BISMARCK, ND — Two North Dakota farmers, who filed a federal lawsuit in June to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on commercial hemp farming in the United States, had their case dismissed by federal Judge Daniel Hovland yesterday. In a 22-page decision, Judge Hovland wrote that the problem facing state-licensed hemp farmers David Monson and Wayne Hauge needs to be addressed by Congress if they hope to ever grow the versatile crop which is used in everything from food and soap to clothing and auto parts. The decision can be read online.

Lawyers working on behalf of the farmers are considering an appeal on a number of issues. In particular, the Court ruled that hemp and marijuana are the same, as the DEA has contended for years. However, scientific evidence clearly shows that not only is industrial hemp genetically distinct from the drug marijuana, there are also absolutely no psychoactive effects from ingesting it.

“Obviously we are disappointed with the decision,” says Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp, a grassroots group working to bring industrial hemp farming back to the U.S. “The Court’s decision shows it understands that the established and growing market for industrial hemp would be beneficial for North Dakota farmers to supply. Yet the decision overlooks Congress’s original intent – and the fact that farmers continued to grow hemp in the U.S. for twenty years after marijuana was banned. If the plaintiffs decide to appeal the case, we would wholeheartedly support that effort. We are not giving up and will take this decision to Washington, DC to prompt action by Congress on HR 1009, the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007, which would clarify a state’s right to grow the crop,” adds Steenstra.

In a related development, Vote Hemp has learned that the DEA has sent a “Memorandum of Agreement” to North Dakota State University (NDSU) which, if signed by the school, would clear the way for industrial hemp research there. NDSU filed an amicus brief in support of the farmers’ lawsuit which highlighted the university’s eight-year struggle to secure a license from the DEA to grow industrial hemp for research as mandated by state law. “It seems our arguments about the DEA’s delay in processing NDSU’s application have resulted in the agency finally taking positive action to allow research,” comments David Bronner, President of the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) and Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, a manufacturer of soap and other body care products using hemp oil imported from Canada.

Vote Hemp, the nation’s leading industrial hemp advocacy group, and its supporters are providing financial support for the lawsuit. If it is ultimately successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own hemp farming laws without fear of federal interference. More on the case can be found online.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

BISMARCK, ND — Two North Dakota farmers who filed a lawsuit in June to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on commercial hemp farming in the United States were in U.S. District Court on Wednesday, November 14, 2007. The farmers, State Rep. David Monson of Osnabrock and Wayne Hauge of Ray, observed the oral arguments made before Judge Daniel Hovland on their behalf by attorneys Tim Purdon and Joe Sandler.

Judge Hovland stated he had read and re-read the briefs filed by both sides in the landmark case and concluded the hearing by saying, “I promise to make a decision by the end of the month,” in regards to the DEA’s motion to dismiss. In the meantime, Judge Hovland stayed the farmers motion for summary judgment as he felt the motion to dismiss should be dealt with first.

“Today’s arguments revealed numerous weak points that the DEA is relying on to thwart this landmark case,” said Eric Steenstra, President of Vote Hemp. “The DEA’s assertion that the farmers didn’t have standing because they haven’t grown industrial hemp yet was rejected by Judge Hovland when he said ‘I am not convinced that the plaintiffs have to expose themselves to prosecution’ and reminded Department of Justice (DOJ) Attorney Wendy Ertmer, who argued on behalf of the government, that ‘this Court has jurisdiction to make a declaratory judgment,’ which is what we are seeking,” added Steenstra.

Judge Hovland expressed skepticism that the DEA would ever act on the applications, based on the fact that an application by North Dakota State University was still pending after more than eight years. Judge Hovland also indicated he thinks that the DEA has “prejudged the merits of the applications to grow hemp.” While much of the government’s dispute centered on their contention that this case is not ripe because they are still considering the farmers’ application, attorney Joe Sandler argued that the application the farmers made to the DEA is no longer really the issue.

