HEMP LEAVES MINDS MUDDLED

Try to figure this one out: It is permissible under federal law to
import industrial hemp, and to make and sell products made from hemp.
But it's illegal to grow it.

Because of that little quirk in laws, Californians who produce the
many products made from the fibrous hemp plant import tens of
thousands of acres worth of hemp seed, oil and fiber every year. They
make all kinds of products: hats, bags, shirts, scarves, wallets,
purses, yarn, rope, twine, hammocks, soap, lip balm, shampoo, body
lotion, rugs, paper and homeopathic medicines. Hemp also can be used
to more a fiberglass-like substance that is used in everything from
molded auto parts to surfboards.

According to the Hemp Industries Association, the variety and volume
of products made from industrial hemp have exploded since 1990.
Nationwide sales in 2005 totaled $250 million, the industry group
said, and that total is increasing by approximately $26 million per year.

Those manufacturers buy all their raw material from other countries,
including Canada, where nearly 15,000 acres of hemp is grown.

California farmers should figure out a way to cash in.

Two significant obstacles stand in the way -- the federal government,
and a few knee-jerk reactionaries who believe industrial hemp and
marijuana are synonymous.

Industrial hemp and marijuana look similar but are very different
plants. Industrial hemp carries just trace amounts of THC, the
intoxicating chemical in marijuana, not enough to affect people. The
flowers of the hemp form of cannabis are useless as a drug.

A little education and a little enforcement (by the Department of
Agriculture, not the cops) could overcome the worries of people who
fear the word hemp.

The issues are addressed in Assembly Bill 1147, which was introduced
a year ago and, after several revisions, finally cleared the Assembly
last week on a 44-32 vote. The bill now heads to the state Senate. If
it passes there, it will be in the hands of the governor.

Most of the opposition in the Assembly last week came from
Republicans. Only one Republican, the bill's co-author, voted for the
measure. Yet we've heard no strong rationale for the opposition.

Rick Keene, R-Chico, said cross-pollination could occur between
marijuana plants and hemp. That, however, would lessen the value of
both the marijuana and the hemp. Keene also said growing hemp would
be "a first step" by those who wish to legalize growing marijuana,
but we don't see the connection. It would be easy for the California
Department of Food and Agriculture to keep track of who is growing
industrial hemp because farmers would have to grow large plots of
hundreds of acres to make it cost effective. Those farmers would
register their crops and pay for tests of THC levels. They would also
pay the cost of agriculture department supervision during growing
season and harvest.

There's one other obstacle: the question of whether the federal
government would allow farmers to grow industrial hemp. Six states
(Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine, Montana, North Dakota and Virginia) allow
the growth of industrial hemp for research purposes only.

The Drug Enforcement Administration considers growing industrial hemp
and growing marijuana to be the same thing, which is why no states
are doing it. A bill in Congress would exclude industrial hemp from
the definition of marijuana, but its passage is far from a certainty.
California could force the issue by passing AB1147.

Let's hope that when our lawmakers vote, they'll know the difference
between hemp and marijuana and will focus on the issue.