Dr. Donald Land: Testing Commercial Cannabis for Pesticides

Dr. Donald Land is the Chief Scientific Consultant for Steep Hill, one of the leading scientific cannabis analysis labs in the world. He is also a Professor of Chemistry at UC Davis. Dr. Land recently joined us to discuss the trending topic of pesticide use in legal cannabis markets, and how Steep Hill aims to protect consumers with thorough pesticide testing.

A lawsuit in Colorado recently became the first example of the risks that come with an unregulated agricultural market. Currently, testing for pesticides is not mandated in several states with legal markets (medical and recreational), although such testing is required for many other products under the FDA and other federal institutions. In this interview, Dr. Land discusses the importance of mandated pesticide tests, as well as the methodologies that Steep Hill uses and the inherent risks to consumers in an unregulated market.


Read the full interview

What is the testing process that you use? How does it vary across products, edibles, concentrates, tinctures, etc.?

Testing involves inspection for foreign matter, followed by extraction of toxins. Filtering is used to separate unwanted, inert material that might interfere or clog instrumentation, followed by analysis using chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry for sensitive, selective detection and quantitation. Different types of samples require different details, particularly in the inspection and extraction steps. Edibles are treated differently from flowers, etc.

What pesticides are you testing for and how comprehensive is the test?

Normally, the EPA sets pesticide restrictions for all commodities – what can be used, how it is used, what cannot be used, and the maximum residual levels allowed. Since cannabis is still US-DEA Schedule I, federal agencies, such as EPA, USDA and FDA , are precluded from establishing rules for cannabis and cannabis-related products. Thus, different states are having to develop their own guidelines. Some states have decided to err on the side of caution and require testing for “ALL pesticides at the lowest limits in the EPA schedule.” This test would include thousands of compounds, some of which are no longer manufactured or available even as standards, and would be an incredibly time consuming and expensive test. Meeting these types of requirements is generally not feasible at a cost the market would bear. In other states and localities, short lists of “allowed” pest treatments -typically things like garlic oil, neem oil, and other substances generally regarded as safe for this application -and “disallowed” treatments, which is typically a list of pesticides known or suspected to be in use in that jurisdiction to control mites and mildew, or other prevalent pests threatening cannabis grows. Generally, such lists contain a few dozen specific pesticides that must be monitored for that jurisdiction. Because the EPA has not (and currently can not) approve any pesticides for use on cannabis, any and all pesticide use is federally prohibited and detection of the presence of any known pesticide controlled by the EPA would warrant destruction of the contaminated portions of the crop.

How common is pesticide contamination in the samples that have been tested? What sort of contamination has been seen?

At present, required pesticide testing is in the earliest stages of implementation in several states, but not much data is available yet from those efforts. In CA, where pesticide testing has been practiced only voluntarily for a few years by a small minority of producers and sellers, only a very small subset (<1%) of samples actually get tested. Of those tested, about 1-2% test positive for an EPA regulated pesticide, typically miticides or fungicides. However, since the test is voluntary, it is unlikely that producers who use pesticides would choose to test, so this is likely lower than it would be in a mandatory testing situation. Also, absence of residues does not necessarily mean pesticides were not used. Pesticide manufacturers must, to receive EPA approval for sale and use, demonstrate that the active compounds break down relatively rapidly after application and does not persist. Thus, most pesticides, applied early enough prior to harvest, may no longer be detectable in the harvested product. Greater regulatory control in this regard should unify policies across many jurisdictions in the future.

Are there plans to expand pesticide testing into the other states in which Steep Hill operates?

Steep Hill tests for pesticides, mycotoxins and other toxicants to help ensure the safety of cannabis being consumed. When California was the first state to move down the path of legalization of cannabis markets, testing was not part of the thought process until Steep Hill was founded in 2007. Since that time, the value of safety and quality testing has been verified and every cannabis market legalized since that time has required safety and quality testing. California appears to be on the verge of establishing new laws regarding its legal cannabis market and testing plays a prominent role in regulations currently before California lawmakers. Additionally, some CA cities and counties have established their own guidelines for testing requirements. Thus, Steep Hill, with offices open or opening soon in WA, CO, NV, NM, and OR, in addition to CA and others, has invested heavily in state-of-the-art equipment capable of meeting the most stringent testing requirements. Steep Hill’s standard operating procedures are adjusted to ensure full compliance with the laws of each jurisdiction. For producers interested n getting ahead of the curve, Steep Hill can test at the most sensitive levels required in any jurisdiction as the nation nears legalization of interstate commerce and the creation of national brands.

Realistically, how worried should the average consumer be about pesticide contamination?

Cannabis crops are often extremely valuable. With wholesale prices often greatly in excess of $1,000 per pound, a mature outdoor plant could produce in excess of five pounds after harvest, meaning individual plants are worth many thousands of dollars each. When infestations of insects, molds or other pests take hold, they can spread like wild fire and devastate hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of potential product. Faced with this prospect, it is not hard to understand why some resort to imprudent, often dangerous application of toxic chemicals to prevent the loss. The extreme high potential value of cannabis and the lack of regulation and oversight of production make this industry much more susceptible to bad actors applying toxic pesticides in unsafe practices that could reach the consumer. The fact that many consumers choose to inhale smoke or heated vapors directly into the lungs and, from there into the bloodstream, exacerbates the dangers of the presence of toxins. For a consumer who regularly purchased cannabis once per week, the currently observed rates of contamination would imply that about once per year or so, that consumer’s purchase would be contaminated with pesticides.

Are there any easy ways for consumers to identify products that have been sprayed with pesticides?

Unfortunately, pesticides are generally used and are toxic in such small amounts that their presence can only be reliably detected using expensive analytical instrumentation with rigorous testing technique. Growers know whether they have used pesticides or not, how much and when. For other foods, FDA and EPA inspections and random testing with the threat of loss of license is the incentive for compliance. Also, EPA approval of some effective pest control methods means farmers have alternatives for treatment. Unfortunately, none of that infrastructure so far exists for cannabis. Consumers should make sure they purchase their cannabis from within the established, regulated system in their jurisdiction and make sure that their lawmakers know the importance of testing and regulation of pesticides and other toxins or microbiological contamination.


 

Thank you for taking the time to answer our questions, Dr. Land! To learn more about Steep Hill, visit their website. Questions or comments? Post them below!

End


Cannabis Breathalyzer Expected to Release Sometime Next Year

You’re undoubtedly familiar with the breathalyzer, an electronic device that measures an individual’s blood alcohol content using a sample of his or her breath. In fact, if you are a licensed driver anywhere in the United States, you have given your implied consent to a breathalyzer test if you are ever pulled over on the suspicion of drunk driving.

Soon, you might also have to give implied consent to a breath test for recent marijuana use. A breath-based test that can measure the amount of delta-9 THC present in an individual’s bloodstream could be available sometime next year, according to researchers at Washington State University.

“This would be a more accurate test for them to determine whether someone is impaired, and combined with other evidence, whether they need to make an arrest,” said State Senator Mike Padden of Spokane Valley.

Currently, the same field sobriety tests that are used with suspected drunk drivers are used to gauge whether a driver is impaired by marijuana use. These tests include asking the driver to walk a straight line, stand on one leg, and the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus, which asks allegedly impaired drivers to follow an object with their eyes without moving their heads from a stationary position. But marijuana does not affect individuals the same way that alcohol does, which is why a sobriety test developed specifically for stoned drivers is ideal.

Although driving after using marijuana is not as dangerous as driving drunk or driving distracted, using marijuana can still impair a driver’s ability to make safe decisions on the road. This is especially true if it is used in conjunction with alcohol.

In Washington, drivers are considered to be impaired if they are found to have at least five nanograms of delta-9 THC per millimeter in their blood. In Colorado, there is currently no legal limit for the chemical in drivers’ bloodstreams. Delta-9 THC is the psychoactive component of marijuana – it’s what gets you high. Developing a test that can specifically determine the amount of delta-9 THC in an individual’s blood is critical because it, unlike the metabolites that can stay in an individual’s bloodstream for days or weeks after using marijuana, can make a driver a hazard to other motorists and pedestrians.

But the test is not ready for use by law enforcement yet. Currently, it can only determine if delta-9 THC is in a subject’s blood – not how much. During its first round of trials, it was administered to 30 participants had an accuracy rate of approximately 50 percent. It also brought up one false positive, a sign that there is still a significant amount of refining to be done before the test can be released to the public.

“We don’t want to accuse somebody of smoking marijuana when they didn’t,” said Herbert Hill, a Washington State University chemistry professor who is part of the team developing the portable marijuana breath test. The test is currently undergoing its second round of trials and is slated to be available to law enforcement in about a year.

Photo Credit: ashton

End


Marijuana Lobbyist Discusses How Ordinary Citizens Can Work to Legalize in their States

John Davis is a founder and current executive director of the Coalition for Cannabis Standards and Ethics, a Washington-based nonprofit organization that works to perpetuate the highest levels of ethics, education, standards and quality throughout the cannabis industry. He helped draft and coordinate some of the earliest cannabis legislation initiatives as a board member of the Hemp Initiative Projects, starting as early as 1993. Later, he founded Seattle-based dispensary Northwest Patient Resource Center, which is hoping to transition into the recreational market.

John was recently interviewed by Shango Los, host of the Ganjapreneur.com podcast, to discuss what it takes to push state-level marijuana reform through the complicated legislative system. “If you’re really going to follow a law, if you’re going to follow a legislative cycle… you’ve got to put the work in,” John explained during the podcast. “Don’t just take other people’s words for it, because those people come with agendas and they will tell you things about a bill that’s more rumor than truth.”

The two also discuss best practices for how to approach and understand proposed legislation, how to get and stay in touch with your elected officials, and how cannabis activists can work productively with politicians and lobbyists who are not in favor of cannabis reform.

The full podcast episode is available via iTunes and Ganjapreneur.com, where full transcripts of this and previous interviews are also available.

About Ganjapreneur:

Ganjapreneur launched in July 2014 and has since established a significant presence in the cannabis business world. The website regularly publishes interviews and commentary from leading minds in the industry, and has also launched a B2B business directory, a live feed of job listings from marijuana job boards, a domain name marketplace for start-ups and venture capital firms, and a mobile app for Apple and Android devices which aggregates daily cannabis industry news, business profiles, and other information. For more information about Ganjapreneur, visit http://www.ganjapreneur.com.

Source:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/john-davis-ccse/washington-cannabis/prweb13061553.htm

End


Brand Focus: Letting Quality Speak for Itself, Ft. Avitas

As Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh advised, “Chase the vision, not the money. The money will end up following you.” With the sale of Zappos to Amazon in 2009 for approximately $1.2B and a personal fortune nearing the billion dollar mark, Mr. Hsieh has made an excellent argument for his philosophy. 