“This case is unique because North Dakota is the only state to regulate industrial hemp so only the exempted portions of plant, that is, the non-viable seed, stalk and oil, enter commerce of any kind, whether intrastate or interstate,” said Sandler. “When the North Dakota legislature changed its eight-year-old hemp law to no longer require a DEA license this past April, it made it a matter of state law that the farmer who goes through the licensing process need not involve the DEA in any way since only the exempted portions of the plant, as described in the Controlled Substances Act, would enter commerce.”

Judge Hovland also asked Ms. Ertmer what the DOJ’s position is on HR 1009, the federal Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007. Ms. Ertmer said she did not know, however Vote Hemp believes that the DOJ would in fact aggressively oppose the Act if it were to be heard in Congress. A transcript of the November 14 hearing will be available in a couple weeks. If successful, the landmark lawsuit will lead to the first state-regulated commercial cultivation of industrial hemp in fifty years.

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. More on the case can be found online.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

BISMARCK, ND — Two North Dakota farmers who filed a lawsuit in June to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on commercial hemp farming in the United States will have their day in court on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 in Bismarck, North Dakota. Oral arguments begin at 10:00 am CST in the William L. Guy Federal Building, located at 220 East Rosser Avenue in Bismarck, North Dakota, and will immediately be followed by a press conference on the courthouse steps.

The farmers, State Rep. David Monson of Osnabrock and Wayne Hauge of Ray, will appear in court to observe oral arguments made on their behalf by attorneys Tim Purdon and Joe Sandler. If successful, the landmark lawsuit will lead to the first state-regulated commercial cultivation of industrial hemp in fifty years.

WHO: Rep. David Monson, North Dakota House assistant majority leader and licensed hemp farmer
Wayne Hauge, Seed breeder, licensed hemp farmer
Tim Purdon, lawyer with Vogel Law Firm of Bismarck and co-counsel for the plaintiffs
Joe Sandler, co-counsel for the plaintiffs and legal counsel for Vote Hemp, Inc.
Eric Steenstra, President, Vote Hemp, Inc.

WHAT: Oral arguments, media availability and teleconference on new lawsuit to grow hemp in ND

WHERE: William Guy Federal Building, 220 East Rosser Avenue, Bismarck, ND 58501

WHEN: Wednesday, November 14, 10:00 am CST for oral arguments (media availability afterwards)

The North Dakota Legislature recently removed the requirement that state-licensed industrial hemp farmers first obtain DEA permits before growing hemp. The question before the U.S. District Court 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. More on the case can be found online.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

BISMARCK, ND — North Dakota State University (NDSU), a publicly funded land grant university has taken the unprecedented step of submitting an amicus brief in support of two North Dakota farmers, Rep. Dave Monson and Wayne Hague, who filed a lawsuit in June to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) ban on state-regulated commercial hemp farming in the United States. In the amicus, NDSU states that since 1999 they have waited for DEA to grant their application to grow non-drug industrial hemp to create varieties best suited for the North Dakota climate and soil conditions. NDSU contends these farmers should be granted relief from the court, as it is pointless to wait for DEA’s decision on licensing because the school’s interaction with the DEA shows the federal agency has no intention of cooperating with a premier agricultural university let alone private farmers. The amicus can be read online. Due to DEA’s obstructionism, the North Dakota Legislature removed earlier this year the requirement that state-licensed industrial hemp farmers first obtain DEA permits before growing hemp, enabling the plaintiff farmers to bring their case.

In a Reply to the DEA’s Opposition to the farmers’ Motion for Summary Judgment filed Friday, lawyers for Monson and Hauge argue that not only do the farmers have standing as they are licensed by the state to grow industrial hemp and do not have to risk arrest before growing the crop, but that DEA is ignoring that the Controlled Substance Act (CSA) exempts non-drug hemp seed, oil and fiber from control. DEA is improperly extending its authority under the CSA into purely intra-state regulated industrial hemp farming that places only exempt non-drug hemp fiber and seed commodities into commerce, that not only did Congress not intend to regulate, but cannot regulate via the CSA under the Commerce Clause.

