Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Medical pot growers ravage California forest habitat
The Sacramento Bee ^ | October 21, 2012 | By Matt Weiser

Posted on 10/21/2012 8:55:10 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

California's annual medical marijuana harvest is just about done, but this year brings a new revelation sweeping the nascent industry: The feel-good herb may not, in fact, be so good for the environment.

From golden Sierra foothills to forested coastal mountains, an explosion of pseudo-legal medical marijuana farms has dramatically changed the state's landscape over the past two years.

A rush to profit from patient demand for pot has resulted in irresponsible forest clearing, illegal stream diversions, and careless pesticide and fertilizer use that has polluted waterways and killed wildlife, state and local government officials said.

(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; libertarians; medicalmarijuana; mexico
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 next last

1 posted on 10/21/2012 8:55:14 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

And? Where are the environmentalists? Just out back...puffing on a joint?


2 posted on 10/21/2012 8:59:27 AM PDT by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

But, but . . . left-wing potheads would NEVER damage the environment!

When they puff, they are at one with Nature!


3 posted on 10/21/2012 9:07:29 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I imagine the medical marijuana growers are being driven into the woods by the Obama Admin crackdown on growers. Who is going to rent to a grower in that circumstance - which means the enviornmental problems are an unintended consequence of the crackdown.

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Attorney-general-defends-medical-pot-crackdown-3619425.php

Nadler pointed out that as a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama had promised that he wouldn’t use “Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.”

But since 2009, federal agents and prosecutors have conducted about 200 raids on medical marijuana dispensaries and growers and brought more than 60 indictments, Nadler said.
Much of the federal crackdown has taken place in California, one of 17 states (plus the District of Columbia) that have medical marijuana laws on the books. Medical marijuana advocates in California have accused the Obama administration of duplicity in its evolving policy positions.

But Holder insisted the Justice Department has limited its enforcement actions “to those individuals (and) organizations that are acting out of conformity ... with state laws.”


4 posted on 10/21/2012 9:08:41 AM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Make it legal and have pot farmers grow with out fear. They should also grow the fiber and seed variety for oil and natural fibers.


5 posted on 10/21/2012 9:11:27 AM PDT by the_daug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The sad truth is that the majority of grows in the forest areas are in fact Mexican drug cartels. They are killing people and destroying areas just like they do in Mexico.

This is what loosening pot laws leads to


6 posted on 10/21/2012 9:14:23 AM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
California government is largely run by 60’s and 70’s hippie doper commies, all the way up to the governor, so it's no worries. Anyway, they can make up for it by closing a few more dairies.
7 posted on 10/21/2012 9:14:45 AM PDT by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Quick! Someone blame the War on Drugs and all Republicans!

Thanks Oldeconomybuyer.


8 posted on 10/21/2012 9:22:51 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: the_daug

+1


9 posted on 10/21/2012 9:22:51 AM PDT by Jayster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nifster
This is what loosening pot laws prohibition leads to
10 posted on 10/21/2012 9:36:36 AM PDT by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Oh surprise surprise! Make drugs legal and take the profit out it for thugs, yada, yada!

The dopers have a criminal mentality and aren't likely to care about much else but we knew that already, didn't we?

11 posted on 10/21/2012 9:39:29 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the_daug

I know, right?

Is there anything it can’t do!

:)


12 posted on 10/21/2012 9:43:23 AM PDT by freedomson (Tagline comment removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Exactly as most environmentalist really don’ care about the environment.


13 posted on 10/21/2012 9:45:44 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
The dopers and the enviros love to wrap themselves in high sounding virtue but in the end it's just a chance to feed their boundless egos.
14 posted on 10/21/2012 9:53:11 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Interesting these environmentalist nuts are not all that concerned about their “rain forests” when they are harvesting POT from them!!!!!


15 posted on 10/21/2012 10:01:11 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Interesting these environmentalist nuts are not all that concerned about their “rain forests” when they are harvesting POT from them!!!!!


16 posted on 10/21/2012 10:01:22 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“The dopers have a criminal mentality and aren’t likely to care about much else but we knew that already, didn’t we?”

Please explain the 21st Amendment.


17 posted on 10/21/2012 10:05:37 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nifster
The sad truth is that the majority of grows in the forest areas are in fact Mexican drug cartels. They are killing people and destroying areas just like they do in Mexico.

