OCTOBER 2022

TFNB Your Bank for Life, we understand the unique struggles this emerging market creates for early adopters. We love working with innovative entrepreneurs on the next big thing, and we believe Hemp is exactly that. For over 130 years, we’ve been getting to know our clients and helping them plan for their future, at times we’ve been the only ones who will listen. Come tell us your story and plans for your venture. Our success is predicated on your financial well-being, and we love to help our customers achieve their goals.

- Your Bank for Hemp

“Well, I had 93 acres all of a sudden, so what do you do with it?” Belushi, now 67, once told Newsweek. “And that year (2015), cannabis became legal for recre ational use in Oregon. I thought, ‘What the hell?’ ”

A BUDDING ENTERPRISE

It’s the weekend before Thanksgiving 2021, and harvest is fresh on his mind. “The greenhouse is bursting,” he says of his plants at Belushi’s Farm, the site of his legal cannabis grow operation in southern Oregon’s Banana Belt. The area gets nearly 300 days of sun a year, ideal for growing premium ganja. “Regarding the outdoor grow, we were very lucky. We harvested the day before the onslaught of rains.”

Overall he’s pleased with his plants. And he takes extra-special care of them. A lover of music, Belushi has said public ly, many times, that he sings and plays the harmonica to his plants. He even gives them names. And right before the plants are harvested, he told Forbes in 2020, he showers them with gospel music “to let them know they are going to the heavens – they are going to have an afterlife help ing people. It’s love, love, love, love, love.”

The farm has a range of offerings: The Blues Brothers pack of pre-rolled joints; Chasing Magic (Jim’s Secret Stash, a line of flower that includes Black Diamond OG, Snowman Cookies, Afwreck, Nilla Wafers and other strains); and Captain Jack’s Gulzar Afghanica, (on Belushi’s site, it’s referred to as “The Smell of SNL,” because notorious cannabis breeder “Captain Jack” allegedly supplied the highly potent, hybrid strain to members of the sketch-comedy show.)

“We have a love of new cultivars,” Belushi says. “I just walked through the greenhouse of Mothership 1, and we have all these land race sativas that have gone crazy. Crazy! They are tall and [have] long, huge elbows of flowers. These strains are going to be the stars this year for us.”

The flower his farm grows has complex blends of terpenes and THC, creating a medicinal effect that encourages healing.

Belushi’s favorite strain is “Cherry Pie,” which he calls “the Marriage Counselor” for its relaxing effects. The farm’s website lists his products at various dispensaries not only in Oregon, but ones in Colorado, Oklahoma and Illinois (Belushi’s home state) as well.

‘I’M REALLY LOVING THIS’

Belushi has truly, deeply plunged him self into his business, spending more than 200 days on the farm, working the land and tending to his plants. He does what he can to ensure quality, whether it’s test ing PH levels, making sure the soil is the right temperature, curing, smelling and, of course, sampling his flower.

A cannabis user since his teenage years, Belushi mostly takes it a bit easy on the ganja these days. He considers himself a micro doser, enjoying a mere 2.5 to 5 mg canna bis-infused chocolate at night to help him sleep. “I haven’t been really ripped in a long time. Well … that’s not true. I went to see the

His experience on the farm is docu mented in Discovery’s Growing Belushi. The unscripted, reality TV show first aired in 2020 and follows Belushi and his staff as they navigate cannabis farm life. (He just completed filming the sec ond season; the airing date has yet to be announced.)

“It’s a big investment – but I didn’t do it for the money. I didn’t do it for the money. I didn’t do it for the money,” Belushi said early in the first episode. “I did it to feel purposeful in my life. The joy is being successful at something. And this is an opportunity to be successful with some thing that is human.”

In an April 2021 techcrunch.com ar ticle, Belushi said he has turned down a movie role because filming for it took place during harvest time. His agent didn’t quite approve. Belushi doesn’t seem to mind.

“That purpose has grown stronger in my heart and mind since I first said it,” he tells me. “It’s flushing out as I retain

more understanding and knowledge of this world of cannabis. I’m really loving this – I’m loving the farming, I’m lov ing the relationship with this gorgeous plant, I’m loving this community that it’s bringing me into … full of real and grounded people with beautiful purpose. I love seeing the veterans and the people who have suffered starting to feel better.”

ON THE HORIZON

Belushi has a lot to look forward to. Currently he’s examining grows in Massa chusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Mich igan, Illinois and Arizona, searching to find the right partnerships with those who share similar philosophies about cannabis’s medicinal powers, he says. “I see us being in many states in the next two quarters.”

He’s looking to bring Bhang Choco lates (his nightcap edible) and Glazed premium edibles to other partner states. With the help of chef David Yusefzadeh, he is about to release a Blues Brothers THC-infused ice cream in Massachusetts. There are talks of expanding into highend gummies, also the release of Captain Jack’s and Blues Brothers concentrates and hashish.