To inspire people to take action, we must be committed to a cause greater than ourselves. That’s what branding is all about; communicating a common ideology that self-selecting people (both employees and customers) can rally behind. The foundation of a successful brand begins at the point at which the values and beliefs of a company’s workforce intersect with the values and beliefs of their target market.  

For one cannabis industry innovator, that fundamental belief is rooted in social and environmental stewardship.


Avitas

avitaslogoWashington producer/processor Avitas Agriculture has developed an impressive line of flower, oils, and cartridges with a focus on corporate responsibility, premium quality, and elegant packaging. Co-founder Adam Smith contributed these thoughts about what it takes to build a brand that is committed to something bigger than itself.

What process did you use to develop your brand? Was it developed internally or with an agency?

Branding is all about associating the product with specific emotional response in the consumer. We wanted our branding to represent our company’s deep passion for this plant. Our process started with brainstorming sessions about the legal recreational market, what we wanted to provide to the market as a whole, and what we our hopes and dreams for the cannabis industry looked like. We wanted a mature, grown-up, fun, responsible and safe market to develop, so that is where we started. We also wanted to stay as far away from the traditional “stoner” marketing as possible. We wanted to be one of the first brands to put serious design and marketing knowledge into our packaging and branding. We worked with Mint Design in Seattle for all of our design work, and they are a stellar team. 

What are the defining characteristics, core tenets, or ideological values of your brand?

Our company core tenets are Customers, Quality, Community, and Environment.

We hold our customers in the highest regard and place them at the center of all that we do. We are passionate about growing the finest quality Cannabis because that’s what our customers care about. We care just as much for our customers as we do for our plants.  

We are serious about quality. Cannabis in its purest state. Unadulterated by artificial additives, pesticides or other contaminants. That’s the only way we grow. We go above and beyond to ensure that Avitas products are the highest quality products available on the market.

Being part of a community means more than just being a good neighbor. True community transcends geographical boundaries, and our efforts and funding flow into education, charities, and other locally-owned small businesses. We donate a portion of our net profits to substance abuse and education programs, as well as donating food and money to local food banks. We always strive to buy from local businesses and make every effort to buy only Made in the USA equipment.  

There’s no way around it, growing cannabis is resource intensive. We are committed to decreasing our impact on the environment and limiting consumption of nonrenewable resources. We do not use any harmful chemical pesticides, insecticides, or herbicides.  Our fertilizer runoff is also recycled on our farm along with our soil and plant material.

Branding in this industry is still in its infancy. We are still tweaking and testing our packaging and labeling to resonate with our customers, increase operational efficiency in our packaging process, and ensuring we stay well within the spirit of the regulatory requirements. To me, being a responsible company in the cannabis industry is paramount. I do not want cannabis to turn into the next Big Tobacco, with Joe Camel as its mascot. So we stay far away from anything even remotely attractive to children, juvenile references, puns and other copyrighted or trademarked material.

Are there other companies in the cannabis industry that you feel have branded themselves exceptionally well?

Branding has come a long way in the last year, especially in Washington State. Companies are paying attention to their branding and packaging more than ever now. I think we had a little to do with that by coming out early with solid branding and packaging. One company that I think is doing a good job is Mirth Provisions; they were the first cannabis infused soda in the state and captured the essence of the northwest, outdoor lifestyle, and cannabis culture as a whole. The Goodship Company has also done a fantastic job. I think their overall essence and feel is tuned into the same emotions that our brand connects with.

What common missteps or pitfalls would you suggest to companies looking to build a brand in the cannabis industry?

My advice for other companies would be to stay true to yourself and what you are doing as a company. Cannabis or not, don’t copy other brands! Avoid puns and don’t take the easy way out by playing down cannabis to the lowest common denominator. It’s time for cannabis to be respected and treated properly by the companies profiting from her. Do your part to make the industry better, more responsible, and safe.

 

End


Supreme Court of Mexico Rules Personal Cannabis Consumption Should Be Legal

The Mexican Supreme Court delivered an argument Wednesday stating that individuals should be allowed to grow, distribute, and use marijuana personally.

The ruling does not change any laws, but it creates a legal base on which lawmakers might be able to do so. The argument made by the court highlights a growing frustration with the War on Drugs and prohibition in Latin America, which has done little to end the flow of drugs to the United States or the violence it creates.

Some, such as Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, have noted the incongruity of imposing prohibition on Latin American countries while at the same time marijuana legalization spreads across the United States.

“We are killing ourselves to stop the production of something that is heading to the U.S., where it’s legal,” said Armando Santacruz, one of the plaintiffs in the marijuana case.

John Walsh, who works with human rights group the Washington Office on Latin America, stated that “every country in the world signed up to a treaty that prescribed a prohibitionist and criminalized approach to dealing with drugs that was one-sided. That basic response doesn’t work anymore.”

As long as marijuana remains illegal in most of the United States, it’s unlikely that legalizing it in Mexico would do much to put a dent in drug cartel profits or reduce violence. But if demand for and supply of legal, American-grown cannabis continues to grow, the cartels might eventually be shut out of the market.

“In the long run, as the U.S. legalizes marijuana, Mexico is going to have a tough time competing with lawful American suppliers,” said Walsh. “That doesn’t mean they won’t have a business plan, it’s just that marijuana will be removed from it.”

Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto said that although he respects the court’s decision, his government, as well as health and security officials, oppose legalization.

Source:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/world/americas/mexico-supreme-court-marijuana-ruling

Photo Credit: Gary J. Wood

End


Cannabis Packaging Company FunkSac Gets Funding, Partners With Snoop Dogg

FunkSac, a Denver-based cannabis packaging company that focuses on producing odor-concealing and child-resistant products, announced that it has received funding from Casa Verde Capital.

Furthermore, FunkSac announced that it is partnering with Snoop Dogg, who will be working on programs to promote safety in the use of FunkSac products.

Casa Verde Capital is a venture capital firm focusing on emerging markets. “Casa Verde’s investment will enable FunkSac to expand into new markets, further develop our existing odor-free and child-resistant technologies, as well as spread awareness of key safety measures and responsible use,” stated FunkSac CEO Garett Fortune. “Snoop Dogg has also become a fan and avid believer of our products, so we are thrilled about the new partnership with him.”

“Cannabis is valuable to me for medical, recreational and creative purposes, but we’ve gotta store it in a way that’s safe and secure,” said Snoop Dogg. “FunkSac and its products are the most impressive I’ve seen in the industry. I hope people all over the world realize what a difference these products—made by a veteran owned business—can have on our day-to-day life.”

Source:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/funksac-scores-funding-from-casa-verde-capital-300171262.html

Photo Credit: Chris Potter

End


Ohio Voters Say “No” to Cannabis Legalization

Ohio voters rejected a proposal to legalize medical and recreational marijuana on Tuesday.

Issue 3 would have made cannabis legal for adults ages 21 and older to grow, possess, and use recreational cannabis. The same ballot measure would have made it legal for medical uses as well, something that hasn’t been tried previously.

Among those who voted against the ballot were some who disagreed with the fact that commercial marijuana grow licenses would be restricted to a small group of investors.

“I can’t believe I voted no when it was finally on the ballot,” said Marty Dvorchak. “I think it’s ridiculous that marijuana is illegal.”

State lawmakers created another ballot initiative — Issue 2 — that would have undermined legalization efforts by disallowing the insertion of monopolies, oligopolies, or cartels into the Ohio constitution, as Issue 3 would have done by creating exclusive growing sites.

Source:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/midwest/ct-ohio-marijuana-vote-20151103-story.html

Photo Credit: ProgressOhio

End


Colorado Voters to Decide Whether to Refund Cannabis Tax Money

Colorado voters will decide next week whether the $66 million in marijuana taxes collected this year will be kept by the state for school construction and drug abuse prevention programs or refunded to citizens.

Because Colorado has a surplus budget this year, the state’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires the state to ask voters whether they want the excess tax money refunded or if the state can spend it. Proposition BB asks the voters to let the state use the $66 million in pot tax revenue.

The money would be used on the whole for school repair and construction and drug abuse prevention programs aimed at kids.

“We are looking at trying to keep it related to helping kids stay away from drugs and also education efforts and things of that sort,” said Rep. Beth McCann (D-Denver).

Some are worried that by creating new programs using marijuana taxes, the state will be left with subsidies that eventually may need to be funded by non-marijuana taxes.

“It’s all for the kids, and that’s great. I think the question is: Are you creating a new subsidy that is going to require longtime financial support?” said Jessica Peck, an attorney specializing in cannabis law.

If the proposition fails, $25 million in income taxes would be refunded to taxpayers, including those who didn’t buy cannabis. Another $17 million in excise taxes would go back to marijuana growers.

Sources:

http://www.hightimes.com/read/colorado-asks-voters-reshuffle-spending-new-pot-taxes

http://www.collegian.com/2015/11/marijuana-policy-update-proposition-bb/140891/

Photo Credit: James Hernandez

End


Uruguay Set to Produce 6-10 Tons of Cannabis Per Month

Uruguay set new goals for national cannabis production and distribution last week.

The first country to completely legalize marijuana will try to produce between 6 and 10 tons of cannabis a month, according to National Drug Board chief Milton Romani.

Romani stated that the marijuana would be sold at pharmacies to registered users only. The program is basically ready to go; “we just need to fine-tune the software for registration and pharmacy sales,” he said.

Under the law passed in December 2013, Uruguayan citizens can purchase up to 40 grams of marijuana a month from pharmacies, or they can grow it at home or as a member of a cannabis club. Foreigners cannot, for the moment, legally purchase marijuana there.

Romani noted that there’s “a market of about 160,000 Uruguayans that frequently or occasionally consume marijuana,” and some 3,100 citizens have registered as home growers.

Source:

http://www.news24.com/Green/News/Uruguay-sets-high-marijuana-target-20151031

End


Reggie Gaudino: Patenting Strains & the Future of Cannabis Intellectual Property

Reggie Gaudino is Vice President of Scientific Operations and the Director of Intellectual Property at Steep Hill, a national leader in cannabis science and technology.

Reggie recently joined our host Shango Los for a conversation about the genetic patenting of specific cannabis strains, the future of cannabis breeding, and how the involvement of big agriculture is going to shift the landscape of the entire marijuana industry.

Listen to the podcast below, or scroll down for the full transcript!

Subscribe to the Ganjapreneur podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, SoundCloud or Google Play.