How dare you cloud the issue with truth!

18 posted on 10/21/2012 10:07:55 AM PDT by Roccus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

My SIL buys grapes for a major winery in N Cal. She works closely with farmers in the northern coast counties in California.

She says they have to make sure that the grape are harvested before pot harvesting begins. Pot harvesting pays better for the migrantfarm workers.

The pot farmers squat on federal and state land and on private property. They have their own private “armies” and terrorize the local residents. They not only divert rivers, but also steal water from the legitimate farmers. Those farmers are still charged for the water usage.

When pot harvest is over, they leave all of the trash from the camps for state officials and private residents to clean up. It is a huge disaster. And it costs us a lot of money.

All in all it is a dangerous, expensive and destructive situation.

Making pot legal would change what part of that? It is a profitable model now. And how is pot not legal as things stand?


19 posted on 10/21/2012 10:09:42 AM PDT by rbbeachkid (Get out of its way and small business can fix the economy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210

Please explain why having drunks isn’t enough.


20 posted on 10/21/2012 10:19:51 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rbbeachkid

It seems like private contractors could be hired to search for these fields.

With a proper reward system in place, hunting for pot plants could be a nice hobby for some individuals, and a lucrative business for small companies.


21 posted on 10/21/2012 10:20:31 AM PDT by ansel12 (Mitt Romney is a mixture of LBJ and Nixon, Obama is a mixture of LBJ and Jimmy Carter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

From Humboldt have fam and friends up there. It is a mess up there. Can’t go walking in the forest without getting shot at.


22 posted on 10/21/2012 10:29:50 AM PDT by waxer1 ("The Bible is the rock on which our republic rests." -Andrew Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I owned property in N Calif from 1988 thru 2004. Good horse trails which dated back to the pioneers & the Gold Rush days were no longer usable because of the pot growers shooting at you.

The Tahoe National Forest is no longer a place where you can camp-hike- or ride. There are large grows there being run by cartels from Mexico and they have found it is easier to bring the workers & the seeds to the USA & do all their planting here.

They are so dangerous that many county sheriff’s in N Calif won’t go near them.

Horse riders are being told they cannot use certain trails because of ‘enviro damage’ from hoofprints, but these cartels are far more destructive.

The failure to control / eradicate these pot grows was another reason why I moved out of N Calif.


23 posted on 10/21/2012 10:32:31 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“Please explain why having drunks isn’t enough.”

Well that wasn’t the point you were trying to make, was it? You specifically tried to argue that taking the profit motive from thugs (i.e. legalization) would not affect their criminal mentality. Except we had a huge national experiment to determine that precise question called the 18th Amendment. Which, since you’re not a fan of history, was repealed (first of it’s kind) by the 21st Amendment.

You want to change the subject? I don’t blame you.


24 posted on 10/21/2012 10:34:08 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: freedomson

Don’t know don’t care if there is anything it can’t do. I know that too much money is spent to stop it so I’m willing to embrace it. In Nebraska they planted hemp for habitat enhancement for pheasants beginning of the 20th century. Nothing like watching a cock ring neck fly up and grab a dead hemp stock take it down and feast.


25 posted on 10/21/2012 10:38:41 AM PDT by the_daug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
The dopers have a criminal mentality and aren't likely to care about much else but we knew that already, didn't we?

'Scuse me, but since their IS NO Constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate or prohibit 'drugs' of any kind.....

it isn't the growers or consumers that are exhibiting a 'criminal mentality' here.

Unless, that is, you just don't care about the Constitution.

26 posted on 10/21/2012 10:47:10 AM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Because the environmentalists are the ones smoking the dope.


27 posted on 10/21/2012 10:48:57 AM PDT by ully2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

They have been promoting communism for years too.


28 posted on 10/21/2012 10:53:52 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

And that right there is exactly why I believe MJ should legalized.

As a former Sheriff Explore, we regularly cut down these farms.

But, not before the aea was cleared of chems, feces, food waste. Those places are disgusting and your garbage can is cleaner.

Importantly, our safety was of the utmost concern and DEA, FBI and local LEO would remove all kinds of booby traps from razors and fishing hooks attached to eye level branches, which would take out an eye, even shotshell and home made claymores.

Now I don’t smoke the stuff but , I know so many who do and they function just fine. They don’t puff all day and use it recreationally while being very productive.