And even though he’s managing a busy business in a lucrative, competitive indus try, Belushi never gets sidetracked from his true mission: “I realized the other day that my whole life has been acting and singing. The purpose was to make people feel good. And in that process, I would feel good. I’ve found the same mag ic here. This plant makes people feel good, feel better. And I feel good and better for being part of it. I love the magic of this plant. I’ve always been chasing the magic.”

Texas Hemp Summit

BY SHAYDA TORABI, EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBER- TEXAS HEMP COALITION

Texas Hemp Coalition, the premier advocacy group for the hemp industry in Texas, is hosting its inaugural B2B industry event, The Texas Hemp Summit, this November 11-12, 2022 at the Texas A&M Agrilife Center in College Station..

The event is poised to bring together B2B industry leaders from all across Texas and beyond to discuss farming, process ing, cannabinoids, fiber, and retail topics concerning hemp operators through edu cational conversations and presentations.

The goal of the summit is to address trending issues that are directly impacting our state’s hemp operators, as well as be a learning opportunity for those looking to get into the industry and scale.

Anyone who is interested in getting more involved in the industry, launching a brand, scaling their business, or who may be seeking job opportunities is encouraged to attend.

During these two days, the Texas Hemp Summit will pack keynote presentations, panel discussions, as well as networking opportunities for attendees to get plugged into the most pressing subjects relevant to their passions, and business interests.

Confirmed speakers are:

• Keynote with the Texas Department of Agriculture, Sid Miller

• A legal fireside chat with Lisa Pittman of Pittman Legal and Cameron Field of Michael Best

• Overview of Texas A&M University Hemp field research with Dr. Russell Jessup

And more to be confirmed, so check the website for more details.

The event has industry support from: Flex Payment Solutions, Shimadzu, Tejas Hemp, Caprock Family Farms, Sweet Sen

si, Drops of Life, Boveda, Agilent, Hemp Industries Association, Hemp Building Ventures, Michael Best, Haus of Jayne, and more who will also be in attendance to meet you and answer your questions in person during the summit.

Tickets are on sale now for $110 at the Ear ly Bird rate until October 24th, 2022 when they will increase in price, and the event is FREE to all students with valid student ID.

To learn more about the event, and pur chase tickets visit: TexasHempCoalition. com/SUMMIT

If you would like to explore membership opportunities, the Texas Hemp Coalition holds regular meetings to discuss pressing topics and would love to invite you to join us as an official member to help champion and advocate for hemp in Texas TexasHempCo alition.org/MEMBERSHIP

CAN YOU GET INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR YOUR CANNABIS BUSINESS?

BY LISA L. PITTMAN, PITTMAN LEGAL, AUSTIN, TEXAS

Insurance coverage is complicated. An insurance policy can consist of a couple hundred pages that include numerous coverage forms; lists of defined terms of great legal significance such as “occurrence,” “property damage,” and “bodily injury;” pages of exclusions; pages of endorsements that modify the coverage forms; and riders that condition or limit the coverage. A declarations page summarizes the coverage, defines who the insured is (also an issue in coverage cases), and states the various monetary limits to various types of coverage. It takes reviewing a policy numerous times, with post-its, a marker and a highlighter, to conclude what is actually covered and not covered. This was not easy for me, as an attorney trained in scouring insurance policies and then litigating them for over a decade, so I cannot imagine how daunting this process is for a small business owner.

When an insured sues an insurer for refusing to pay a claim, it is referred to as a “first party” or in some states, a “bad faith” lawsuit. The claims are usually breach of contract, deceptive trade practices, and applicable statutory and common law claims. The court will be tasked with determining whether there is coverage by following several tenets of insurance law. Interpretation of an insurance policy is a question of law. The court is limited to reviewing the plain language of the insurance policy, casting all ambiguities in favor of the insured,

with the facts of the loss, or in the case of an active lawsuit or the duty to defend an insured, the types of allegations in the petition made against the insured. Extrinsic evidence is only allowed when the policy language is ambiguous. This is called the 8 corners rule: the 4 corners of the policy, compared with the 4 corners of the complaint.

The burden of proof is on the insured to show coverage, and on the insurer to prove an exclusion to coverage. In the case of cannabis coverage cases, the court also has to determine the impact of conflicting federal and/ or state law on the situation – some policies, even when knowingly insuring marijuana businesses, have exclusions for violations of federal law/policy, controlled substances exclusions, or even specific marijuana exclusions –despite that being the purpose of the policy. An insurer will argue either that coverage has not been triggered, or that an exclusion precludes coverage, or both! If an insurer loses one of these cases, they can be assessed up to treble damages in most states. If the insured can demonstrate issues of material fact exist about the nature of the loss, then the insurer cannot win summary judgment as a matter of law and the case will go to a jury to decide. Juries hate insurance companies.