With support of the landmark litigation coming from all branches of the North Dakota government as well as the Attorney General’s office who represents NDSU, the DEA has resorted to raising outlandish claims that somehow non-drug industrial hemp can be used as a drug even though impossible by definition, and in Canada and European countries where hemp is grown for export to the US, there is no such activity taking place. Gold can hypothetically and has in some instances been extracted from seawater, but the minimal concentration makes it technically and economically inefficient and commercially non-viable to do so. There are trace opiates in poppy seeds consumed on bagels, that could also be hypothetically be concentrated; but just as with industrial hemp is not a practical source of drugs for the illicit market.

“The DEA is making a feeble defense, and is basically saying the farmers in North Dakota could divert their non-drug industrial hemp crops to make drugs, even though that is economically impossible and no one does that anywhere in the world. The media should be very skeptical of any ‘facts’ the DEA purports as DEA has realized the strength of the farmers’ case and is furiously backpedaling, asking for discovery on facts it previously held to be undisputed in a desperate bid to sow confusion,” says David Bronner, President of the Hemp Industries Association whose company, Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps imports hemp oil from Canada for their soaps.

Monson v. DEA will be argued in court on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 in Bismarck, North Dakota. Oral arguments begin at 10:00 am CDT in the William L. Guy Federal Building, 220 E Rosser Ave Bismarck, ND and will immediately be followed by a press conference on the courthouse steps.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

SACRAMENTO, CA — Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 684, The California Industrial Hemp Farming Act, yesterday evening, rejecting the will of the vast majority of Californians who supported the legislation. The landmark, bi-partisan legislation would have followed North Dakota in establishing guidelines for the farming of industrial hemp, which is used in a wide variety of everyday consumer products, including food, body care, clothing, paper and auto parts. The new law would have established a five-year pilot project in four counties to allow farmers to legally supply numerous California manufacturers that currently must import hemp raw materials (including seed, oil and fiber) from Canada and elsewhere. The pilot project would have given the hemp industry an opportunity to assess the crop’s impact on the state economy and allowed law enforcement to measure any negative effects hemp farming might have had on their drug eradication efforts.

“Governor Schwarzenegger’s veto message ignores the fact that California regularly enacts laws that face federal scrutiny and even litigation,” says Patrick Goggin, California Council for Vote Hemp, the nation’s leading industrial hemp farming advocacy group. “The vetoed bill is no different than numerous other bills the Governor has signed that asserted the state’s right to regulate where the U.S. Congress has not.”

AB 684 would have clarified that the cultivation of industrial hemp is legal only on the condition it contains no more than three tenths of one percent (0.3%) tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The legislation was jointly authored by Democratic Assemblyman Mark Leno and Republican Assemblyman Chuck DeVore.

“The Governor’s environmental credentials should take a hit because of this veto,” comments David Bronner, President of both the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) and Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps. “Industrial hemp is about sustainable agriculture that saves our forests, reduces use of agricultural chemicals, and cuts carbon emissions by replacing petroleum-based products with renewable, natural-based alternatives. Governor Schwarzenegger has once again embraced an irrational approach to one of the most environmentally beneficial crops known to man,” adds Bronner.

California businesses spend millions of dollars each year importing hemp from Canada, China and Europe. Demand for hemp products has been growing rapidly in recent years. The North American hemp market now exceeds an estimated $300 million in annual retail sales. Making products ranging from natural soaps to healthy foods, there are a wide variety of “Made in California” hemp producers who could benefit from an in-state source of hemp seed, fiber and oil.

John Roulac, founder of California hemp food manufacturer Nutiva, is not discouraged by the veto. “The funny thing is that we are not going away. At a time when resources are running low and polar caps are melting, the general public is moving towards healthy and sustainable solutions. Regardless of what any politician says or does, we will just keep building a billion-dollar hemp foods marketplace. Every mainstream grocery and natural food store’s aisles will have stacks of hemp food in the coming decade. It is hard to even think of a food category that hemp will not be a player in.”

Vote Hemp’s goal was to release California farmers from the over-reaching prohibition on industrial hemp cultivation and reintroduce the crop to the state. AB 684 would have allowed California to follow North Dakota’s lead and assert its right to regulate industrial hemp under the U.S. Constitution, the federal law and recent U.S. Circuit Court decisions.