Listen to the Podcast


Read the Transcript

Shango Los: Hi there and welcome to the Gangapreneur.com podcast, I’m your host Shango Los. The Gangapreneur.com podcast gives us an opportunity to speak directly to entrepreneurs, cannabis growers, product developers and cannabis medicine researchers, all focused on making the most of cannabis normalization. As your host I do my best to bring you original cannabis industry ideas that will ignite your own entrepreneurial spark and give you actionable information to improve your business strategy and improve your health and the health of cannabis patients everywhere.

Today my guest is Dr. Reggie Gaudino, Vice President for Scientific Operations and Director of Intellectual Property at Steep Hill. Reggie is building their genetic analysis division and is also working with his teams to further the science behind cannabis testing. Dr. Gaudino is a published genetic researcher with 18 years of intellectual property experience in writing, prosecuting, and managing patents and patent portfolios in fields as diverse as software and telecom to biotechnology and molecular genetics. Welcome Reggie, glad you could join us.

Reggie Gaudino: Thank you, glad to be here.

Shango Los: So Reggie, let’s start with the burning question that’s on everybody’s mind as I speak to them as far as cannabis and intellectual property goes. People all over the country have got their favorite strains that they have developed themselves and they want to patent them, they want to own them forever, they want to license them to other people. I’ve seen it in so many different business plans whether or not it seems to be reasonable science-wise. What are you seeing as this is evolving as your … Seeing the new technologies that can track the cannabis genetics. Is this something that is on the horizon for these entrepreneurs or is it just something they’re going to be hoping for?

Reggie Gaudino: No, not only is it on the horizon, but it’s actually a lot closer than most people think. This is actually a really intense area of focus for not only myself but the program that I’m building here at Steep Hill. I’ve been trying to get the message across for the last couple of years that the industry is changing. At some point, big agriculture, Monsanto, Dow Agrosciences, the pharmaceutical industry, they’re all going to jump on the bandwagon once everything goes from schedule I to schedule II. That’s a reality, it’s not when is it going to happen or maybe it will happen. It’s going to happen and it’s going to come pretty soon. There’s a lot of movement in the government right now. A savvy observer of the industry will see that the movement is gaining momentum and is moving towards that direction. Why is that important?

That’s important because every strain that is publicly available for sale right now basically becomes open source. Patent law states that you can’t apply for a patent of any kind anything that’s been being sold for a year or more. The message that Steep Hill is trying to get out is, you know, if you’re a breeder, the best thing that you can be doing right now is breeding your butt off. Finding those nuances, going after those new unique strains, trying to develop better phenotypes, so that you can have some relevance, you know, a few years down the line. There’s not a single grower who seriously has the power to compete with the likes of the Monsanto or Dow Agrosciences.

The only thing left then is to put your stake in the ground and to really protect your strains so that when everything that’s on the shelves now becomes open source, you have something better to offer the community. That’s exactly the message we’re trying to do. How do we go about doing that?

That can be done in a number of ways. Here, at Steep Hill, we try to not only have the best science and the best testing, but we’re actually trying to build something right now, a breeder services program, that will allow us to help breeders not only do those things like find the better traits, breed the better strains, but also have a concerted package of tools they can use, that they can do those things better and faster and hopefully that will help them put that stick in the sand and allow them to really get to the point where they have IP. They have something to license. They have something that they can build a bigger business around. That’s exactly the message that we’re trying to give and we really believe that that is the way the industry will change and it will change soon.

Shango Los: Reggie, there are so many bombs in that answer that you just dropped it’s amazing. You dropped that, get ready because big-Ag is really coming, get ready because licensing your strains is coming, and also you better hurry up and get your breeding stuff out on the market so you can actually own it. You just probably got a lot of people shaking in their boots just right there.

Reggie Gaudino: I was hoping not to be doom-and-gloom. You know there are certain realities. Right now, because it’s counted as schedule I, you have a lot of people in a sense looking in. They’re looking in, waiting for that opportunity. Right? I think you see the success that some people that have really taken that cutting-edge approach have. Granted it’s outside the United States. You look at GW Pharmaceuticals, well GW Pharmaceuticals is doing some great stuff. The fact that they went that route, you know that other pharmaceutical companies are chomping at the bit, but the bigger pharmaceutical companies, those with the most to lose, don’t want to get there too soon and/or be the test case for someone saying, “Eh, you know this is not right yet.”

We know that it’s coming in the industry and because of that it would be better to have a good plan in place then to be caught with your pants down. That’s the reality. While doom-and-gloom, nobody wants to hear that negative message, I mean, these are realities. These are realities. The realities are because of the way the cannabis industry is actually coming in to mainstream business. It’s not like we’re going to come in to mainstream business and suddenly things are going to change for us. The patent law is the patent law. Because of the way patents work and I know that in my bio lead-up you said intellectual property. Well, from an intellectual property stand point, everything that has been done in the cannabis industry through the altruism and the kind of camaraderie that has typically been associated with the industry, when you get to big business, that goes away. It’s unfortunate, but the industry is going to change. It has to change.

One of the things that we have to make do, we have to look more like a pharmaceutical industry, we have to make it look more like some of these other industries if we want people to take it seriously and use this wonderful plant for medicine. That’s what we’re about. That’s why we did the testing. That’s why we want to ensure the safety of the product. To the point where we actually, we as Ynsight, Ynsight is our arm for genetic research, what we would like to be able to do is help, actually, doctors embrace the product better because we can give them a more systematic naming convention that is tied to chemical profiles, that is tied to genetics. These things are all very important for the industry to make the industry advance as a powerhouse unto itself and not because it was absorbed by big Ag or big farming.

To do that, we as an industry have to start looking at the other industries that we will touch and we have to play by those rules. The rule in patent law is, if you have been selling something for a year or more, commercially, or if it has been offered for sale, then it cannot be patented. That means everything on the shelves in a dispensary right now, Monsanto and Dow Agrosciences and all those other big Ag companies, can come in, buy clones, but not pay a penny to the original breeder, and grow them and outsell you because they will be able to do it faster, better, and at a lower price point. If all those things go away, what’s left for the people that have worked so hard for this industry?

That’s the message. If you make new breeds, and you don’t sell those breeds before you apply for a plant patent and assuming that you can get that plant patent because you have a unique strain, which has unique characteristics. There are a number of plant patents that are in the plant patent queue that the government is kind of dragging their feet on them. But they’re there, you can go and you can look at all the plant patent applications, there’s dozens if not hundreds of plant patent applications already out there. That is where breeders have to go to be able to maintain being relevant, to maintain not only their revenue stream, but the rights to what they want to do or who they want to give their product to.

Shango Los: Wow, that’s some shiver-me-timbers kind of talk right there. I’m sure that a lot of people’s minds have just been blown. You know, I want to talk a bit more about how breeders can defend their plant lines, but we need to take a quick break first. We’re going to take a short break and be right back, you are listening to the Gangapreneur.com podcast.

Shango Los: Our guest this week is Reggie Gaudino of Steep Hill. Before the break we were talking about how big Agribusiness is going to be moving in and sweep up the strains that are presently on the market. Some pretty scary stuff for heritage growers. Reggie, what can heritage growers do to defend themselves? You were pretty clear that strains that are presently on the market for more than a year are not patent-able and therefore indefensible from big Ag. But at the same time, a lot of the strains that are presently on the market have not have the genetic testing done on them yet, and so really, what is and what is not a strain is kind of hard to probably argue in court. If a strain has been on the market locally, but has never had it’s genes identified and so it’s just kind of an anonymous source, and heritage growers who are developing things right now, what can they do to either protect the strains that they already have out there? Maybe the answer is nothing. Then, when should they wait to put out the strains in the future that they want to be able to cash in on?

Reggie Gaudino: Those are both great questions. The best thing that they can be doing right now is developing strains and getting to stable phenotypes. That can be done a number of ways. That’s a whole other section that we can possibly, if you would like, have another podcast on, but the reality is, you want to be looking at phenotypes that you have been breeding for awhile that you’re in to your F8, your F9, your F10, right? It’s about at that level of back-crossing and end-crossing that you’ll start to see stability in the cannabis genome. Stability in terms of breeding is based on a genome size. Cannabis genome is about three times smaller than the human genome so it’s actually a fairly large genome. It actually takes closer to 10-12 generations to ensure that you’re really at stable phenotypes. Why do I bring that up?

Plant patents require that you are at a stable phenotype and, depending on the type of patent applied for, that it’s an asexually propagated plant (cuttings), or it’s actually something that comes from/produces seed. In the plant patent statutes, which is what I’ve been kind of trying to cull the information and develop a check-list for growers and breeders. We have that … If it’s not already up on the website it will be on the Steep Hill website pretty soon. You know, the important thing there is that there are regular plant patent features that have to be met. You have to know times to flower, inter-node length, flower colors, there’s just a bunch of stuff that has been accumulated over the years that are required for a plant patent. One of those things is a genetic component.

The genetic component is what really, I think, is the most important thing in the cannabis industry because there are so many different strains as you mentioned, and there’s probably a lot of strain similarities. How do you ensure that the stuff you’re breeding now can be distinguished from the stuff that’s already out there? Then what can you do with your stuff that’s already out there? That’s the second part of the question. Girl Scout Cookies are phenomenally popular, right? It’s going to be a shame when these guys (Big Ag) come in and take Girl Scout Cookies and grow it out the wazoo. What I would recommend is if you have stuff on the market, take that stuff, bring it to somebody who does genetic analysis, there are not a lot of companies out there that can do it right now, and spend the money if your product is a big bread winner for your business, spend the money and get some genetic analysis done.

The analysis is going to be anything from Deep Sequencing, which is fairly expensive, to more like qualitative trait analysis. Those terms are on different sides of the spectrum in terms of the involvement of genetic analysis. We at Steep Hill, have been building tools that we are trying to put out on the market for the breeders so they can follow these things. We’re working on molecular diagnostics for various traits, we’re working on methods to be able to identify similarities between strains or differences between strains. A lot of this stuff is actually fairly high-tech. We have a lot of really cutting-edge molecular biology equipment in our lab that allows us to do a lot of this research. What this allows us and possibly some other more advanced labs to do is to actually give you kind of a genetic profile that you can kind of layer on top of a chemical profile, right?

Chemical testing is important because that gives you the terpene profiles, it gives you the cannabinoid profiles, right? Here’s the kicker, sometimes profiles are not the be all and end all. The reason for that is that you can get similar profiles from crosses that give you convergent phenotypes. Let’s say you take two different strains, the F1 of strains that have been crossed are very rarely the real final phenotype that you get at F10, right? As you breed an F1 and interbreed an F1, you’ll get a lot of pheno’s out and then those pheno’s will sometimes look like other strains. It’s a transient kind of thing. If you were to continue to breed that particular strain, you would possibly lose the thing that made it look like something else. That’s why, getting back to stable phenotypes. You want something that’s going to breed true (or at least stably) and you want to be able to follow those traits.