Securing insurance coverage to begin with is no walk in the park either. Marijuana and hemp are considered high risk, in a similar category to topless

bars, liquor, and guns. These “specialty” coverages are typically insured by excess and surplus lines of insurance that cater to these unique risks. No A rated admitted carriers currently provide cannabis coverage. Other complications in evaluating coverage options include, sometimes the premiums and deductibles are too high to maintain the coverage, the limits are too low to justify it, a specific product is not covered (like delta 8), or the exclusions eat up the policy. There are brokers that specialize in these markets and it is possible to secure some coverage if you know where to look. This article is going to survey the past twenty years of notable cannabis coverage disputes.

Both hemp and policy nerds can rejoice at this one…In Bogard v. Cty. Mut. Ins. Co. , 1 a fire occurred in the home of the insured while he was manufacturing a hemp salve in Oregon in 2017. The insurer denied the claim based on the Controlled Substances exclusion since the Total THC of one of the harvests was .381%, and therefore, marijuana. Thus, the court was faced with squaring Oregon hemp law before the 2018 Farm Bill, with federal law which had not yet distinguished between hemp and

1 No. 1:19-CV-00705-AA, 2021 WL 4269991, at *5 (D. Or. Sept. 20, 2021).

marijuana, with two different standards for measuring Total THC in a substance involving two harvests. At issue was whether THCA should be included in the Total THC calculation, which at that time was used by Oregon state law, but not federal law. Testing from the 2017 Harvest showed compliant levels of delta-9 THC, but .435% THCA using the Oregon regulation, and when multiplied by .877 and added to the calculation, the Total THC became .381%. The 2018 Harvest delta-9 THC was .0365%, the THCA was .254%, resulting in Total THC of .259%. No lawyer likes to do math so the Court held that since the insurance policy did not reference Oregon’s standards for Total THC calculation, the simple and later adopted U.S. Farm Bill definition of hemp as containing less than .3% THC by dry weight applied, and therefore the substance was hemp and not a controlled substance, so the insurance company had to cover the loss. 2

The next case demonstrates the creativity required in arguments with an insurance company. In Am. Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., S.I. v. Big Bush Farms LLC , 3 the court evaluated whether there was a duty to defend an insured in a lawsuit alleging breach of contract, conversion, and unjust enrichment resulting from a failed business deal involving faulty seeds which caused a lower yield of industrial hemp. The insurer refused to defend, citing the exclusion to the definition of “property damage” for “physical injury to marijuana or cannabis plants … even if legal in your state.” The insurer argued

2 “The federal regulatory standards did not yet exist at the time of the loss or when Defendant denied Plaintiffs' claim and are not referenced or incorporated into the Policy. Rather, the Policy references only 21 U.S.C. §§ 811 and 812 and those statutes, by further reference to 7 U.S.C. § 1639o(1), define hemp as cannabis containing 0.3% or less “delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol” by dry weight. By the strictest reading of the statutes' plain terms, this might exclude THCA from consideration entirely. At best, it is ambiguous about whether THCA should be considered. And if THCA is to be considered, the statutes themselves provide no standard for converting THCA to delta-9 THC by decarboxylation.” Id. at *5.

3 No. 6:19-CV-1725-MK, 2020 WL 6038048, at *1 (D. Or. Apr. 7, 2020),  report and recommendation adopted, No. 6:19-CV-1725-MK, 2020 WL 4346936 (D. Or. July 29, 2020).

that hemp is cannabis and therefore excluded. The insured cleverly pointed out that no physical damage to cannabis plants were alleged, rather, due to the low yield from the bad seeds, the plaintiff was deprived of the possession of the hemp and the resultant harm from the “loss of use of tangible property,” which is included in the definition of “property damage.” Unfortunately, the Court held that since the policy excludes coverage for physical injury to cannabis plants, the “loss of use” coverage for those plants was also excluded.

Are butane fires covered causes of loss? It depends on the policy, but in Laber v. Nationwide Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. , 4 , the insurer successfully relied on a residential exclusion for “increased hazard,” which was defined as any loss occurring while a hazard is increased by a means within the control and knowledge of the insured.” The court explained that the actions of the insured in manufacturing hash with butane in his home was an increase in hazard, thus the significant claim for destruction of three apartment buildings was denied.

In Kinsale Ins. Co. v. JDBC Holdings, Inc. , 5 , the insurer sought rescission of the insurance policy after a chemical fire resulting from hemp manufacturing occurred, due to several exclusions, one being the “procedural safeguard” endorsement concerning theft. This endorsement provides that if certain protective equipment were not installed by the insured, that the policy is terminated. The Court disregarded this endorsement as inapplicable since it only pertained to theft. Then, the insurer argued that coverage will not issue when there is a misrepresentation on the insurance application, which the insurer argued fell under the “concealment, misrepresentation, or fraud” exclusion. When the insured applied for coverage, they wrote the sprinklers were “being installed,” when installation had not

4 No. 118CV00420MSMPAS, 2020 WL 555247, at *1 (D.R.I. Feb. 4, 2020).

5 No. 3:20-CV-8, 2021 WL 2773002, at *1 (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 31, 2021), motion to certify appeal granted, No. 3:20-CV-8, 2021 WL 2773003 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 29, 2021),  reconsideration denied, No. 3:20-CV-8, 2021 WL 5240853 (N.D.W. Va. July 7, 2021).

begun yet, and still was not completely in place at the time of the fire. The court held that since the insured admitted the sprinklers were only being installed and the insurer accepted the coverage and took the premium, that the insurer had a duty to pay the claim.