AB 684 would have revitalized commercial industrial hemp farming in California, which occurred in the state until shortly after World War II. Support for state action on industrial hemp farming has been growing among U.S. manufacturers whose appetite for hemp fiber, seed and oil is fueling the increased demand. For example, in the automotive industry, industrial hemp is used in the natural fiber composites that have rapidly replaced fiberglass as the material of choice for vehicle interiors. At least three million cars in North America already have hemp-based components in them.

Hemp is a versatile crop, and its sales are growing as an organic food and body care ingredient. Imports of hemp seed from Canada grew 300% between 2006 and 2007. Today, more than thirty industrialized nations grow industrial hemp, and many export it to the U.S. Incredibly, hemp is the only crop that is legal for Americans to import yet illegal to grow.

Some notable organizations that supported the industrial hemp bill include the Sierra Club, Organic Consumers Association, California Certified Organic Farmers, California State Grange, and Rainforest Action Network.

The Governor’s veto message, along with additional background on the bill, can be found online.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

BISMARCK, ND — Two North Dakota farmers, State Rep. David Monson from Osnabrock and Wayne Hauge from Ray, have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in a lawsuit filed June 18 in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota that seeks to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) obstruction of state-licensed and state-regulated commercial hemp farming in the United States. The farmers are seeking a declaration that they cannot be criminally prosecuted for growing hemp under state regulations, now in effect in North Dakota, which ensure cultivated plants have no potential drug value and are grown solely for the production of legal hemp fiber and seed commodities. The Motion and other legal documents can be viewed online.

“The DEA cannot purport to extend Congressional authority under the Commerce Clause via the Controlled Substances Act in order to interfere with North Dakota’s industrial hemp program, in which only federally-exempted, entirely legal hemp fiber and seed commodities are placed into interstate commerce,” says Tim Purdon, an attorney working on the case. “North Dakota regulations enforce conservatively strict non-psychoactive THC limits similar to Canadian regulations, which ensure there is no drug value in any part of the plant that could be diverted into the interstate market for recreational marijuana.”

The farmers were issued their state licenses to grow industrial hemp from North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson in February 2007. Pursuant to North Dakota law at that time, the farmers also applied for a DEA license to grow industrial hemp. Over the next few months, however, the DEA’s delay and expressed intent to review the applications as if the farmers intended to grow an unprecedented amount of Schedule I drugs, versus cultivate a non-drug agricultural crop, fueled frustration in North Dakota’s legislature. In April, the legislature changed their law, removing the requirement for a DEA license and asserting that the state license itself was fully sufficient.

An Affidavit accompanying the Motion from Professor Burton Johnson of North Dakota State University (NDSU) included a formal letter from NDSU to the DEA this summer. In the letter, NDSU relays that the public university was directed in 1998 by North Dakota state law to collect and cultivate feral, local wild hemp in order to begin breeding industrial hemp varieties that could best thrive in North Dakota’s climate and meet the requirement of 3/10 of one percent THC or less in flowering tops. NDSU filed for a license from the DEA in 1999, but to date the agency has failed to act on the application. Please click here to download a copy of the letter. (PDF file 176k)

“The national movement supporting farmers’ right to grow hemp learned from the NDSU example that the DEA has no intention of being rational about facilitating non-drug industrial hemp research and cultivation, even when it’s by a major university,” says Vote Hemp President Eric Steenstra. Vote Hemp’s grassroots supporters are funding this legal action to overcome the irrational hysteria and bureaucratic inertia of the DEA, and to restore industrial hemp farming to American farmers. Vote Hemp is dedicating this effortto recently-deceased Anita Roddick, founder of The Body Shop, and Michael Sutherland, former board member of the Hemp Industries Association (HIA). Both were trail-blazing pioneers in the modern restoration and renaissance of the global hemp industry.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

SACRAMENTO, CA — Vote Hemp, the nation’s leading grassroots organization working to revitalize U.S. industrial hemp production, urges California editorial writers to support AB 684, The California Industrial Hemp Farming Act. This landmark, bi-partisan legislation is now up for the Governor’s signature and would establish guidelines for farming the non-psychoactive plant which is used in a wide variety of everyday consumer products, including food, body care, clothing, paper, auto parts and bio-fuel.