People who have been breeding for a long time are actually their own best laboratory. The reason I say that is if you’ve got strains that you’ve been looking at for 8-10 generations you’ve been inter-breeding yourself, you already have what we call in genetics, a mapping population. At that point, you can find any trait that you’re interested in and you can measure it. In one or two experiments, a good genetic analysis team can take the parents and the offspring and tell you what gene is responsible for that trait. The reason for that is because the background between the parents and the offspring at F8 if not F10 are so similar that when you find one difference, it’s fairly easy to locate in the DNA. Based on that power, we have the ability to start helping breeders identify the genes and the DNA sequences that are responsible for those traits that they find unique. That is why not doom-and-gloom, right? They’ve been doing it so long. They’re already so good at what they do that they’ve already created the tools that they need to be able to help them move forward and they don’t even realize it.

Shango Los: Reggie, getting it to be stable, you know, F8, F9, F10, so that you would be able to get a patent, for heritage growers, that can take a long time. One of the things I dig when I learned about GenKit from Steep Hill, was that it’s ability to let growers sex the plants way earlier in the process while they’re still in veg instead of the traditional looking at it with a magnifying glass to figure out the sex as it’s starting to head towards bloom. Tell us a little about the GenKit and how it’s being adopted by growers.

Reggie Gaudino: I’m glad you asked. We built GenKit as a vehicle for this service. I’m not sure how it got out there, but GenKit for whatever reason people thing that means gender kit, right, but it’s actually not, it’s genetics kid. What it allows us to do is with the same work flow, test for a whole bunch of different things. The first product we put out on the market was the male-not-male discriminator. The whole idea was to have this be a piece of a bigger plan. That bigger plan is to allow breeders to get to stable phenotype much faster. The sex-test is actually the first part, but now as we develop these new traits and we actually keep an eye out on our website because in probably less than a month, two months max, we have two or three trait markers that we’re adding to GenKit that we’re going to announce.

What that allows us to do is, you know, as soon as you crack a seed, at the second true leaf, you send us a little piece of leaf in and we can test, you know, we can tell you, male, not male, I say not male for a reason and we can talk about that in a little while, and we can tell you what some of the other traits might be. The reason that’s important is because then if you combine that with some early leaf-testing services, so you have a genetic profile now, and then you run an early chemical test to see, of the seeds you’ve cracked, which are the males, which are not males, if you’re interested in males do you want to keep some of these males because they have the highest CBD-THC ratio, or what the genetics tells you. Then what that allows you to do is once you figure out what are the best in that, say, 50-100 seeds you’ve cracked, you throw away everything that’s not going to give you what you want, reducing your resource load, and then you force flower between like 4-6 weeks. You don’t have to grow to full maturity.

If you can do that, you don’t need a lot of seeds, you just need a couple hundred seeds. You don’t need a full plant worth of seeds, right? You force flower early, you do the breeding with a male pollen you want, you get some seeds, you crack those seeds, you keep doing it. Now if you look at it, you’re mating, seeding, you know, at the 6, maybe latest, 8 week mark. 52 weeks divided by 6 weeks is 8 with a few weeks left over, that means you’re at 8 generations per season now, using these tools. If you’re an indoor grower, that’s great. Obviously, that doesn’t always translate for an outdoor grower, but if you combine your process where you do some indoor and some outdoor, then you’re at 8 generations in one year.

Shango Los: I can totally see how the GenKit is going to excite so many breeders who want to be able to get to that stable F8 and F9 really fast. Also our time is going really fast, so we’re going to have to take another short break now, Reggie, hold on just a second. You are listening to the Gangapreneur.com podcast.

Shango Los: Welcome back, you are listening to the Gangapreneur.com podcast. I am your host Shango Los and our guest this week is Reggie Gaudino of Steep Hill. Reggie, we’ve been talking a lot today about protecting your phenos and getting them to stable at F8 and F9 for an eventual patent. The other thing that we talk a lot about on this show is the reliability of analytics labs and we’ve talked to a couple pros that have said, “You know, it’s one thing to want labs to give you the same answers.” Because we know that growers are shopping around for labs to give them the results that they want and sometimes it’s also the way that they’ve chosen their sample, but the one thing we keep coming back to on the show is this common opinion by professionals that it’s the standards themselves that are used in the HPLC machines that have not been developed enough because they haven’t been developed long enough for cannabis specifically and therefore since the standards themselves, they’re quick to degrade and folks may not be buying the same standard from different companies, that just at it’s very basis, it’s going to be impossible to have consistent testing. With your deep background on this, what are your thoughts?

Reggie Gaudino: We’ve been experiencing that same thing here. We work really hard to ensure that we have good calibration on all of our machines. The way we do that is by, we order our standards from multiple sources. We have seen that on any given batch of material that we get from the standard vendors, that on some day some will have great standards and those same companies on other days will have not so good standards. What we do to minimize that is whenever we want our calibrations, we measure them on standards that we source from multiple places. It’s expensive because the standards are not cheap. That’s the kind of lab that customers should be looking for. They should not be afraid to say, “Hey, can I see your calibration curves? Can I see how often you run your standards? How often to do you run your blanks?” That kind of stuff. Because that’s how we ensure that we are doing the best job and giving the best quality results to the clients, right?

The other thing that is very, very important and we take pride on is joining those Emerald Cup Competitions, because now, you have a third party that is now certifying your level of accuracy because they send out complete unknowns, you have to send the test results back to them, they do the analysis. Labs that are not competing in those, everybody should take a second look at those and say, “Hey, why are you not competing in a national standards competition?” It’s there for us to be able to say, “Hey, you know what? We meet at least a minimal level of certification that means that we’re doing the job the right way.” Clients should be adamant that the labs that they test with compete and meet at least those minimal certifications standards. It’s very important that they the labs have that level of certification to offer their clients.

Shango Los: That’s really good insight. You know, I’m surprised/not surprised, to hear you run it home again. What we’ve heard a couple times is that, you know, with these standards being different from the different companies, there is no doubt then that the different cannabis analytics labs are putting out different results. I mean, so many people, they want to hate the lab and think that maybe it’s their team that’s bad, but actually it’s just the state of the science. That’s something pretty severe to have to deal with.

Reggie Gaudino: Certainly that’s true, right? But by doing what I said, if every lab does not take it on gospel that once the standard maker is doing the job the right way all the time, you minimize that. That’s the extra step a good lab will take to make sure they’re giving out the right answers.

Shango Los: Right on, good, that’s a good book-end on that. Before we finish up here, I want to address, you know because our show is for entrepreneurs and certainly the cannabis breeders that are listening have really greatly appreciative of the stuff we’ve been talking about so far, let’s talk about the people that want to be you, Reggie. For a lot of those breeders, they want to step it up and get the education to become geneticists themselves so that they can work in the lab instead of necessarily in the grow room. What do you recommend for folks that are in states that have not normalized yet who want to prepare themselves for a career doing what you are doing? I mean it’s pretty exotic and there are not a lot of mentors yet for people to follow in their footsteps. What are your words of advice for somebody that wants to come up behind you in the future?

Reggie Gaudino: A good strong plant biology and molecular biology background will help them get almost all the way there. If they want they want to do the intellectual properties stock kind of stuff that I do, that’s above and beyond, but to be a good cannabis geneticist, to be able to do the kind of research that I do and my team does, to be able to ask those kind of questions, it’s really just basic science. All we’ve done is taken good people from regular science and brought them to the cannabis industry.

What’s so wonderful and what I love about this and why I’m here is because it gave me the opportunity to do stuff that was being done in other commercially important agricultural crops. Think about that, right? Cannabis is a commercially important agricultural crop that we know nothing about. We know so much more about wheat, about rice, about all these other things and so, it was basically a blank slate here. There’s a lot of room, there’s so much to be done in the cannabis industry in terms of understanding the genetics and understanding the biology of the plant that I would say anybody who’s in college, who’s studying biology, this field is just waiting with open arms.

A good education, not even the PhD. Bachelors or Masters, if you have good science skills, you can do what we do here and advance this industry. That’s what we really need right now. We and other labs that do this kind of work are more than happy to bring people in, to teach them, mentor-ships. I can’t stress enough how … Look for good programs. If you’re going to college, look for good programs. University of Colorado in Boulder, they have the Cannabis Research Genome Initiative, right? Rather the Cannabis Genome Research Initiative, CGRI, you know. There are programs out there that will help bring the level of cannabis science up to everybody else’s and at that point all I can say is watch out, because there is a lot to come.

Shango Los: Right on, well that sounds like a really inspiring place for us to end today because we are out of time. Reggie, thanks so much for being on the show.

Reggie Gaudino: Thanks for having me, this was great and I hope I provided some helpful information.

Shango Los: Yeah, absolutely, well I’m already planning on having you on again because I still have a lot of questions left. Dr. Reggie Gaudino is Vice President for Scientific Operations and Director of Intellectual Property at Steep Hill. You can find more episodes of the Gangapreneur podcast at the podcast section at Gangapreneur.com. You can also find us on the Cannabis Radio Network website and in the Apple iTunes store. On the Gangapreneur.com website, you will find the latest cannabis news, product reviews, and cannabis jobs updated daily along with transcriptions of this podcast. You can also download the Gangapreneur.com app in iTunes and GooglePlay. We’re also thrilled to announce that you can now find this show on the iHeartRadio Network app, bringing Gangapreneur to 60 million mobile devices. Thanks to Brasco for producing our show as always, I am your host Shango Los.

End


Reno Embraces Its First Medical Cannabis Collective

As cannabis gains ground throughout the country, it seems to emerge in a slightly different way from state to state.

Sierra Wellness Connection recently opened in Reno, Nevada, and although it drew a large number of community members for its grand opening, the understated atmosphere provides a contrast to some of the more high profile, almost flamboyant openings of the early clubs in Colorado and California.

Sierra Wellness Connection operates its own grow facility with anywhere from 15 to 20 strains. They also offer cannabis-infused products as they become available in Nevada.

The new location is clinical and professional as well as warm and friendly. Dispensary manager Eva Grossman says, “A lot of very sick people are coming to us. These people have been waiting a long time for cannabis to arrive in Nevada.”

Whatever it is, the attitude toward cannabis in Reno is, for the most part, quietly accepting. Grossman says the collective has encountered nothing but positive support as it eases into the community, establishing its place as a legitimate medical alternative for patients.

Ganjapreneurs may want to take note.

Reading a community is an integral part of building a successful business. And as consumers become more sophisticated, they are demanding more both in the quality of goods and in service.