JDBC Holdings, Inc. also dealt with the pollution exclusion, which the insurer argued also barred coverage of the claim because the chemicals exuded from the fire constituted seepage of smoke from a hazardous substance. The Court disagreed, holding smoke damage is a covered loss under the policy, and to the extent this is ambiguous, it had to be resolved in favor of the insured. The Court also admonished that, “an exclusion in a general business liability policy should not be so construed as to ‘strip the insured of protection against risks incurred in the normal operation of his business,’ especially when the insurer was aware of the nature of the insured’s normal operations when the policy was sold.”

An insurer asserting multiple possible bases to deny coverage, even if not the one originally relied upon by the insurer, is extremely common.

Very similar facts and holding can also be found in the Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. McDermott , 6 case; however the Court in that case held that the failure to notify the insurance company of butane marijuana extraction in a house’s basement that burned down due to that activity voided the coverage because the insured knowingly omitting a material fact about a change in use of the policy as required by an endorsement. The court also referenced the increased hazard and intentional acts exclusions to deny coverage, and held that the conversion of the basement into a marijuana extraction business created liability for the insurance carrier that it did not assume.

In Barnett v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., 7 , the insured sought coverage for marijuana plants seized and destroyed by police in this 2011 case. The policy did not define theft or stolen. But, the Court held these terms

6 603 F. App'x 374 (6th Cir. 2015).

7 200 Cal. App. 4th 536, 539, 132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 742, 744 (2011)

have well understood meanings. Coverage depended on the interpretation of the nature of the theft – the Court noted theft must include an intent to steal the property. Noting the insured could not show that the police intended to steal the marijuana, the Court held no theft occurred. Moreover, the Court held the insured was not entitled to get the marijuana back, especially once the insured was charged criminally in the matter for having too many plants.

In Tracy v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co ., 8 a Hawaii caregiver sought coverage for stolen marijuana plants under her homeowners policy. While the Court noted that her having too many plants might void coverage under state law, and that the insured had an insurable interest in the plants, it concluded there was no coverage because marijuana is still a Schedule One, federally illegal plant, rendering the policy void against federal law/policy. The policy’s exclusion stated there was no coverage for claims relating to the use, sale, manufacture, or delivery of marijuana.

In Green Earth Wellness Ctr., LLC v. Atain Specialty Ins. Co., 9 the insured sought coverage following a nearby wildfire, contending the smoke damaged mother plants, flower plants, vege plants, clones, and finished product. The insured believed the plants would be covered under “stock,” meaning: “merchandise held in storage or for sale, raw materials and in process or finished goods.”

Because the defined term “raw material” was ambiguous under the policy, it was construed in favor of the insured here. However, the Court ruled that “growing crops” exclusion negated coverage. At issue were whether the various life cycles of plants were considered growing crops, since the plants were potted rather than free standing attached to the earth –but, the Court held that growing crops includes mother plants and clones, and therefore coverage was excluded.

In Bowers v. Farmers Ins. Exch ., 10 the

8 No. CIV. 11-00487 LEK, 2012 WL 928186, at *13 (D. Haw. Mar. 16, 2012).

9 163 F. Supp. 3d 821, 823 (D. Colo. 2016).

10 99 Wash. App. 41, 991 P.2d 734 (2000), as amended on reconsideration (Mar. 7, 2000).

insured sued his insurer for refusing to pay a claim under the landlord’s insurance policy for mold damage caused by the destruction of a basement marijuana grow of which the landlord was not aware. The Court denied coverage on the basis that the tenant’s actions in the basement constituted vandalism, which was an excluded loss in the policy, and that tenant’s actions were a proximate cause of the loss.

This survey is but a small smattering of the coverage issues plaguing cannabis businesses. Other common exclusions in a cannabis insurance policy include violation of ordinance or law, contraband, outdoor plants, criminal acts, employee dishonesty, health hazard, vaping, fungus, RICO, and intoxication. The exclusions discussed by the cases in this paper include controlled substances, cannabis/hemp/ marijuana plants, procedural safeguards, increased hazard, intentional acts, concealment/misrepresentation/fraud, pollution, void against federal law/policy; sale/manufacture/delivery of marijuana, growing plants, vandalism, and mold. Some policies will contain endorsements or exclusions for certain products, like tea or coffee, for example, when those are common substances infused with hemp CBD. It is therefore necessary to comb every page of the policy to assess whether it is the right one for you – the insured will be held to have understood and known

what they agreed to in accepting the policy language in the insurance contract.