AB 684 was authored by Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine). Thanks to their leadership, this is the second time in two years that a bi-partisan hemp farming bill has passed the legislature. AB 684 is very different from AB 1147 which was vetoed by the Governor last year.

California Industrial Hemp Farming Act Changes from 2006 to 2007

• AB 684 takes careful and measured steps toward industrial hemp cultivation with a 4-county pilot program that will sunset after 5 years. Near the end of the pilot program the Attorney General will report to the legislature on law enforcement impacts, and the Hemp Industries Association (HIA) will provide a report on the economic impacts.
• The 4 pilot counties include Imperial, Kings, Mendocino and Yolo. These counties were selected based on their agricultural conditions and local support for industrial hemp.
• New requirements include the reporting of crop GPS locations, tighter controls on THC test samples, a five-acre crop minimum, and prohibitions on the pruning or tending of individual plants, which is indicative of marijuana cultivation.
• Another difference is the support of the Merced and Imperial County Farm Bureaus, as well as the neutrality of the California State Sheriffs Association and the California District Attorneys Association.
• Industrial hemp is not a partisan issue. The legislature in North Dakota unanimously passed a hemp bill similar to AB 684 earlier this year. In California last February, the highly respected social research firm Zogby International polled 800 likely voters on the issue of industrial hemp. 71% said they support “changing state law so that California farmers can grow industrial hemp.” 60% of Republicans and 67% of rural voters said they support allowing farmers to grow industrial hemp.
• The goal of AB 684 is to carefully assess if industrial hemp will be a profitable new crop for California farmers and if it can be grown without impacts on marijuana enforcement. This is a reasonable and careful step forward on this long-debated issue.

Hemp is a versatile crop, and its sales are growing as an organic food and body care ingredient. Imports of hemp seed from Canada grew 300% between 2006 and 2007. Today, more than 30 industrialized nations grow industrial hemp and export it to the U.S. Hemp is the only crop that is illegal to grow yet legal for Americans to import.

California businesses spend millions of dollars each year importing hemp from Canada, China and Europe. Demand for hemp products has been growing rapidly in recent years. The U.S. hemp market now exceeds an estimated $300 million in annual retail sales. From natural soaps to healthy foods, there are a variety of “Made in California” hemp products that could benefit from an in-state source of hemp seed, fiber and oil.

For the environment, the agricultural benefits are not limited to the versatility of uses. Industrial hemp is an excellent rotational crop because its dense growth smothers weeds without herbicides. Hemp requires less water and agricultural chemicals than other crops, has deep roots that leave the soil in excellent condition for the next crop, and is proven to increase yields. These benefits save farmers money and reduce the amount of pesticides, defoliants and chemical fertilizers that run into our waterways.

Prior to harvest, a farmer must obtain a test report from a DEA-registered laboratory documenting the THC content of the crop. Farmers must retain a copy of the test report for two years from its date of sampling, make it available to law enforcement officials upon request, and provide a copy to each person purchasing, transporting or otherwise obtaining the oil, cake or seed of the plant. The legislation clarifies that the cultivation of industrial hemp is legal on the condition it contains no more than three tenths of one percent (0.3%) tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Crops that exceed the 0.3% THC limit must be destroyed.

To eliminate the possibility that industrial hemp could be mistaken for marijuana, the bill does not include the leaves or flowering tops among the legal parts of the industrial hemp plant. Regardless of THC content, leaves and flowers that are removed from the field of cultivation are not considered industrial hemp. Hemp flowers have no psychoactive effects or legal commercial application. Nevertheless, it is important to prevent defendants from making the spurious claim that confiscated marijuana leaves and flowers are industrial hemp. The bright-line definitions and requirements in AB 684 ensure that law enforcement will not be negatively impacted.

Vote Hemp’s goal is to relieve California farmers of the over-reaching prohibition on industrial hemp cultivation and reintroduce the crop to the state. California must assert its right to regulate industrial hemp as permitted by the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Congress and the 2004 9th U.S. Circuit Court decision in HIA v. DEA.

