Posted on 05/11/2017 9:58:32 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The grapevines that line rolling hillsides and sweeping valleys in Northern California’s wine country have become iconic – a symbol of the region’s rustic charm that helped California earn its reputation as a world-class wine and food destination.
But winegrapes have new competition: weed.
California’s legalization of recreational marijuana has led to the beginning of a major transformation of wine country. It’s been just seven months, but already investors are snapping up property where wine was once produced. Vineyard operators are developing expertise in cannabis cultivation. New, specialty marijuana businesses are sprouting up in Sonoma and Mendocino counties. And farmers who have long made a good living by growing and harvesting winegrapes are expressing interest in diversifying with marijuana.
“As a sustainable farmer, you have to be willing to change with the market, and with crops that are profitable,” said Steve Dutton, president of the Sonoma County Farm Bureau.
Farmers, outside investors and cannabis entrepreneurs see the landscape of California’s North Coast changing before their eyes. Their opportunities are particularly ripe in the fertile soils of rural Sonoma, Mendocino, Humboldt and Trinity counties.
“I think that cannabis and wine have amazing potential for a symbiotic relationship, and the reason this region is used for that production is the soil and the air and the unbelievable ecological qualities that we have up here in Northern California that are unique to the world,” said Amanda Reiman, community manager for Flow Kana, which recently bought the flagship Fetzer Vineyards winery property where the label got its start.
Poseidon Asset Management, a San Francisco-based hedge fund specializing in cannabis, was the lead investor for the $3.5 million purchase.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
20 years of medicinal product growing was at much smaller scale than this corporate agro farming concept.
Seems doubtful, as it's widely reported - on FR and elsewhere - that CA medical pot has been so laxly regulated as to be a legalization in all but name. Have any evidence for your suspect claim?
"California generated $2.7 billion in medical-cannabis sales in 2015" - https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/01/01/californias-gigantic-medical-marijuana-industry-co.aspx
“Have any evidence for your suspect claim?”
Other than press out of Oregon and Northern California, some drug wars in Tennessee and Kentucky, Indiana and the mid west mess, other nickel and dime operations get hit by gangs etc.... highway truck jackings on I-81 up through Virginia, requests by senators looking for additional funding to combat trafficking on interstate corridors going up the Eastern seaboard; no.
But then again, this is uncharted territory. With 40 something other states looking for resource. Supply and demand and all of that pesky side action. Human nature, greed etc...
Prohibition was a countrywide re-legalization of alcohol by constitutional amendment. A few states legalizing MJ does not a prohibition make. What is created with only a few states relaxing some control, are nefarious groups who will seek to fill the demand of those users residing states which have not or will not relax code & statute.
Will the Fed step up or not in the foreseeable future?
Seems doubtful, as it's widely reported - on FR and elsewhere - that CA medical pot has been so laxly regulated as to be a legalization in all but name. Have any evidence for your suspect claim?
You seem to have provided "evidence" for a suspect claim other than "medicinal product growing was at much smaller scale". But let's go ahead and look at this "evidence":
Other than press out of Oregon and Northern California,
What's that press say?
some drug wars in Tennessee and Kentucky, Indiana and the mid west mess,
No legalization there, so no possible support for your claims about what will happen under legalization.
other nickel and dime operations get hit by gangs etc....
Be a little more vague, could you?
highway truck jackings on I-81 up through Virginia,
I-81 doesn't run through any states that have legalized, so again no possible support for your claims about what will happen under legalization.
requests by senators looking for additional funding to combat trafficking on interstate corridors going up the Eastern seaboard; no.
And you'd have us believe that these senators are concerned about trafficking because they want to prevent pot robberies?
But then again, this is uncharted territory. With 40 something other states looking for resource.
If by "resouce" you mean pot: all 50 states have been supplied with pot before there were any legal growers to rob, and it will remain the case that targets of theft offer resistance while dirt offers no resistance to seeds.
Supply and demand and all of that pesky side action. Human nature, greed etc...
Nobody said legal pot growers alone among Americans would be immune to thieves - just that there's no sound reason to expect "countless" instances of pot-theft gunplay.
Prohibition was a countrywide re-legalization of alcohol by constitutional amendment.
Opposite - what you just described is the END of Prohibition, which was also begun with an amendment unlike federal pot prohibition.
A few states legalizing MJ does not a prohibition make. What is created with only a few states relaxing some control, are nefarious groups who will seek to fill the demand of those users residing states which have not or will not relax code & statute.
News flash: such groups existed before any state had legalized.
Will the Fed step up or not in the foreseeable future?
"Step up" to do what exactly? Continue to exceed their Constitutional authority by meddling in intrastate commerce in pot?
“Opposite - what you just described is the END of Prohibition, which was also begun with an amendment unlike federal pot prohibition.”
Which is exactly what I didn’t mean to say when I somehow mysteriously left out the word “end” in the beginning of that freaking sentence.
So... I completely blew my argument and surrender, but am not convinced. Nor can. I wrap my arms around conceptualizing anything less than unending strife for these corporate farms. Watching billions of untaxed, unregulated, state sanctioned controlled substances being produced openly is far and removed from simple decriminalization.
I understand completely the points you are articulating and I’m not in disagreement. But I do not think the federal government is going to simply give it a pass. Nor do I think the criminal element is going to let opportunity pass them by.
They are both taxed and regulated (although not by the feds).
I do not think the federal government is going to simply give it a pass.
They have so far - and AG Sessions has said that the COle memorandum under which this has happened is "not too far from good law."
Nor do I think the criminal element is going to let opportunity pass them by.
Like I said: Nobody said legal pot growers alone among Americans would be immune to thieves - just that there's no sound reason to expect "countless" instances of pot-theft gunplay.
In Oregon you can grow your own, up to 6 plants IIRC.
The prohibitionists are much more useless and annoying than the users.
States rights, simple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.