As time goes by and there is more historical data, and if federal legalization in some form happens, it will become easier to obtain coverage, less riddled with exclusions, and at better prices. Until then, coverage is limited to a few carriers, and the customers must diligently review the proposed insurance policy to determine whether the coverage sought is contained in the policy. Brokers and lawyers familiar with insurance coverage can help elucidate what is and is not in the policy. There are also pros and cons to weigh in deciding to file a claim to begin with. The case law should further develop as more first party lawsuits are filed by cannabis businesses, for denials of claims just like any other business. Most insurance coverage cases are filed in federal court, and it should be noted here that these courts have not shied away from marijuana related claims just because of the federal illegality – courts still apply the applicable state law underlying the dispute in the same manner as they would decide any other case.

I look to make my next niche the niche niche niche area of cannabis insurance coverage cases. If you have any questions about a policy or the process, feel free to give me a call. Insurance is dreadful, no doubt about it; but, it is necessary to protect your business.

ROCKET SEEDS: INTERVIEW

BY STACEY LOVETT

How did Rocket Seeds start as a business and what was the vision?

Rocket Seeds started up roughly 5 years back in Los Angeles Ca.

It was created with the vision of having all the seed banks under one roof like amazon but for only cannabis seeds.

Tell me a little bit about the backstory of the company and what your position is with them.

It begin when Crop King Seeds was introduced to the States by the founder, then brought along other Canadian-based seed banks. It was here in LA when our CEO Landra came up with Rocket Seeds and I have been with the company for over a year now. I started in an entry-level job and then became Marketing Director/ Social Media Manager. I knew nothing about growing or even about cannabis.

I have learned a lot about this growing business. (No pun intended ) It’s crazy to think people really overlook seeds and honestly, they are important.

How does the concept of a seed bank work?

Seed banks usually develop cannabis strains OR outsource them thru a trusted breeder to get high-quality seeds. Seed banks usually sell to commercial and indi vidual growers. But we have seen a rise in the wholesale side as Retail stores want to have seed packs available at their location/s. The individual grower now has options as to what strain they would like to grow next, and the options are endless: shipped directly to their doorstep discreetly or walk straight into a hydro store, smoke shop, etc. and pick up a pack!

How does it work with both interstate and worldwide commerce with the varying laws?

The statement the DEA put out stated that cannabis seeds containing less an 0.3% are legally hemp and they are legal. None of our seeds have THC in them TILL cultivated. So we recommend the buyer to know their state laws regarding cultivation.

What varieties does Rocket Seeds offer?

We have a large variety of different strains; Regulars, Fast Version, CBD, Hemp, Feminized & Auto flowers.

Regulars - these seeds have a 50/50% chance of being either. Sometimes, how ever, they can also produce intersex plants. We recommend these to experi

enced growers as these seeds can be used to create new genetic profiles.

Feminized- Just as it sounds these only produce female plants. They are more desirable as they produce more working substances such as THC and CBD than male plants. We recommend this type of seed to growers with some experience.

Auto-flower- Are easy to grow and easy to maintain as they are canna bis strains cross-bred with rudera lis. Perfect for small places indoor or outdoor with a short flowering time.

Fast Version- similar to Autos but these offer a slightly larger yield and can be cloned for mother plants.

CBD/HEMP - what makes this different from Hemp seeds is that CBD contains cannabinoid content as hemp doesn’t not. And CBD Is usually used as a treatment for a variety of reasons.

You can still consume both but you won’t get high.

You all provide a great deal of education through your blogs - what are some effects you’ve seen in that side of your company with what that brings to both consumers and your business?

The effect that we noticed from our educational blogs is that we do get a lot of novice growers feeling ready to try their hand at cultivating. We are glad to give that confi dence thru this and also have a list of recommended grow ing sites we promote so you can get all the information you need.

We really want our custom ers to thrive.

Hemp digital microscopy:

Trichome size, maturity, & anthocyanin content

BY RUSSELL JESSUP

Digital microscopy continues to provide increasingly pow erful tools for observation of Cannabis trichomes. Valuable details regarding trichome ma turity, quality, abundance, size, and associated phytochemi cals can be rapidly obtained for plant breeders, extractors, dispensaries, and consumers. Recent improvements in cellphone mounted microscope attachments are further link ing these advances with image analysis software tools.

An undergraduate student researcher at the Texas A&M University’s Industrial Hemp Breeding Program (Meredith Clay) has begun to use a miniature microscope (iMicro: http:// www.mobile-scope.com/) that can attach to the camera on a smartphone and analyze the trichomes found on hemp plants. The iMicro Q has a zoom capacity of 200x to 1000x as well as a built-in smartphone application.

Hemp trichomes can be found on the bracts/flower, leaves, and stems on both male and female plants. Trichomes are

comprised of silica and not only provide protection from pests but also contain valuable cannabinoids, terpenes, and other phytochemicals. Glandular types of trichomes are commonly found on fe male hemp bracts/ flowers and specifically contain cannabinoids. Capitate-stalked trichomes can be identified by their nar row, tall stalk and bulbous head. Both the size and relative abundance of these glan dular trichomes can be used as indicators of potential cannabinoid yield.

As the plants mature, the color of the bul bous trichome heads transition from clear/ transparent (immature, low yield) to cloudy/ opaque (approaching maturity, increasing yield) and further to amber/ brown (ap proaching overmature, maximum yield) due to the oxidation of the phytochemicals and secondary metabolites.

Digital photographs enlarged and enhanced via microscopy can precisely gauge this pro gression and ratio of trichomes across ma turity stages, allowing farmers to accurately determine the optimum harvest time.

As one example of additional phyto chemicals of inter est, trichomes have also been found to accumulate antho cyanins.

These compounds are powerful antiox idants and generally appear red in color.

The digital micros copy methods being evaluated provide effective tools to directly visualize and select for this trait.

All of the image metrics taken for tri chome size, maturity, and anthocyanin content are being extended to automated image analysis software tools by Ms. Clay and others in the industrial hemp breeding program. The goal is development of lowcost, rapid screening applications to serve hemp industries.

Made

exclusive

CBD space. This premium formula

keep you focused on growing your business

we take care of your payment processing needs.

a merchant in an industry not every bank

it is important to choose partners who know how to keep your CBD business compliant

operational.

ABOUT SUSAN HAYSCANDIDATE FOR TEXAS AG

Texas has two big names on the ballot for AG Commissioner in November. Meet the incumbent challenger, Susan Hays.

BY JESSE WILLIAMS - TEXAS CANNABIS COLLECTIVE. TWITTER: @WILLIAMSJESSEM

If you’ve been in the cannabis space since Texas went hemp, you likely know of her. If you don’t, at least one other person in your connection for hemp in Texas does. Susan Hays is a prolific attorney in Texas that has been at the forefront of cannabis legislation for quite some time. Hays was heavily involved in the crafting of the original language of the Texas hemp bill HB1325 in the 86th regular legislative session.

Susanwas named the first cannabis Super Lawyer® in the state of Texas, and continues to be a top attorney in the state of Texas on the topic.

Hays has been involved in many other highly prolific cases in the state such as issues with voting in the state and women’s healthcare.

Hays latest case she was involved in re volved around the smokable hemp ban lan guage from DSHS and created by the legis lature with HB1325. The state ruled that the legislature’s language was constitutional per the state constitution and federal guidance, but that the DSHS language would have its injunction upheld as the agency dropped their argument. Hays has stated there are limits on what DSHS can add. So it’s likely that they realized they were possibly exceed ing their limits as an agency.

Susan’s family has been ranching in the West Texas areas since shortly after the Civil War in the US. She’s a fifth-generation Tex an. She and her husband own land outside of Alpine Texas which is southwest of Fort Stockton where they have been experiment ing with growing both hemp and hops. She’s noted that her family over the years had started to find a balance between farming/ ranching and becoming educated in other industries in order to continue their legacy in the area. Her generation being the ones

that left the area for the cities to get higher education and better paying wages. The area has been known for cattle and cotton. Americans and Texans have not only seen the global economy change, but the Tex as economy as well. Along with changing geographical issues that have been arising from recurring droughts in Texas, Hays has seen the need for farmers and ranchers to diversify what they grow or raise. Being dependent on one or two items alone will eventually cause a town and its residents to suffer long term.

On the issue of cannabis though, Hays really dispels the notion that moving the plant towards a legalization direction is a so cietal disaster waiting to happen. A phrase advocates have used is that the sky is not falling from legalizing anywhere. And Susan is quick to point that out as well. The writing is on the wall. All Texas has to do is read it and be smart about expanding cannabis laws, and Susan feels she is best equipped to do just that as an attorney who understands agriculture.

Susan notes that leadership roles in Texas with their failure to deal with cannabis re form the right way has caused issues. Their failure to adequately fund criminal justice has created a void in the state’s ability to identify and test dangerous black market products. Susan has pointed out several

times in discussions that funding for police education and training is vital to the success of these programs and the safety of the citi zens in the state as well. When these mech anisms aren’t utilized correctly the market will always fill a void where there is money to be made. Hays points out that Texas’s failure to get ahead of the market only al lows the black market to expand while good cannabis operators are at a disadvantage.

She’s publicly stated as well that our foren sic crime labs in the state are seriously un derfunded. These same labs lack the ability to test mystery substances or do full spec trum analysis on possibly dangerous items such as black-market vape pens. These same labs are already having difficulty processing rape kits and dangerous drugs quickly.

Hays has positioned herself that the state of Texas needs to fund criminal justice and legalize cannabis the right way. Susan be lieves that a healthy cannabis regulatory regime should focus on some core values:

• Cannabis should not be regulated more heavily than other products un less there is a valid scientific, medical, or public safety reason to do so.

• The regime should promote public health and safety while creating eco nomic opportunity for as many Texans as possible.

• Regulations and taxation should ac complish a clear goal without eco nomically burdening the industry - or patients.

As Susan Hays puts it: Farming is hard, ethics should be easy.