Legalize the stuff and you wil also find a cleaner product that is safer and a forest that is safer to hike in.


29 posted on 10/21/2012 11:08:44 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

“Now I don’t smoke the stuff but” I just don’t believe that part when anyone says that. It’s like going to the doctor about an STD and saying ‘some friend of mine has this problem..’. Uh huh.


30 posted on 10/21/2012 11:12:42 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

How are they managing to clear forest for this, and not have it stick out like a sore thumb from the air?


31 posted on 10/21/2012 11:23:46 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

Yeah nOOb and the three most overated things in the world are:

Home cooking

Home cleaning

And You....


32 posted on 10/21/2012 11:24:35 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
The government needs marijuana to remain illegal. It is one of the biggest forms of currency export with which to mask inflation and monetize the debt.
33 posted on 10/21/2012 11:32:38 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (Islam offers us choices: convert or kill, submit or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
Pot is for all practical matters legal in California since it seems at least 200% of the population qualifies as having a medical need for it.

The de facto legalization has not removed the crime or the criminals from the industry.

And Len, it was you that brought up the 21st. not me. To the best of my knowledge it has nothing to do with pot.

But since you brought up the 21st. The people who violated the law on a large scale then also ran prostitution and gambling enterprises and were willing to murder to further their business. They had that criminal mentality.

The 21st was submitted to the country for approval something the so-called “medical” pot growers seem unwilling to do.

No, thank you, I neither need nor want to have someone with a pot fried brain in the car in front of me anymore than some brain dead drunk who can't function.

And the notion that legalization would take the profit out of pot is silly. The greatest effect would be for large growers to take control who could meet government regulations.

34 posted on 10/21/2012 11:36:19 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210

Zactly


35 posted on 10/21/2012 11:42:46 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan
“’Scuse me, but since their IS NO Constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate or prohibit ‘drugs’ of any kind.....”

Then I must assume you don't consider it constitutional for the feds to regulate which, if any, drugs cross the borders. And if not drugs why tobacco and booze? Or beef for that matter?

36 posted on 10/21/2012 12:05:32 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

There is no such thing as legal for “all practical matters”. In law, something is either legal or it is illegal. There is also no such thing as 200% of the population.

You’re saying at one point that prohibition has no correlation to pot and then make the exact point that legal growers would be able to make a profit in precisely the same manner that alcohol producers make their profit, by meeting government regulations. And without guns and ammunition.

It’s almost like you don’t want to actually think about the issue as much as spout banalities.


37 posted on 10/21/2012 12:21:30 PM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Then I must assume you don't consider it constitutional for the feds to regulate which, if any, drugs cross the borders. And if not drugs why tobacco and booze? Or beef for that matter?

Nice dodge in changing the subject. A tactic which I notice you attempted to earlier with another Freeper.

-------

And no, it is NOT Constitutional for the feds to regulate anything that crosses the border. They have only a concurrent jurisdiction with the state to collect taxes at the points of entry.

Everything else is under the purview of the States as per the 10th Amendment.

[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.
Samuel Adams (under the pseudonym "Candidus") in the Boston Gazette, 1772

--------

Since you feel free to engage in the game of 'assumption' I'll play along and assume from your reply that indeed you do not care about the Constitution.

38 posted on 10/21/2012 12:31:05 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Pot is for all practical matters legal in California since it seems at least 200% of the population qualifies as having a medical need for it. The de facto legalization has not removed the crime or the criminals from the industry.

De facto legalization is not the same as real legalization.

The de facto legalization in CA is that users aren't mercilessly prosecuted. But, prosecuting them is a lot like prosecuting well-intentioned gun-owners for minor technical violations. The big action, and the big money, is with the criminal growers. Real legalization would make that go away. Why would someone take over part of a National Forest to grow weed, threatening any hiker who stumbled on the field, if it were legal to grow on a farm?

39 posted on 10/21/2012 12:51:58 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
I'm not going to take time to explain a simple English phrase to you, if you don't understand it then you just don't.
Nor am I going to defend what I did not say, that's a fool's errand.

So if you think pot ought to be legalized, so beit but there is no reason to suppose that the the so-called benefits would result.

As for not thinking about the issue...well, over the years I've seen a general lowering of the mores of the society around me and the relaxation of the restraints against many kinds of behavior that were once taken as unthinkable.