If signed into law, AB 684 would revitalize commercial industrial hemp farming, which occurred in the state until shortly after World War II. Farmers have great expectations for the crop, given the exceptionally large yields that California farmers once achieved and the great strides made in agricultural irrigation and mechanization since hemp was last grown.

Support for state action on industrial hemp farming is growing among U.S. manufacturers whose appetite for hemp fiber, seed and oil is fueling the increased demand. For example, in the automotive industry, industrial hemp is used in the natural fiber composites that have rapidly replaced fiberglass as the material of choice for vehicle interiors. FlexForm, an Indiana manufacturer whose hemp-content materials are found in an estimated 2.5 million vehicles in North America today, uses approximately 250,000 pounds of hemp fiber per year. The company says industrial hemp could easily take a greater share of the 4 million pounds of natural fiber it uses yearly, as “hemp fiber possesses physical properties beneficial to our natural fiber-based composites.” In addition, FlexForm says it would “gladly expand domestic purchases.”

Among the numerous companies supporting the bill are Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, makers of North America’s top-selling natural soap, Alterna, a salon hair styling product manufacturer, and Nutiva, a rising star among innovative health food companies. All three of these businesses are based in California and currently must import hemp from other countries.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

SACRAMENTO, CA — Last night, California’s Senate and Assembly each voted to approve AB 684, the California Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2007. The legislation gives some California farmers the right to grow non-psychoactive industrial hemp which is commonly used in everything from food, clothing, paper and body care to bio-fuel and even auto parts. The bill now goes to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger for his signature.

The text of the legislation can be found online.

AB 684 was authored by Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine). Thanks to their leadership, this is the second time in two years that a bi-partisan hemp farming bill has passed the legislature. Last year, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill, AB 1147. The new version of the bill addresses his concerns.

“The new legislation significantly limits the scope of hemp farming to just four agricultural counties, includes a sunset provision, and contains rules on testing crops to ensure the industrial hemp contains less than 3/10 of 1% (0.3%) THC,” says Vote Hemp legal council and San Francisco attorney Patrick Goggin. “This bill is a response to the Governor’s detailed explanation of his veto last year. Everyone knows hemp farming is consistent with California’s efforts to be a leader on U.S. environmental policy. We believe this new hemp legislation is deserving of the Governor’s signature,” adds Goggin.

Farmers would only be able to grow industrial hemp as a pilot program in four counties – Imperial, Kings, Mendocino and Yolo. Sales of industrial hemp products, especially in the food and body care markets, are skyrocketing, prompting the TODAY Show to dub hemp “a hot food trend” for 2007. Exports from Canada of hemp seed grew 300% between 2006 and 2007. Today more than 30 industrialized nations grow industrial hemp and export it to the U.S. Hemp is the only crop that is illegal for American farmers to grow yet legal to import.

There is strong support for hemp in California. A telephone poll of likely California voters, taken from February 22-26 of this year, showed a total of 71% (+/- 3.5%) support changes to state law that would allow farmers to grow hemp. The survey was conducted by the respected research firm Zogby International on behalf of Vote Hemp and five manufacturers of hemp food products, including ALPSNACK, French Meadow Bakery, Living Harvest, Nature’s Path Organic Foods and Nutiva.

Poll questions and results regarding industrial hemp farming policy and consumer attitudes on hemp products and nutrition can be viewed online.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

OCCIDENTAL, CA — The Hemp Industries Association (HIA) is pleased with the latest statistics on hemp markets and acreage from Canada. The statistics, released by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Health Canada and Statistics Canada late last month, show that the decade-old Canadian hemp industry is continuing its growth, but at a more moderate and sustainable pace.

“Last fall we expected the double-digit growth of the hemp food sector to continue in 2007, especially since hemp milk would finally be available to waiting consumers,” says Eric Steenstra, HIA Executive Director. “The latest statistics out of Canada for 2007 to date far exceeded our expectations. We project that this growth in the markets for hemp products will keep pace into 2008, with some categories experiencing triple-digit growth,” adds Steenstra.