Sierra Wellness Connection is getting to know its community through a strong emphasis on education. Whereas many clubs won’t let you through the door unless you have a doctor’s recommendation and are ready to join the collective, Sierra Wellness Connection provides an open library and consultation room that welcomes anyone whether or not they are patients.

Grossman says this is particularly helpful for potential clients who need help with the very first steps. The entire process of seeing a doctor and getting a recommendation can be intimidating, but if they have a place to go and a knowledgeable person to help guide them, it takes away some of that fear. She says a fair number of people have stopped by just for information, and that’s fine with her. Grossman is a strong patient advocate. She stresses the importance of not pressuring people, but rather giving them the time and resources they need to make their own decisions.

Grossman is also an example of how women ganjapreneurs are changing the face of the cannabis industry. A powerhouse of energy, she comes across as proficient and organized. The collective is clearly geared toward medical use. You probably won’t find half naked women — or men — on their product labels. Sierra Wellness Connection is among the wave of new businesses working hard to change marijuana’s stoner image.

Photo Credit: Trevor Bexon

End


THC-Infused Lotions and Skin Care Products Manufactured in Legal Marijuana States May Soon Be Available in Big-Box Retail Stores

Ah Warner is the CEO and founder of Cannabis Basics, a Washington-based cannabis topicals company that has helped shape the unique cannabis industry from its outset. Cannabis Basics offers lotions and topicals for both the medical cannabis and skin care markets, producing everything from pain relief creams to beauty products and tattoo treatment balms.

Earlier this year, Ah helped draft and advance legislation that established low-THC skin products — like many of the products offered by Cannabis Basics — as something that should be commercially available in the mainstream marketplace via distributors such as Super Supplements or Whole Foods. Additionally, Cannabis Basics recently became the first business to be awarded a federal trademark using both the word “cannabis” and a depiction of a marijuana leaf.

Recently, Ah appeared on the Ganjapreneur.com podcast for a discussion with podcast host Shango Los. She shared insights about the founding and growth of Cannabis Basics and what makes her company’s products stand out from many of the other cannabis topicals on the market.

Ah discussed the amount of effort it takes to establish a unique formulation process, and shared advice for people breaking into the topicals industry: “Do some research first. When you actually start to do your test batch, make sure that you take copious notes.”

When the discussion turned to the branding of her products, Ah responded: “The best advice I can give to entrepreneurs is to pay professionals do this type of work for you. “

Recordings of the podcast are available via iTunes and the Ganjapreneur website. There are full transcripts available of this and previous episodes at Ganjapreneur.com.

About Ganjapreneur:
Ganjapreneur launched in July 2014 and has since established a significant presence in the cannabis business world. The website regularly publishes interviews and commentary from leading minds in the industry, and has also launched a B2B business directory, a live feed of job listings from marijuana job boards, a domain name marketplace for start-ups and venture capital firms, and a mobile app for Apple and Android devices which aggregates daily cannabis industry news, business profiles, and other information. For more information about Ganjapreneur, visit http://www.ganjapreneur.com.

Source:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2015/10/prweb13039665.htm

End


CBD Biosciences Gets $8 Million From Pueblo, CO to Open Hemp Processing Plant

The city council of Pueblo, Colorado voted 5-1 on Monday to direct $8 million in incentive money to help a hemp-oil company get its processing plant up and running.

The Pueblo Development Foundation is giving $3 million to transform a former Boeing rocket assembly plant into a hemp processing plant for CBD Biosciences.

The company, a partnership between O.pen Vape and Thar Process Inc., will also receive $4.89 million to purchase equipment.

According to forecasts laid out in the agreement voted on by the council, the plant will create 168 jobs over the next two years that will pay an annual salary of $41,590 on average, not including benefits.

“This will be a fast-paced project,” said Pueblo Economic Development Corp. CEO Jack Rink. “They are already in town looking at the building. They have product they need to dry, so it’s full-speed ahead.”

The project may incentivize more Colorado farmers to start producing hemp, said Rink. “This is that missing component — the company that can process the crop. It is really going to create the incentive to plant more in the future.”

Source:

http://www.denverpost.com/marijuana/ci_29030544?source=rss

Photo Credit: Travis Isaacs

End


North Dakota Ag Department Looking for Industrial Hemp Research Participants

The North Dakota Department of Agriculture announced Tuesday that it’s looking for participants for an industrial hemp program.

In a press release, state Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring said the department was seeking applicants to participate in the program “for the purposes of agricultural or academic research.”

“Industrial hemp may only be grown in North Dakota through the North Dakota Department of Agriculture’s pilot program or by institutions of higher education,” he stated.

The 2014 U.S. farm bill allows state agriculture departments to grow hemp for research purposes.

North Dakota applicants must submit a proposal to be reviewed by a committee, appointed by Goehring. The deadline is January 1st; application instructions can be found here.

Source:

http://www.agweek.com/news/nation-and-world/3869667-participants-sought-nd-industrial-hemp-program

Photo Credit: Chris H

End


Bernie Sanders Proposes Removal of Cannabis from Scheduled Substances List

Bernie Sanders proposed Wednesday that marijuana be cut completely from the list of the ‘most dangerous drugs’ banned by the Federal government.

Doing so would allow states to legalize cannabis without fear of federal repercussions.

Sanders laid out his support for the proposal in a two-hour long meeting with students at George Mason University in Virginia. The meeting was broadcast online to some 300 other campuses around the country.

“Too many Americans have seen their lives destroyed because they have criminal records as a result of marijuana use. That’s wrong. That has got to change,” Sanders told the audience of 1,700.

Sanders is the first candidate to call for cannabis’s removal from the Federal government’s schedule of controlled substances. Another Democratic candidate, Martin O’Malley, argued that marijuana should be moved to Schedule 2. Hillary Clinton has said she wants to take a wait-and-see approach regarding legalization experiments at the state level before committing to any sort of federal changes in the law.

Sander’s proposal would give the power to regulate marijuana — like alcohol and tobacco — to the states. It would also give marijuana businesses access to banking services and certain tax deductions.

Source:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-will-propose-nixing-marijuana-from-federal-list-of-dangerous-drugs/2015/10/28/be8c3adc-7da2-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html

Photo Credit: Michael Vadon

End


UK Parliament Forced to Discuss Cannabis Prohibition; Just 2% Of Parliament Attends

After a quarter million signatures were put forward to the British parliament’s e-petition system, the government was forced to convene a session regarding the production, sale, and consumption of marijuana.

Unfortunately, only 14 of 650 members of parliament were in attendance at the debate, though the number of signatures the e-petition received made it the third most popular ever.

Clark French, a medical marijuana patient and the director of the United Patients Alliance, filmed the debate for the Cannabis News Network. French was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis at the age of 22, and uses cannabis to treat the pain.

You can see the video here.

Source:

http://thestonedsociety.com/2015/10/26/watch-the-uk-parliament-debate-cannabis-for-the-first-time/

Photo Credit: Michael D Beckwith

End


John Davis: A Hands-On Approach to Changing Cannabis Policy

CCSE LogoJohn Davis, founding member and current executive director of the Coalition for Cannabis Standards and Ethics, has been a stalwart in the pursuit of cannabis reform for over 20 years. He helped draft and coordinate some of the earliest cannabis legislation initiatives as a board member of the Hemp Initiative Projects, starting as early as 1993. Later, John founded the Northwest Patient Resource Center, a Seattle-based dispensary that is moving to transition to the recreational market. He has served as Cannabis Policy Expert for both Seattle and the entirety of Washington state and was elected vice-chair of the National Cannabis Industry Association’s board of directors in 2014.

“If you’re really going to follow a law, if you’re going to follow a legislative cycle… you’ve got to put the work in.”

John recently joined our podcast host Shango Los to talk about the details that go into pushing marijuana reform at the state level through the complicated legislative system. They also discuss best practices for knowing and understanding proposed legislation, how to get and stay in touch with your elected officials, and how cannabis activists can work productively with politicians and lobbyists who are not in favor of cannabis reform.

You can listen to the interview via the media player below, or continue scrolling for the full transcript.

Subscribe to the Ganjapreneur podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, SoundCloud or Google Play.


Listen to the podcast


Read the full transcript

Shango Los: Hi there, and welcome to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast. I am your host Shango Los. The Ganjapreneur.com Podcast gives us an opporunity to speak direct to entrepreneurs, cannabis growers, product developers and cannabis medicine researchers, all focused on making the most of cannabis normalization. As your host, I do my best to bring you original cannabis industry ideas that will ignite your own entrepreneurial spark and give you actionable information to improve your business strategy and improve your health and the health of cannabis patients everywhere.

Today, my guest is John Davis. John Davis is a founding member and executive director of the Coalition for Cannabis Standards and Ethics. He has worked on drug policy reform for over 20 years. John was a board member of Hemp Initiative Projects in Washington State starting in 1993 where he helped to author early marijuana legislation initiatives and run the campaigns. He is founder of the Northwest Patient Resource Center a medical marijuana dispensary in Seattle, Washington, soon to be 502 licensed. John was elected to the board of directors of the National Cannabis Industry Association in 2012 where he was elected vice chair in 2014. John is a board member of the Coalition for Responsible Cannabis Reform, the Nevada Cannabis Industry Association, and was a founder of the Washington Cannabis Commission Project.

John has served as Cannabis Policy Expert to the State of Washington and the City of Seattle, as well as several other states and localities. He has been an advisor to foreign presidents, heads of state, British parliament, and multiple US agencies. John helped author the Washington State implementation guide for 502 Regulated Cannabis with the Washington State Interagency Regulators Achieving Cooperation.

Before he’s moved to the Cannabis industry, John provided construction services for the US military and held a high level US military security clearance. John has been featured on ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, CNN Money, Bloomberg Fox Business and many more. John was Cannabis Business Executive’s pick for the 8th most influential person in cannabis policy of all time.

Today, he is here to speak with us about working with state legislators on cannabis reform. Welcome, John.

John Davis: Hey. Thanks for having me, Shango. Great to be here.

Shango Los: John, what are your initial recommendations for someone new to following cannabis legislation at the state level so they get off on the right foot?

John Davis: It’s with anything. You first don’t take other people’s word for what’s going on in a legislative body, even someone that is connected. Because they don’t always give you the full picture and sometimes they have an agenda. The thing about it is, if you’re looking at modern legislature in any state, all of the stuff that’s online, in Washington, you can find that at ledge, and that follows the legislature’s every move.

You can look at the current language of any bill that’s going through the system. You can see the bills from an overview, and you can even see the proposed amendments on it. The one thing that I’ve noticed in Washington State is that often people are reading the wrong version of law, like they’re reading a couple iterations ago.

Often, when a bill is traveling through a legislature, especially in Washington, they’re striking amendments. What a striking amendment is in a piece of a legislation, is that is taking everything except for the bill sponsors and the title and replacing all the other words. A striking amendment basically turns it into different bill. You could be reading one bill and say, “Hey, I have a problem with that,” and there’s a completely different bill going on.

In the state of Washington, with any bill, it will have, if you go to the bill homepage, you can read through when it was introduced, what the first reading was, what committees it needs to go through, what committees have just passed, and all the way up into session law. If you look at the documents, and it’ll have all the available documents from the bill, once the bill is passed, that passed bill is always called, “Session law.” If you’re reading anything else, you’re not reading what actually passed.

First things first is make sure that you’re reading the right bill. As I say, if you’re serious about following legislation, here is the bad news Shango, is you have to sit down and read it. That is tough. Myself, what I do is I take myself out to dinner, because me and the bill and highlighter and a pen and I just sit there and have dinner and read the thing, all devices turned off, and go through it.

Bill language is like anything else. It’s a little bit learning a foreign language, but I think the best way to begin to have those skills is to just do it and to read it. After you’ve read a few of these documents, you understand the way they’re organized and you’ll say, “Oh, okay. Yeah, I understand this section is the intent section. This section has to do with this. This section has to do when sections are enacted.” You’ll begin to get it.

If you’re really going to follow the law, if you’re going to follow a legislative cycle, follow through the legislative cycle, you’ve got to put the work in. Unfortunately, you’ll read one iteration of the bill, you’ll have your comments, and then they’ll put in a striking amendment. Yes, you got to read that one too. When a striking amendment is proposed often, what you have to do is take that striking amendment and compare it to the last version of the bill to see what things have changed.

Sometimes, you have to go through line by line, because the iterations of the bill will only show you by underlining and striking what pieces were added, what pieces were taken away from existing law, not from the last iteration of the bill. Often, it’s a matter of mechanically going through line by line and saying to yourself, “What has changed here?”

Shango Los: It sounds like this would be a really good opportunity to use a mentor and that yes, your idea to make sure that you know where the bills are online, and to make sure that you’re reading the most recent bill are good, but it sounds like every state is going to have its own idiosyncrasies, and so finding a mentor who can say, “Okay, these are the five things you need to know. This is where the bills are kept. This is how to read it in our state.” To get your toes wet so that from that point, you can take yourself to dinner and know what you’re reading and know you’re reading the right thing.

John Davis: Yeah and that’s if you can find someone who is willing to do that. Yeah, that’s great, because they don’t teach you the stuff in school or going through and getting a poli-sci degree, they don’t teach you these skills. These are skills that are learned on how to follow legislation like this. Yeah, absolutely, if you can get a mentor without an agenda to sit and take you through how bills in your particular locality or state or whatever you’re concerned with, what that process is that would be a wonderful thing.

Shango Los: I think that’s a good point too that you need to suck it up and know you’re going to have to read this bill and read the bill over and over again very likely during the legislative cycle, because there are certainly rewards to it, because when you read the bill, you are going to know that better than anybody that you talk to. Because almost nobody else has read the bill, and so you have a level of familiarity with it that others won’t, which will not only have other people that you’re trying to activate respect you more probably, but also when you speak to the legislators, they’re going to know that you’re not contacting them just based on rumor, but that you’ve actually done your homework.

John Davis: Yeah, and there’s so much rumor out there like, if you’re going to follow a bill, follow a bill, but don’t just take other people’s words for it, because those people come with agendas and they will tell you things about a bill that’s more rumor than truth. Then if you’re just going around saying, “This bill ends hashish in Washington State,” is like, “No, it doesn’t. Here’s the sections that that’s in. It’s more nuance than that.” If you’re going to be all opinionated about the bill, at least know what you’re talking about.

You should know, these bills are broken up into sections and if you’re concerned with concentrates, there’ll be a section maybe too that deals with that. You could at least find those sections and follow those sections. If you’re going to have an opinion, please make sure that you yourself are looking at it and not taking anyone, else’s word because the upshot to that is with the rumor, it gets a lot of those people.

Some agency will go out and say, “Hey, we need to storm our legislature because they are proposing this,” and it’s not true. Then a bunch of people show up down at the legislature and start lobbying their legislators to change something that’s not there. It makes us all look like we’re high.

Shango Los: Yeah, I believe that. Thanks, John. We’re going to have to take a short break right here. We’ll be right back. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast.

Shango Los: Welcome back. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast. I am your host, Shango Los. Our guest this week is longtime cannabis activist, consultant, and entrepreneur, John Davis. John, before the break we were talking about you really want to get into following cannabis legislation at the state level, you really need to get in with both feet.

Getting involved with the creation of legislation to be really frustrating and fulfilling at the same time, there’s so many deals that are made in the shadows and so much money in the game. Do you think that individual people can still play a role in cannabis legislation at the state level?

John Davis: Yeah, absolutely. Yes, if you’re on your own and not willing to put in the work, yes, you are unable to affect anything. However, if you are actually willing to put in the work and you by yourself can be effective by going in and making those relationships with legislators and getting to know them. One of the best things that you can do as a private citizen is show up to the fundraisers. You don’t even have to give money every time you go to a fund raiser, nobody checks, but money is the way that some of the engine runs.

If you’re able to give some, that always helps. You give some money and you can get a legislator on the phone, but by forging these relationships, you by yourself can be influential by being able to influence a lawmaker. Then that lawmaker can be influential in the actual floor, the stuff that goes down on the floor. What’s a better idea is to find other people with like minds, and that’s what you can do is just show everybody is find other people that have like minds. It actually makes it better, because when you’re going through, you’re all having to read the law. You can cry on each other’s shoulders about how much it sucks. As you’re more people, you have a larger voice. You can get to more legislators. You can even give yourself a name, and as long as your brand is good and they consider you people that know what you’re talking about, then yes, you can be effective.

It’s not just about the money. It can be a lot about the money, but it’s also, given the money, the legislators aren’t going to do something that’s just evil because of money, they have to get reelected. They are definitely influenced by money, but they’re also influenced by putting together something that is not going to be horrific to the voting public.

Shango Los: It sounds from what you said before the first break that they would really value, the legislators, would appreciate being come to with actual ideas from somebody who’s actually done their homework. Since so many cannabis activists are, we’ve got more history than a lot of the legislators, that coming, having read the bills, and actually having some solutions in mind instead of just coming in and complain, would also be a really great way to create influence.

You might not come with money, but if you come with ideas, they have their own value and the elected officials will probably be thrilled to hear them, because maybe that’s the solution they’ve been looking for themselves.

John Davis: They are. Look, if you actually know what the heck you are talking about, you are stakeholder and you can give them the stakeholder’s perspective. If you really know what you’re talking about, they want that. You do have to come with solutions, but those solutions like, people think that they can come and say, “Hey look, I think the law should include this.” It’s like, no, to be effective, you say, “Okay in third line page 46, I need, should to be may.” That is what actually changes legislators minds, because that’s something that they could do.

You’re not asking them, “Hey, can you go understand all of this subject and then change it based on these ideals that I have?” They’re not going to do it. When you come in and say, “Look, I’ve read the proposed bill, I’m good with a lot of it. Section three, I need this paragraph to be stricken, specific things,” they’re really looking for it. If you actually have credibility of knowing what you’re doing, they can also say, “Hey look, we’ve met with stakeholders and the stakeholders wanted this.”

Shango Los: That sounds like it would make a lot of sense to give them truly actionable information that they can do something about instead of having it be amorphous. Then they have to take the next step to figure out how to actually make that happen. We’re talking about meeting with the state representatives in order to make this happen. For folks who have never done that before, how exactly do you do it? Is it as easy as just picking up the phone and calling them and asking for their time?

John Davis: Oh, no. They view that as lazy. Sometimes they’ll give you their time, but look, if you’re interested in, let’s say Washington state for example, go down to Olympia and drive down to Olympia, parking actually, the rates are not too bad, and go into the legislative session early on. This is after you’ve already attended a bunch of fund raisers, right, but now you’re in session. Go to the offices of especially people that are in the committees that matter to your bill.

Do you meet with the representative? No, you meet with the legislative aides. Those legislative people don’t understand how important legislative aides are. Most of the stuff that’s actually written comes from the legislative aides, not the legislator. Now, knowing the legislators handy, because they can steer this whole process, but once you’re good with the legislative aides, you come by, they know who you are, bring them by good analysis, then you get to be known by that offense, but never underestimate the person that’s sitting at the desk, that’s the receptionist.

Shango Los: So I shouldn’t feel bad if I go to visit my representative and they’re not there, or even if they are there and I’m introduced to an aide, because actually the aide might actually have the juice that I’m looking for. It isn’t being punned off on an aide. That aide might actually be the channel I’m looking for.

John Davis: Yeah, the aide actually may be more effective than the legislator, because the aids generally are the ones that actually do the work. The legislatures just goes down. The legislator’s job is to go and get that work through the legislative process.

Shango Los: What if I want to approach a representative who is on the other side of the bill? I know that they may not want to make the changes that I’m going to suggest, but I really want to talk to them and potentially sway them, or point out something that I think that they’re misinterpreting. What’s a good way to approach somebody who’s on the other side?

John Davis: Okay, remember that these people are human. I think that a lot of people think that somehow elected officials are somehow super humans or something, a lot like the rest of us. If you go in yelling and screaming, they’re going to think to themselves, “How rude. Don’t let that person in my office,” certainly never setup a meeting with them.

Also, if you’re talking to them from a knowledge point, they’re going to listen better. If you come with respect like, okay, so you’re going in and you’re having typically democratic issue with a republican — find common ground, i.e., to take cannabis for instance. I’ve talked to high level people in congress, US congress that are republicans and actually the republicans are getting more just good with the issue and say, “Hey look, republican, don’t think of this as a cannabis thing. Think of this as a … You’re for small government, right? You’re republican. You’re for small government, you’re for state rights, you’re for the 10th amendment. You don’t have to be pro-cannabis or anything like that, just be a republican.” Try to put it, frame it from their standpoint, the way that they’re going to look at it and …

Shango Los: I see. Suddenly, it’s not, “Oh, we want to make this drug legal. This is about individual rights and this is about the freedom of businesses to go into what they want and the freedom to pay your taxes and be an American.

John Davis: Yeah, exactly. You’re framing it from their point of view. You can actually made headway that way. In anything that you’re doing with the legislative body, when you’re coming into someone that’s on the opposition, first, show no hate. Be very cordial. Shake their hand. Say, “Thank you for taking the time. I’d like to give you a perspective.” Even if they still agree afterwards, you be polite, even if they’re not polite to you.

You shake their hand and you thank them for their time and then you come back. At some point, legislators, they’ll feel for you, if you’re putting in the effort, even if they’re on the other side. If you’re constantly respectful, most of them will show that back to you. Some of them will never, but.

Shango Los: That makes a lot of sense too, because it will give them an opportunity to see you as a human if you’re treating them like a human as well. We’re going to take another short break and be right back. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast.

Shango Los: Welcome back. You are listening to the Ganjapreneur.com Podcast, I am your host Shango Los. Our guest this week is longtime cannabis activist, consultant, and entrepreneur, John Davis. John, before the break we were talking about the best way to approach our elected representatives, just treating them like humans, and whether they’re on the side of cannabis that we want them to be, or whether or not they’ve got issues, either way treat them like good people.

John Davis: Right.

Shango Los: I would think that over the course of a legislative cycle, lots of really unexpected and ugly things could happen. What’s the best way to deal with when you get involved of making the sausage of a bill and things just totally fall off their axles?

John Davis: What happens if, more like what happens when. This is legislative sausage being made and I’ve been through a lot of legislative sessions in the state and localities and actually in the US congress. You’ve got a bill and you’re trained to usher it through the process, everything is going to appear to be coming off its axles, but really it’s the way that it’s done.

There’s going to be people on the other side, now you’re lobbying for something. Perhaps, you did your work and got in early and got a sponsor and it’s your bill. You actually wrote it, and you shopped it and you got someone to introduce it. Now, the people on the other side, you think they’re going to say, “Wow, that’s the piece of legislation I’ve ever seen.” No, it’s not the way it goes. There is going to be someone that’s against you. There is going to be the localities, or the police, or this or that, or private prisons.

Those people are going to be attempting to make your bill a 180-degrees from what you planned it to be. It’s a dynamic process. Then you’re really trying to understand who your opposition is, who are those people on the other side, how can I get to them? A lot of people don’t know that being a good lobbyist means lobbying other lobbyists as well, not just he legislators, but to find those people on the other side and say, “Hey, can I crawl into your head a little bit and understand it?” “Okay, yeah we’re natural enemies, but maybe we can … Do you really need this? Can you soften on this part?” Even work together in those ways, because what you’re trying to do is you’re trying to get the best bill possible.

There is no perfect piece of legislation, it’s all sausage. There’s going to be things in there that you are successful in and there’s things that you’re not so successful in. That’s just the way it’s made, but that’s why they make another legislative cycle so you can go in the next year and fix those things that you weren’t able to fix this year, and to make sure that the stuff that you really want are in the bill.

All sorts of things happen. They can be people lobbying on your side, seemingly on your side of an issue, but they could be doing it in a really poor way that is starting to anger people. People will get upset about your issue based on the behavior of people that come in and purport be on your side. You need a very dynamic… dynamic process.

Shango Los: I can see how even either our own allies and different cannabis activists could get upset because maybe they haven’t read the law or maybe they don’t understand how the legislature works. Maybe they’re getting angry because I’m not getting more angry and yelling when my communication style might not be to yell at legislators. I’m looking for a different solution and so I can imagine that it would be challenging not only to work sometimes with folks who are holding different opinions, but also people on my own side for people who want me to be more radicalized than the bill is going to allow.

John Davis: Nothing is worse for a cannabis bill than cannabis activists that are pissed off and want to yell at someone, because that’s exactly what they do. Often, you’re having to be in there and you have precious time there at the lobby and you have to spend the first five minutes saying, “Hey look, I’m not those guys.”

Shango Los: Right.

John Davis: I understand the passion is out there, but when the passion is misinformed, do you think that you’re going to come into a legislator’s office, yell at them and then they’re going to think, “Oh yeah, he’s right. I’ve been bad.” No, they’re humans. They’re going to be pissed off at you, “How rude of you to come into me? I’m an elected official and yell at me?”

Sometimes there’s a lot of damage control that you need to do from people on your own side. That’s why it’s important to build your own brand or your group’s brand. Hey, we work together. We might not always like what’s coming out, but we’re never going to come and accuse you of being evil for having a different view from us. Because you got to remember, there’s another legislative cycle that you can be effective in. If you’re down in a legislature, your one goal, your sole goal is to be effective like all else is secondary. Because actually, they are trying to change legislation.

If you’re yelling and screaming, you can alienate a legislator for life. The thing about it is, they’re humans. They can also be very petty. Sometimes, they will be against something because screw you, that’s why, and you never want to get there. You never know, and I’ve seen this over and over again, you’d never know when someone that you hated last session is a key committee vote for you at this particular junction.

If you’ve alienated them, you’re not going to be able to get that vote. Sometimes that’s what it is when it’s going through the committee process, it’s a matter of one vote. If you don’t have that vote or the committee chair sideways on you, you will never be able to usher a piece of legislation through. Yeah, gotta mind your Ps and Qs.

Shango Los: Yeah, absolutely. That sounds like a great point to end on to, to treat your representatives humanely and kindly. Make sure you do your homework and if you don’t pull it together, remember that there’s always another legislative session. John, thanks so much for being on the show.

John Davis: Thank you for having me. I had a good time.

Shango Los: John Davis is a longtime cannabis activist, consultant, and entrepreneur. You can find more episodes of the Ganjapreneur Podcast in the podcast section at Ganjapreneur.com. You can also find us on the Cannabis Radio network website and in the Apple iTunes store. On the Ganjapreneur.com website, you will also find the latest cannabis news, product reviews, and cannabis jobs updated daily along with transcriptions of the podcast.

You can also download the Ganjapreneur.com podcast via iTunes and Google Play. We are also thrilled to announce that you can now find the show on the iHeartRadio network app, bringing Ganjapreneur to 60-million mobile devices. Thanks to Brasco for producing our show. I am your host, Shango Los.

 

End


NFL to Pittsburgh NORML: Stop Using Steelers-Inspired Logo

The National Football League (NFL) has sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Pittsburgh chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), claiming that NORML is illegally appropriating the Pittsburgh Steelers logo.

The logo in question is essentially the same as the Steelers logo, with yellow, red, and blue marijuana leaves in place of the three four-pointed stars (which are apparently also known as “hypocycloids”).

From the NFL’s letter to NORML:

“As a result of your organization’s unauthorized use of NFL Marks to promote Pittsburgh NORML’s business, the public is likely to be misled into believing that Pittsburgh NORML and/or its products are authorized, approved, sponsored by, or are otherwise affiliated with, the NFL and/or the Steelers Club, when they are not. Moreover, such unauthorized use may cause dilution of the Steelers Club’s famous logo mark, and otherwise negatively impact [NFL Properties’] and/or the Steelers Club’s trademark rights.”

Not surprisingly, Pittsburgh NORML backed down, stating that they “have we have no stomach for a fight with the nation’s largest non-profit, the NFL.”

The NORML letter to the NFL also urged the organization “to reconsider its policy on the use of cannabis by its employees, especially medicinal use by players suffering from chronic pain,” and notes that “Cannabis is recreationally legal in three of your major markets –Washington, Colorado, as well as our Nation’s Capital, while medicinal marijuana is legal in 24 states, including your largest markets of California, New York, Illinois and the New England.”

Sources:

http://www.mjinews.com/nfl-asks-pittsburgh-norml-stop-use-steelers-inspired-logo/

Photo Credit: David Fulmer

 

End


Police Continue Issuing Unfounded Halloween Warnings About Cannabis Candies

It’s happening again.

Earlier this month in Atlantic Beach, Florida, after a 33-year-old man was arrested for possessing marijuana-infused candies, police put out a warning to parents that “marijuana candy could be very appealing to teens and children.” In Texas and Arizona, news outlets have also put out warnings to parents to check their children’s Halloween candy for marijuana edibles.

But media hype around cannabis-infused candies is nothing new. In 2014, after the use of recreational marijuana was legalized in Washington and Colorado, Denver police warned parents to check their children’s Halloween candy for cannabis-infused candy impostors. They even distributed the warning in the form of a highly produced, ominous Youtube video. Over a cinematically-filmed shot of identical, unwrapped Sour Patch Kids gummies, dispensary-owner Patrick Johnson tells viewers, “There’s really no way to tell you whether or not a product is infused or not. Once you take something out of these packages and put it next to something that isn’t infused, it’s very difficult to tell the difference.”

But three days into November last year, and despite the scare tactics, no one had reported any incidents of children accidentally consuming marijuana-infused candy. And following the dire warnings from the Washington Poison Center about the potential danger of pot candy, the Seattle police department later admitted to what Seattle PD spokesman Drew Fowler called “fear-mongering.” It seemed that as long as parents used common sense, then expensive, cannabis-laced edibles wouldn’t end up in the hands of children.

So why the renewed fear of marijuana candy this Halloween? At dispensaries in Oregon, where the sale of recreational cannabis became legal on October 1, the Oregon Health Authority has distributed cards to all marijuana buyers reading, “Marijuana can make kids very sick. You can keep the children in your life safe and healthy by storing all marijuana products in a locked area that children cannot see or reach.”

But the sale of cannabis-infused edibles is banned to recreational users in Oregon until midway through 2016, making the threat of cannabis-infused candy finding its way into kids’ Halloween stashes no more likely this year than it was in 2014. And edibles have been available to medical marijuana patients for years, with no reports of cannabis candies ending up in the hands of children.

It’s not the first time that parents, local police, and the media have portrayed marijuana users as malicious stoners dropping weed candy into the loot bags of unsuspecting trick-or-treaters, and the image will persist as long as our culture’s stigma around cannabis does.

Staying safe on Halloween is simple if parents exercise common sense. Don’t let children eat anything that’s not individually wrapped, and throw away any candy that looks unfamiliar to you. Marijuana candies come in packages specifically advertising their cannabis-infused content, and basic caution will suffice in keeping them out of children’s hands.

There are far greater dangers than pot candy facing children on Halloween night, such as cars and flammable costumes. As Joe Hoden, CMO of Dixie Brands, Inc. writes in an opinion piece for The Cannabist, “The American College of Emergency Physicians says that the types of injuries that send most kids to emergency departments on Halloween have nothing to do with candy.”

Photo Credit: george ruiz

End


Pennsylvania Clergy Members Push For Medical Cannabis Legalization

A group of 50 clergy members held a rally in support of medical marijuana legalization outside the Pennsylvania state capitol Wednesday.

The group, which comprised religious leaders from a variety of faiths, signed a statement imploring lawmakers to take action on the issue.

“It’s what we need to do. It is what Christ would do, Christ would help them… It’s the least I can do for them,” said the Reverend Bonnie Whittier. A member of her congregation, Jackson Salemme, suffers from epilepsy.

“Look at your fellow man and make this bill about the patients and not about the politics. There are real people and faces behind this legislation that we are fighting for,” said Cara Salemme, Jackson’s mother.

Salemne expressed her gratitude for the actions of the clergy: “Them standing strong behind parents, patients, and caregivers, I think it’s incredibly important, and it’s a powerful statement.”

Source:

http://fox43.com/2015/10/21/religious-leaders-show-support-for-medical-marijuana-in-harrisburg/

Photo Credit: Gerry Dincher

End


Brand Focus: Focusing on a Broad Market, Ft. Goodship

Equally as important as the emotional connection (discussed in the first installment of this series) and the clarity of purpose (as discussed in the second installment), are the methods of expression used in developing a brand’s identity.

I like to think of the emotional appeal of a brand as the why, the clarity of purpose as the what, and the expression of brand identity as the how. The how is comprised of scores of subtle decisions: product nuances, tone used in copy writing, color palette decisions, visual symbolism, channels of communication, etc.

All of these factors collectively create an immediate impression for potential customers. Within seconds, consumers make a subconscious decision as to whether or not a given brand is relevant to their self-identity. When a brand knows it’s why and it’s what, the how translates clearly. When the former are not immediately apparent, inconsistency in both visual and verbal communication is the result. But when a brand gets it right, it speaks to us on a personal level.

In cannabis cookery, only a select few have been able to achieve this level of branding mastery.


Goodship

The team at Seattle-based edibles maker The Goodship Company has been branding to the beat of its own drum since its founding in 2014. The self-described “bakers, makers, artists, and believers in good” have set the tone for product quality and branding excellence in the Pacific Northwest. The transition from celebrated cupcakes to cannabis cookies has been remarkably polished for the company, staying true to their core values of using locally-sourced, high quality ingredients and delivering a consistently enjoyable experience. CEO Jody Hall took some time out to elaborate more about their branding process for us.

We also consider our cookies worthwhile hiking companions #LifeOnTheGoodship || ???? @stonedonthego

A photo posted by The Goodship Company (@thegoodshipco) on

What process did you use to develop your brand? Was it developed internally or with an agency?

Our brand was developed in collaboration with an agency – a great local spot called Mint Design in Lower Queen Anne. Our process started by laying out our goals for the brand, what story we wanted our brand to tell and how we wanted it to make people feel.

It was important to me that the look and feel of our company and products matched the quality and experience they provide. I wanted the design to feel fun yet professional, sophisticated yet playful, and to break away from the existing market standards around pot products. We are trying to help shed the taboo that surrounds marijuana and help bring it into the light. We wanted the look, design, and color to say “sophisticated good times,” and to communicate trust, professionalism, and (adult-only) fun.

What are the defining characteristics, core tenets, or ideological values of your brand?

From a Goodship company perspective, we have an ideology that’s centered around three main values: being pioneers in the industry, helping to change the world for the better, and fostering human connection.

We believe that marijuana legalization is generating once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to become a pioneer in a brand new, socially impactful industry. We have the chance to have a seat at the table that is shaping the future of pot culture, and that’s really an exciting place to be.

We think that the view of marijuana is as a “sin” is inaccurate, and that marijuana actually has the ability to impact people’s lifestyles, creativity, and social experiences in really positive ways.

Finally, we believe that humanity in today’s day and age is really craving connection to one another. Marijuana is about a lot more than just getting high; it offers an incredible way for people to come together, enjoy one another, and connect. Ultimately, marijuana allows you to disconnect to in order to connect — disconnect from all your daily distractions in order to connect more fully to people and to the world around you.

How do you think effective branding benefits the consumer? How does it benefit businesses?

Effective branding benefits the customer, most simply, because if the brand matches the product, it helps communicate that product’s story. Marijuana doesn’t need to be represented with a skull and crossbones. Instead, it can be enjoyed legally, safely, and responsibly. And the branding of marijuana products and companies has lot of power, if not responsibility, to help shape that perception. Our intention is for our products to be branded and packaged in such a way that you can be proud to bring them to a dinner party in lieu of a fancy bottle of wine. We’re excited to say that we’ve just started to see this perception shift in the market, with pot being less about getting stoned and more about a fun, yet classy social experience.

What are some of the most effective ways that you use your branding to promote your products?

We call our brand a creative collective, and it’s intended to be infused (forgive the pun) into the community as a supporter and friend of local businesses, arts, and culture. Our marketing strategy is less about traditional advertising and more about grassroots connections and becoming a part of everyday culture and lifestyle. We’ve brought on several great local artists to create artwork for the brand. The Goodship has also sponsored events like Capitol Hill Block Party, the Out of Sight Art Fair, Bumbershoot, and The Stranger Genius Awards. As we grow as a company, we hope to continue to increase our support of Seattle’s awesome art and lifestyle projects.

We’ve also extended our brand into a lecture series called The Goodship Academy of Higher Education. The series encourages intimate conversations with some of our region’s most brilliant minds, covering topics from space travel to re-animation to modernist cuisine. The intent is that both audience and speakers alike are “on the goodship” (aka stoned). We look at the world through a different lens when high, and we think that it is a fun and enlightening experience to combine altered states of consciousness with big ideas. We believe that projects like this help promote our brand and its values without the need to heavily use traditional advertising.

Are there other companies in the cannabis industry that you feel have branded themselves exceptionally well?

Yes, definitely. We think that companies like Craft Elixirs do a great job, and create delicious products too! From a packaging perspective, we also love Sitka and our personal favorite in the flower world, Vashon Velvet. Turning to retail stores, we love the Green Head Cannabis brand, a Vancouver-based shop. As well as Uncle Ike’s, Green Theory, Ganja Goddess and Dockside. The list is long, we could go on and on!

What common missteps or pitfalls would you suggest to companies looking to build a brand in the cannabis industry?

I think that the cannabis industry is in a complex transition. It’s moving away from a narrow customer base of heavy marijuana users and medical-only users to a much broader market of curious newcomers or infrequent imbibers. I think it’s easy for a cannabis brand to underestimate the wide range of potential customers it has. For people looking to build a brand in the cannabis industry, I recommend focusing on pot future instead of relying too heavily on pot past. It’s a really exciting time, and I’m eager to see how the industry takes shape as legalization spreads across the country!

End


Gallup Poll Shows 58% of Americans Support Legalizing Cannabis

A new Gallup poll shows more Americans than ever before supporting the legalization of marijuana. The poll, released yesterday, shows that 58% of Americans think cannabis should be made legal, a seven percent increase from last year.

The increases in support for legalization cut across age groups: 40% of people ages 65 and older are pro-legalization. In 1969, only 20% of this group (born between 1935 and 1950) supported legalizing cannabis.

Not surprisingly, support for legalization is strongest among those born between 1981 and 1997, at 71%. But the Baby Boomers are backing pot as well: 58% of them are pro-legalization.

“Americans’ support for legalizing marijuana is the highest Gallup has measured to date, at 58%,” the survey states. “Given the patterns of support by age, that percentage should continue to grow in the future.”

Source:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/21/gallup-nearly-60-percent-of-americans-want-legal-marijuana/

Photo Credit: Martin Alonso

End


The Merging of Washington’s Medical and Recreational Marketplaces

In 1998, Washington state passed I-692, allowing citizens with debilitating conditions to grow medicinal cannabis at home. The actual regulation of medical cannabis was largely left to the local governments until 2010 when the state attempted to regulate MMJ statewide. However, due to a last-minute waiver by then-governor Kristine Gregoire, the attempt largely failed. Despite the falter, a set of loose regulations did emerge governing collective gardens and setting designated providers.

Next, in 2012, Washington passed I-502, bringing regulated recreational cannabis to the Northwest. Unfortunately, I-502 did not tackle the elusive regulation of the medical cannabis system that had been flourishing in the Evergreen State. After trying again and failing in 2014, lawmakers finally passed legislation during the 2015 legislative session that merged the unregulated medical cannabis system into the regulated recreational system.

Despite widespread opposition from medical cannabis activists against the two laws, the state has pressed forward with the merging of medical and recreational cannabis.

The plan from the WA Liquor and Cannabis Board (LCB) is to allow medical cannabis shops who meet the following requirements to apply for MMJ retail licenses first: The business must have opened before 2013. Second, the company must have applied for a license before July 1, 2014. Third, they must have maintained both a local and state business license. Fourth, they must be up to date on their taxes.

Medical cannabis shops will now have the same location restrictions as retail cannabis stores. The nearly 200 operational recreational cannabis stores in the state can now apply for medical endorsements, but the number of medical licenses allowed statewide has not been determined. The original 334 cap on retail shops has been lifted. The new regulations affect all sectors of the medical cannabis industry, meaning producers must indicate the amount of cannabis canopy dedicated to growing medical-grade marijuana.

The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) recently released emergency rules that govern what is and isn’t medical marijuana. These are in conjunction with the already-implemented guidelines for recreational cannabis. The rules cover the amount of THC and CBD allowed in medical-grade products, and ask for more stringent guidelines for heavy metal and pesticide testing, with a prohibited pesticide list promised in the future (the DOH will partner with the Department of Agriculture to devise the list).

The rules also prohibit the addition of terpenes, encourage workplace sanitation, and require training for dispensary workers on the different uses of cannabinoids. Finally, the rules prohibit the use of medical terminology and insist that each MMJ label declares, “This product is not approved by the FDA to treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

Photo Credit: SounderBruce

End


Canadian flag flying against the sun.

Canada’s Liberal Party Wins Election, Plans to Legalize Cannabis

Canada’s newly elected Liberal Party, headed by Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau, may be poised to legalize marijuana there. Cannabis legalization was a main feature of the party’s electoral campaign. From its website:

“We will legalize, regulate, and restrict access to marijuana. Canada’s current system of marijuana prohibition does not work. It does not prevent young people from using marijuana and too many Canadians end up with criminal records for possessing small amounts of the drug.”

The only other country to legalize pot so far is Uruguay. Some, such as the Netherlands and Spain, have greatly relaxed enforcement, but have not legalized it.

If Canada goes through with legalization, it could mark a sea change for international drug policy, which is predicated on a network of treaties. This series of treaties includes the the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs of 1961, the Convention on Psychotropic Drugs of 1971, and the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances of 1988.

By legalizing cannabis and rejecting these treaties, Canada would send a clear message to the United Nations, which plans to review these international agreements in its 2016 session. Indeed, the treaties themselves would lose power as another nation decides to forego them. It is unlikely that the United States, the de facto force behind the treaties in the past, would sanction Canada, especially as four states have now legalized cannabis.

Source:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/20/9573497/canada-marijuana-legalization-justin-trudeau

Photo Credit: Alex Indigo

End