Society has not been bettered by hedonism tarted up as freedom.

I have freedoms too. One of which is being able to use the parks without fear of being shot by some grower protecting his patch.

The War on Drugs has been mishandled as most government programs are but that is not an argument in favor of making drugs legal. Legalization would be just as badly mishandled and the results just as disappointing.

40 posted on 10/21/2012 12:57:09 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

“The big action, and the big money, is with the criminal growers. Real legalization would make that go away.”

Precisely.


41 posted on 10/21/2012 12:59:32 PM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“The War on Drugs has been mishandled as most government programs are but that is not an argument in favor of making drugs legal. Legalization would be just as badly mishandled and the results just as disappointing.”

You fly all over the place and then come to some enormously fallacious conclusion. We have an ACTUAL example of prohibitions’ effect on both criminalization and legalization. Taking alcohol production out of the hands of black marketers is a precise correlation and proves the exact opposite of your conclusion.


42 posted on 10/21/2012 1:14:06 PM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Vendome, You are terribly wrong on this issue.

Have you ever lived next to one of these private growers?

Picture this...

Every hour of the day smells like a skunk has moved in under your house! The smell is terrible, and there is no way to get away from it!

My grand children come over and are always asking why our home smells like skunk, and there is no way to explain it away.

It is turning my neighborhood into a stinking mess.


43 posted on 10/21/2012 1:17:44 PM PDT by Randy Larsen (Aim small, Miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

One more thing...

Your referring to “The War on Drugs” as simply mishandled is the most callous understatement since Dear Leader pronounced the deaths in Benghazi as “not optimal”.


44 posted on 10/21/2012 1:28:50 PM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan
You made this comment:

“’Scuse me, but since their IS NO Constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate or prohibit ‘drugs’ of any kind.....”

My response dealt with just how far that “IS NO” extended in your opinion.

“And no, it is NOT Constitutional for the feds to regulate anything that crosses the border. They have only a concurrent jurisdiction with the state to collect taxes at the points of entry.”

The states, the federal government and the courts disagree with you and that is the reality we live with. Visas, passports and tariffs are regulations on the border and accepted as constitutional by the courts.

Thanks for the Sam Adams quote. I'm part of the “public” as was Sam. And like him I have to obey laws I may not agree with.

“’ I'll play along and assume from your reply that indeed you do not care about the Constitution.”

I can quote too, if not verbatim, ‘The Constitution is not a suicide pact’.

45 posted on 10/21/2012 1:52:58 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
Yes, of course, one more misquote. I didn't use the simply or imply it. As to callousness? Well, go have a good cry and come back later.
46 posted on 10/21/2012 2:12:46 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
My response dealt with just how far that “IS NO” extended in your opinion.

No, your response was to dodge an assertion by asking questions instead of offering a rebuttal.

----

Visas, passports and tariffs are regulations on the border and accepted as constitutional by the courts.

Ah. Now you jump from items to 'persons'.

Well, at least you're consistent....

------

I can quote too, if not verbatim, ‘The Constitution is not a suicide pact’.

You're correct, it is not.

It is a treaty between the States for the creation of an administrative organ with a few specified powers.

So again I ask-

Please show me the Constitutional authority possessed by the federal government to regulate or prohibit 'drugs'.

-----

"The constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
--Patrick Henry

47 posted on 10/21/2012 2:29:23 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as Created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
For an answer you might have to ask a grower but some things are just too obvious. I suppose with actual legalization would come quotas and taxes and various regulations and record keeping.

Growing in a national forest avoids all those problems for the grower that doesn't want the oversight that might cut into profits.
Legalization might work like tobacco growing. Heavily regulated and taxed and only the larger companies able to market the end product.
But would legalization stop imports from cheaper growers?

48 posted on 10/21/2012 2:30:45 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

You brushed off the hundreds of dead here and across the border and you think you have a point because I correctly used the modifier simply? You are completely delusional.


49 posted on 10/21/2012 2:33:34 PM PDT by Leonard210 (Viva Perot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan
The courts have held that the Commerce Clause gives the feds such authority. The constitution does not discuss drugs per se.
And regulate is regulate, you made no such distinction in your comment, item or persons. If you want a precise reply you'll have to be precise yourself.
50 posted on 10/21/2012 2:49:38 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson