Illegal Pot Grows....

[Darian]

A pair of interesting articles appear in todays SacBee. The first concerns impacts of illegal diversion of water for pot grows (medicinal or otherwise) in north coast counties. Follow the link:

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article25352176.html

The second article concerns AB 1242, a bill to limit the ability of water regulators to balance the needs of all water users fairly. Check it out:

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article25350550.html

One way or another, water will flow to agriculture. While I understand the feeling that growers express about needing water to bring in their crops, I have to remind myself that all is not lost for them. The latest version of federal legislation passed a couple of years ago, included provisions for insurance against crop failure. BTW, growers don;t pay for this insurance. The premiums are paid from federal tax revenues.

[Darian]

confirming the impact of illegal pot grows on the environment and the value of those crops is a study recently completed by the Nature Conservancy according to a representative interviewed on Capitol Public Radio, today.

The study, carried out in the field, found that illegal POT grows are not "green" or harmless as advocates would have everyone believe. Among many impacts, staff identified un-permitted road grading, clear cutting of wooded areas, land leveling, construction of hot houses, illegal diversion of water, power (in some instances), de-watering of streams, polluted run-off from unregulated use of fertilizers/herbicides/insecticides and sedimentation of streams/waterways in the report. One of the really interesting impacts is on the volume of water used for irrigation. The interviewee said that Marijuana crops use more water for irrigation in this state than does Almonds and Dairy combined.

A report was released by the Lt. Governors blue ribbon committee which included 58 recommendations on how to handle implementation of regulation in the event that legalization of Marijuana occurs. It's been reported that this report didn't address concerns about the ongoing environmental impacts mentioned above. So much for looking to government to resolve this issue.

[SeanO]

Very interesting, Darian.

I know many anglers have an aversion to big ag, but I would welcome pot grows to come over to the central valley. The ingenuity to irrigate all manner of crops knows no bounds here!

I say legalize it. Leave the North state streams and rivers for fish.

Take care,

[cyama]

Legalize it… That is even what the hippies at the Nature Conservancy say. Read the last paragraph http://www.conserveca.org/our-stories/all/2-blog/211-marijuana-farming-and-california-drought#.VbxEbiShofk The tax money generated will help to protect the fish and the water. The regulations would be clear and those that don't follow the regulations could be made to do so by tax dollars paid for enforcement. The ag folks still use flooding and sprinklers to water their crops they should be made to use best practices….

[Darian]

Unfortunately, whatever regulatory scheme is eventually implemented will determine how/whether "black market" marijuana remains (just as it, alcohol, did during prohibition in the 20's/30's). It seems that there're already voices advocating limitations on taxation and license/permit fees (small government advocates, etc.). So, depending on how all of this pans out, there may be little or no additional revenues for law enforcement activities. Personally, I'm not in favor of legalizing recreational marijuana but am a realist. It's going to happen at some point in the near future as the potential for making a "s__t load" of money is just too much temptation for growers and municipal/state governments to ignore.

One thing to remember is that a lot of the marijuana grown in the "Emerald Triangle" is exported/shipped to other states and/or overseas, according to the Nature Conservancy. So, there doesn't seem to be much incentive on the part of illegal/old line growers to change even if recreational use is legalized.

"The ag folks still use flooding and sprinklers to water their crops they should be made to use best practices…." That's a subject for another thread.

[SeanO]

One thing to remember is that a lot of the marijuana grown in the "Emerald Triangle" is exported/shipped to other states

I don't use it myself, but some of my friends up in OR do. They grow their own now since it has been legalized, so at least some numbers of consumers of CA pot are off the table.

We shall see!

[tascaso]

Sorry but our almond orchard stopped getting surface water for irrigation about 5 years ago. Since the drought of '76 our delivery allotment have never been 100% of what they were. Eventually they curtailed our water allotment to zero. We sold the first half of our family ranch (160 acres) back in the 90's, and this year we finally sold the other 160 acres. With no water from the Delta Mendota Canal, regulation of ground pumping coming we are just done with what was once our family dream of farming. So it ends, now its the next move to leave CA and go some where there is water.

[Darian]

Sorry to hear that you had to sell. Hopefully, the sale produced enough money to start another farm, somewhere, if that's what your intentions are. Good luck to you and your family.

IMO, regardless of the crop grown, the loss of family (small) farms is not a good sign for this state or AG overall. Between very lean water allocations, drought and politics, the only growers left will be the big corporate farms. Smaller farms provide a wide variety of crops that may not make a lot of sense for larger growers. Unfortunately, most of the western states are experiencing the same water related problems we are. Too much demand for over-committed water supplies and few, if any, real solutions coming from government.