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and Statistics Canada data show that the quantity of hemp seed exports increased 300% from 2006 to 2007. Hemp oil exports kept pace, with an 85% increase in quantity. Hemp fiber exports showed encouraging progress, with a 65% increase in quantity. All statistics represent growth from the period January to June in 2007 versus the same period in 2006. Hemp industry experts had predicted a drop in acreage as a result of wholesale market conditions.

“Due to higher prices of other commodities, the lack of a major commercial fiber processing facility, and some surplus left over from 2006, hemp acreage has decreased for 2007,” says Arthur Hanks, Executive Director of the Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance. “On the plus side, we estimate that the farm-gate value of Canada’s hemp industry is about $7 million per year, and with value-added processing that number can well exceed $10 million per year.”

Health Canada statistics show that 48,060 acres of industrial hemp were produced in Canada in 2006. The Health Canada draft statistics for 2007 show a decline to 11,569 acres. Hemp industry experts had expected an even larger decrease and are not surprised with this year’s numbers. Farmers in Canada have reported that hemp is still one of the most profitable crops they can grow.

“In 2006 there were some exceptional yields in hemp grain. It is very easy to overproduce in this sector,” comments Arthur Hanks. “The hemp industry cut contracted acres in 2007 in order to move remaining 2006 production. Food processing capability continues to expand.” Hanks continues, “The data is very good and shows quite strong market growth. There was a 300% growth in quantity of hemp seed exports, and hemp oil exports are on track to exceed 80% growth. And this is all happening with a stronger Canadian dollar.”

U.S. companies that manufacture or sell products made with hemp include Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, a California company that manufactures the number-one-selling natural soap, and FlexForm Technologies, an Indiana company whose natural fiber materials are used in over 2 million cars. Hemp food manufacturers, such as French Meadow Bakery, Hempzels, Living Harvest, Manitoba Harvest, Nature’s Path, Nutiva and Ruth’s Hemp Foods, now make their products with Canadian hemp.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially. 

BISMARCK, ND — Two North Dakota farmers, who filed a lawsuit June 18 in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota in an effort to end the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) obstruction of commercial hemp farming in the United States, are awaiting official response from DEA by August 24. In a related new development, North Dakota State University (NDSU) recently sent a letter to DEA expressing strong support for the would be hemp farmers and plaintiffs David Monson and Wayne Hauge, both of whom applied for bulk cannabis manufacturer licenses earlier this year from DEA. A copy of the letter is available online.

In the comment, NDSU reminded DEA that the public university is directed by North Dakota state law to collect and cultivate wild hemp locally to begin breeding of industrial hemp that could best thrive in North Dakota’s climate and meet the requirement of 3/10 of one percent THC or less in flowering tops of the plant. Since 1999 NDSU has awaited DEA’s response to its own application that would give federal permission which had been required under state law until very recently. In April North Dakota’s legislature changed their law cutting out DEA from the process entirely.

“The national movement supporting farmers right to grow hemp learned from the NDSU example that DEA has no intention of being rational about facilitating non-drug industrial hemp research, even when it’s by a major university,” says Vote Hemp President, Eric Steenstra. “In the new lawsuit brought by farmers that we are supporting, the strategy has been to put hemp farming on our timeline by acting on the fact North Dakota’s hemp regulations no longer require a DEA license. We hope that NDSU will join our lawsuit against DEA’s interference as the university’s own license application has been ignored for 8 years and is no longer required in our opinion,” adds Steenstra.

If successful, Monson v. DEA would result in state licensed hemp farmers receiving assurances that no federal agency could hold them criminally liable under the Controlled Substances Act. Vote Hemp’s grassroots supporters are funding the legal action. A copy of the complaint is available online.

The farmers – State Rep. David Monson from Osnabrock and Wayne Hauge from Ray – were issued their state licenses to grow industrial hemp from North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson in February 2007. At that time the farmers applied for a DEA permit to grow industrial hemp and Rep. Monson also applied for a license to import live hemp seed. Over the next few months, however, the agency’s inaction on the applications fueled frustration in North Dakota’s legislature.

# # #

Vote Hemp is a national non-profit organization dedicated to the acceptance of and a free market for industrial hemp and to changes in current law to allow U.S. farmers to once again grow hemp commercially.