go to the Governor’s desk for his signature.

Although it is perfectly legal to buy, sell, and import hemp products in the US, cultivation of the plant still remains illegal. But there are many reasons to hope that this bill is seen through into law. First, it would offer farmers access to a new cash crop.

Second, it would push hemp production closer toward critical mass and bring down the price of so many healthy and eco-friendly hemp-based products. This would give North American a more sustainable crop alternative to cotton, as well as be an important step toward fighting rising global commodity prices.

But most importantly, it would set a precedent for other US states to rethink their archaic legislation toward the hemp plant. And that would be critical in changing global legislative and industrial attitudes toward a plant that can address so many environmental, energy, and dietary needs.

National Farmers Union

[...] significant policy proposals include a call upon Congress to direct the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) to differentiate between industrial hemp and marijuana and adopt policy to allow American farmers to grow industrial hemp under state law without requiring DEA licenses.

Currently, it is legal to import, buy, sell and consume hemp products in the US, but it remains illegal to cultivate the plant. The reason is that US law does not distinguish between hemp and marijuana. As a result, even if state legislators permit hemp farming and issue a farmer a license, the DEA can still arrest a hemp farmer.

To date, 28 states have introduced hemp legislation and 16 have passed legislation. A total of 9 states have removed barriers to its production or research — including Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Vermont and West Virginia.

The two North Dakota farmers who are suing the DEA so that they can actually use the hemp growing licenses that the state issued them have been granted a renewal on their licenses. As The Dickinson Press reports:

Two North Dakota farmers who were granted the nation’s first state licenses to grow industrial hemp a year ago have been granted renewals. The farmers have tried to get federal permission to grow hemp, which is a cousin to marijuana but doesn’t produce a high.

Although the state of North Dakota (and a few others) permit the cultivation of industrial hemp, it is still illegal under federal law. Consequently, even though a farmer is licensed to grow the plant, they can still face prosecution by the DEA.

Despite the legal murkiness, North Dakota is still issuing licenses to grow hemp, but warns that applicants will still have trouble with federal authorities. Perhaps that these two farmers re-applied for their license is indicative of what they think their chances are of winning their case against the DEA (i.e. good). However, there is no set date for when the judge is expected to hand down his decision on this case.

For those who want more background info on this case, VoteHemp.com has a page all about the North Dakota Case.

Despite that two North Dakota farmers are still in court with the DEA, fighting for the right to grow industrial hemp licenses without being federally prosecuted, the state is continuing to issue licenses to grow industrial hemp. As the Jamestown Sun reports:

The North Dakota Department of Agriculture is accepting applications for 2009 industrial hemp production licenses.

“The applications are due Jan. 1,” said Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson. “Although the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration continues to prevent holders of state licenses from growing industrial hemp, NDDA remains committed to fully implementing state laws authorizing the production, processing and sale of this crop in North Dakota.”

In addition to the associated fees and paperwork, applicants must submit their fingerprints and clear both state and federal criminal background checks.

Not only does it seem unreasonable to undergo such a process while the legality of North Dakota hemp farming still hangs in the limbo of federal courts, but the process itself is kind of curious. Consider a farmer who was convicted for a non-drug related crime (such as a fraud charge for bouncing a check) twenty years ago: they would be denied a license to grow industrial hemp. That doesn’t seem to make much sense. Of course, the North Dakota Department of Agriculture (NDDA) may very well consider applicants’ history on a case by case basis. Anyone know for sure?

In any case, those interested in applying for a license to grow industrial hemp in the state of North Dakota can contact Ken Junkert at the NDDA at 701-328-2231 or kjunkert@nd.gov. More information can also be found on the NDDA Web site.

About one month ago, we reported on Randy Caine, the owner a store called Hempyz in Langley, British Columbia, who was forced to dump his hemp stock because of local zoning laws that restricted the sale of hemp products to a particular shopping mall. Caine’s shop was in the town’s core, not at the mall.

Well, it now seems that Caine might be able to jump back into the hemp business. It seems like the town of Langley has agreed to review the bylaw for reconsideration. As the Vancouver Sun reports:

Langley City’s bylaw restricting the sale of hemp products could soon be gone.

City council has asked staff to review the bylaw, in light of an autumn spat between the municipality and Hempyz, a small store that sold a few health and beauty products containing hemp, along with gifts and novelty items emblazoned with marijuana leaves.
[...]
The motion was a late addition to the council agenda on Monday, [Nov. 24], and was approved.

It calls for staff, “in light of issues that have arisen in the city with regard to the sale of products that contain legal hemp,” to review the C1 Downtown Commercial Zoning.
[...]
Staff will review the zoning and provide a report to the incoming council.

Apparently, a little education goes a long way. The story also covers how one city council member has really changed her mind about hemp. In her mind, hemp and marijuana had always been the same thing… until she looked into if for herself, that is.

Seeing a politician adopt an about-face on the issue of hemp once they looked into themselves give me hope that the North Dakota farmers have a decent chance of winning their lawsuit against the DEA so that they can finally grow hemp, and that the Australian lobbyists will succeed in legalizing hemp consumption in their country. Of course, this hope is based on the actions and statement of a small-town local politician, so we’ll have to wait and see. There’s no telling how stubborn federal government power brokers can be in either the US or Australia.

Now that Australian the province of New South Whales has legalized hemp farming, the CEO of Australian hemp lobby and research company Hemp Resources, Kim Hough, is wasting no time in pushing the envelope. You see, even though it’s now legal to grow hemp for fiber, it is still illegal for Australians to consume hemp-food products. Mr. Hough, however, is riding the wave of Australian media buzz around the hemp farming law to push to have the ban on hemp-foods lifted. As TheWest.co.au reports:

Hemp Resources chief executive Kim Hough has written to his local MP and Foreign Affairs Minister Stephen Smith calling for an exemption from the Australian food standard which makes hemp foods illegal for human ingestion.
[...]
Mr Hough said it was shortsightedness not to allow a valid industry that could be earning thousands of dollars every year. He said hemp protein foods and oils were highly nutritious because they were rich in proteins and the essential fatty acids omega 3 and omega 6.
[...]
Mr Hough said the ban on the use of hemp in food products could also be contrary to Australia’s obligations as members of the World Trade Organisation. [...]

Unlike marijuana, hemp has no psychoactive properties. Consuming hemp-based foods, then, offers you a number of health benefits, such as an unparalleled balance of omega fatty acids (get some hemp recipes here).

Given the way things have progressed in Australia, it seem that Mr. Hough is probably on the right track. After all, we’re not talking about just some hippy-health-nut, here. Under Mr. Hough’s leadership, Hemp Resources recently conducted two successful hemp trials: one in China, and another in Australia. In other words, Mr. Hough is a competent businessman who is, for the most part, taking up a completely reasonable cause.

A few days ago, we posted about how two North Dakota farmers were finally getting their day in court. In June of 2007, the farmers filed a lawsuit against teh DEA’s band on commercial hemp farming in the US, and on November 12, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit will begin hearing oral arguments. Well, the Wisoncisn Ag Connection has some clarification on the exact nature of the lawsuit:

In 2007 the North Dakota Legislature removed the requirement that state-licensed industrial hemp farmers first obtain DEA permits before growing hemp. The question before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals will be whether or not federal authorities can prosecute state-licensed farmers who grow non-drug oilseed and fiber hemp pursuant to North Dakota state law. Vote Hemp, the nation’s leading industrial hemp advocacy group, and its supporters are providing financial support for the lawsuit. If it is successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own hemp farming laws without fear of federal interference.

So basically, while the state of North Dakota permits farmers to grow industrial hemp, the federal government does not. Consequently, therefore, a state license to grow hemp is pretty much useless because it does not protect you from federal indictment.

Complete background information on this case is available on the Vote Hemp – Legal Cases: North Dakota page. And here is some footage of the post-court press conference last November.