Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've wondered recently why we haven't made more use of this remarkably useful plant that, unfortunately, shares a genus with its infamous cannibas cousin. Hemp has an interestng history that goes back several thousand years. In fact, in the early American colonies it was declared illegal NOT to grow it. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are said to have grown it, and some of our greatest historical documents have been printed on hemp paper. England's attempt to block our obtaining Russian hemp was one reason given for the War of 1812. Only the soybean plant even comes close to it in varied usefulness.
The United States seems to be almost alone among the world's major countries who still prohibit large-scale cultivation of hemp for industrail uses. However, some states have been given special permission for limited production. Canada has permitted growing of hemp for many years and has prospered from its sale. A couple links on hemp history and uses follow:
It is my understanding that, among a plethora of absurdities, the USA has allowed this scenario to come about:
1. It is a criminal offense to grow industrial hemp in the USA.
2. The US Armed Forces require huge quantities of hemp for the production of rope and various textiles, which must be imported from Canada.
3. The USA annually imports $100-million worth of hemp, whose production provides jobs in other countries.
It is a legacy of America's Century of Ignorance. This is not about Hemp. It is about blind idiocy masquerading as governance, and hemp is merely an example.
By coincidence, I noticed last evening that Ralph Nader had written a recent article on this subject titled Let Them Grow. I agree that it is an absurdity that is keeping U.S. farmers from growing a useful cash crop while subsidizing them in other areas. Ron Paul introduced a bill, H.R. 1831, in May called the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2011. It may get some traction as more people become educated on this subject.
There's actually a very long discussion thread right now on the "South Dakota" forum, about how the Pine Ridge Reservation Indians (the poorest county in the entire USA) could benefit from growing industrial hemp, since it's the only crop that thrives in the arid-soil "Badlands" area around the Reservation, where there are virtually no employment opportunities and no infrastructure. One of the posters there, keeps harping on and on about how the Pine Ridge Indians should be allowed to grow industrial hemp..
There's actually a very long discussion thread right now on the "South Dakota" forum, about how the Pine Ridge Reservation Indians (the poorest county in the entire USA) could benefit from growing industrial hemp, since it's the only crop that thrives in the arid-soil "Badlands" area around the Reservation, where there are virtually no employment opportunities and no infrastructure. One of the posters there, keeps harping on and on about how the Pine Ridge Indians should be allowed to grow industrial hemp..
ALL and I really do mean ALL....
All natural state agricultural product should be legal by default.
If it can grow out of the ground... it's legal. Done.
Subsequent regulation or crop management or whatever else...
might have some justification in some scenarios and for various reasons...
but the underlying natural state agricultural item itself should never be illegal.
The official line is that it's illegal b/c it is cannabis sativa and CS is illegal in this country due to the ill-advised war on drugs. The thing is, you can smoke industrial hemp but you'll get a headache before you'll get high. Also, it's easy to tell the difference between a hemp field and a pot field--with hemp, the plants are much closer together b/c they're favoring stem production rather than leaf production and if they're serious about the war on drugs then why not just issue special permits for farmers to grow it? They say it's because you could hide your pot plants in the middle of a hemp field, but you could hide your pot plants in the middle of a corn field too. Dumb argument.
I'd say it's likelier that MrRational is correct and also that the cotton farmers are threatened by it, due to the fact that it's a much more economically feasible crop to grow than cotton and could drive cotton prices down. After all, you don't have to spray hemp with a bunch of nasty chemicals like you do cotton--it grows like a weed, lol. Cotton takes several applications of malathion through the season, in an effort to rid it of the boll weevil, and then in the fall it has to be defoliated with something even nastier. Can you tell I'm all for hemp?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