INTERVIEW: Austinite Cannabis Co.

BY RUSSELL DOWDEN WITH ESTELLA CASTRO

su matches, rap shows, and more. If you would like to host an event in collabora tion with us, reach out to our instagram, call our store number or stop by and chat with our staff!

Texas Hemp Reporter: What are some of the biggest sellers?

Texas Hemp Reporter: Estella, like many people in the space your introduction to cannabis was for medical reasons can you elaborate on that experience?

ACC: We began our cannabis journey with hemp. With pain meds being pre scribed so commonly, we wanted to give our community a healthier and more nat ural, non-addictive way to relieve pain and inflammation. We have now expand ed into Oklahoma where cannabis is med ically legal. We hold three licenses and have begun processing our own products. There are not many in the hemp game that make it out of their home state, let alone be able to hold both manufacturing and retail licenses.

Texas Hemp Reporter: How long have you been open in East Austin?

ACC: We have only been open for two years. Our two year anniversary was this year (2022) on August 31th, in this short time we have obtained multiple hemp li censes as well as multiple cannabis licens es in both Texas and Oklahoma.

Texas Hemp Reporter: I understand you have events, comedy and more happenings at Austin Cannabis Co. would you like to elaborate?

ACC: We love hosting events for our community! As true Austinites it is our mission to give back. We try to have a comedy show once a month, we also host events from vender markets, jiu jit

ACC: Our top sellers are always our CBD roll ons. They are 2000mg of CBD infused with menthol to give a similar feeling of icyhot. The menthol + CBD work together to relieve both pain and inflammation. Our gummies are also very popular, we continuously have trouble keeping them on the shelf. Do you know how mind blowing it is to order thousands of gummies at a time and still selling out !?

Texas Hemp Reporter: I understand you’re also in business in Oklohoma’s Cannabis Community. Can you share your experience in that space with readers?

ACC: I’ll start by saying it isn’t for any one. It took months of driving back and forth not always knowing that we were going to succeed. It literally took blood, sweat, tears, and many sacrifices. It took our whole family to make this successful. Our son entered the cannabis community at 18. He is full time running our Austin store just so we have the time to manage our other two stores in Oklahoma. While many kids are partying our son is starting an empire.

Texas Hemp Reporter: We are seeing that many of our retailers are now offering THEIR OWN BRANDs in the stores they own. Do you offer your own brand of CBD health brands at your stores?

ACC: Of course we do. Austinite prides itself over the quality of our products. We carry our Austinite roll on lotions,

salves, CBD gummies, CBN gummies, D8 gummies, D9 + CBD gummies, Pre-rolls, tinctures, merch and accessories. And that is just a few of our in house products.

Texas Hemp Reporter: What is your thought about the Texas legislature’s lack of movement in cannabis this last session and do you think we will get better lawmakers in office that will move cannabis forward?

ACC: We can only hope. Texas knows legalization is inevitable. They may be trying to postpone legalization however they cannot prevent it. Our time is com ing, it is just a matter of when. However we could not wait any longer, which is why we stepped our foot into Oklahoma’s medically legal cannabis. With the all of the licenses we hold, we hope to be one of if not the first legal dispensary in Austin Texas.

Texas Hemp Reporter: This slow moving cannabis regulatory is what lead you to moving into business in Oklahoma isn’t it?

ACC: Yes. We could not wait any lon ger. A Lot of our competition is doing great here in Texas running their CBD business, however it is D9 THC that we are most interested in. When cannabis becomes legal here in Texas there will be many dispensaries that stay as CBD shops however our goal is to be one of the first dispensaries in Austin Texas.

Texas Hemp Reporter: Tell readers about some upcoming events you have planned there at the Austin Cannabis Co. and how folks can stop by for a short visit and learn more about the store.

Austinite host Monthly comedy events can recently our jujitsu event last month.... our comedy showcase is alot of fun you can go online to get your tickets now! Follow our instagram @austinitecanna bis_co to stay up to date with giveaways and events

Texas Hemp Reporter: What happened with the production of Big Texas Hemp?

ACC: This is actually a sensitive subject because unfortunately we lost a canna bis friend through the production of Big Texas Hemp… long story short Austini te sponsored a huge chunk of Big Tex as Hemps production. As many people might know the account is run by Grow House Media on Instagram. Unfortunate ly the production failed. We did our part with the funding however the production team on their end failed. Last we heard there was talk of their documentary be ing sold to netlix or hulu however it has been over a year that Big Texas Hemp has updated us on our investment as well as even post on instagram about any up dates of their documentary. We almost went into partnership with Grow House when we expanded into Oklahoma and thank god we didnt. They had their lawyer

write up a contract that stated that we had absolutely no say in what we were investing in. They wanted to take all of our investment and do what they wished with no approval or partnership from us. The contract also stated that they would be able to fire anyone they wanted without our permission once again. This one re ally hit home because our entire austinite staff is our immediate family. My son, both of my daughter,my daughters boy friend, we have a family friend working with us. I could not imagine having my daughter or son fired and having no say in that decision. Ultimately we can no longer support growhouse or Big Texas hemp.

Texas Hemp Reporter: Thanks for your time . . . . any special shout outs to the Texas cannabis community?

Thanks for all the love and support, just remember we’re not done yet.

Military’s Fake Press Conference Warns Against CBD-Infused Burritos And Cat Shampoo For Service Members

BY KYLE JAEGER | MARIJUANA MOMENT |

The U.S. military has taken great pains to communicate to service members that CBD is off limits. And, apparently at one point, that included staging and filming a fictional press conference on the policy, where questions touched on hypotheticals like the eating cannabisinfused burritos and washing cats with CBD shampoos.

Reporter #2: So that would be a no?

DOD spokesperson: That’s be a definite no.

Reporter #3: What if it’s in a ganjaguac burrito with CBD aioli at Nacho Camacho’s?

DOD spokesperson: The sauce has CBD in it?

Reporter #3: Yes.

DOD spokesperson: Then no, the service member cannot eat that.

Reporter #4: What about dandruff shampoo for cats with that amazing CBD enhancer?

Around the time that the Department of Defense (DOD) codified its rules around the non-intoxicating cannabinoid in 2019, the military released the fake “CBD Policy Press Conference,” which it described as a “humorous look” at the serious policy.

The department isn’t newly publicizing this three-year-old video, but it recent ly showed up on a web search result that Marijuana Moment picked up on. And in the interest of informing the public, we couldn’t in good conscience let this one go unnoticed.

Numerous military branches have ad dressed CBD use in the years since—and some, like the Air Force, have discussed the ban in lighthearted terms—but the DOD production took the idea of a cannabis PSA to a new level.

Here’s the transcript of the fictional military news briefing on CBD: DOD spokesperson: Thank you for coming today. We just want to reiterate that the DOD’s policy on CBD is that it cannot be used by service members for any reason due to its unregulated nature and the possibility of THC. If a service member has a positive drug test, CBD is not a valid excuse. I can now take a few questions.

Reporter #1: What about CBD oil?

DOD spokesperson: Again, service members cannot take any kind of CBD— food, oils, lotions, et cetera.

Reporter #2: What about CBD lotion?

DOD spokesperson: That would fall into the classification of any kind of CBD.

DOD spokesperson: Service members cannot use any type of CBD. I would suggest the cat learn to clean itself, which I was under the impression that’s pretty much all they do in the first place…. Wow. Read my lips. No CBD. No exceptions. Those are the rules. It’s not worth losing your career.

This is all responsive to a federal policy change. When Congress passed the 2018 Farm Bill, hemp and its derivatives like CBD were federally legalized, opening up a large commercial market for the cannabinoid.

After its initial 2019 announcement (and the release of this video), DOD more broadly reaffirmed that CBD is off limits to service members in earlier notices pub lished in 2020.

About one year after hemp was federally legalized, the Air Force sent out a notice that similarly warned against using CBD products that are commonly found on the market. A Massachusetts base of the Air Force told pilots last year that they could face disciplinary action for possessing

any type of hemp product, even if it’s “for your pet.”

Officials with the military branch also said the previous year that it wants its members to be extra careful around “grandma’s miracle sticky buns” that might contain marijuana.

The Navy, for its part, issued an ini tial notice in 2018 informing ranks that they’re barred from using CBD and hemp products no matter their legality. Then in 2020 it released an update explaining why it enacted the rule change.

The Naval War College has gone so far as to warn Sailors and Marines about new hemp products on the market, issuing a notice ear lier this month that says members can drink a new Pepsi-owned Rockstar energy drink that contains hemp seed oil.

The Coast Guard said that sailors can’t use marijuana or visit state-legal dispensaries.

A factor that may have influenced these policy updates is that the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration released guidance to federal agency drug pro gram coordinators in 2019 that outlined con cerns about THC turning up in CBD products and causing failed drug tests. The agency is sued an updated warning in 2020 after several more states voted to legalize marijuana.

That said, a general recently said that the Air Force and Space Force are reviewing marijuana policies and are considering a “common sense” change that could give potential recruits a pass if they test posi tive for cannabis.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Vet erans Affairs (VA) has separately faced criticism over its stance on cannabis is sues.

In March, for example, VA made clear that it won’t provide support for treat ment involving marijuana as part of a new grants program aimed at preventing veteran suicide.

VA’s position on marijuana has been a source of consistent frustration for advo cates and veteran service organizations who have been pushing for expanded re search into the therapeutic potential of cannabis.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Gives Marijuana Activists Temporary Win As They Fight For Legalization Ballot Placement

BY KYLE JAEGER | MARIJUANA MOMENT |

The Oklahoma Supreme Court is delaying its decision on whether a marijuana legalization initiative that was certified by the state last week will appear on the November ballot, drawing mixed reactions from activists and lawmakers.

Oklahomans for Sensible Marijuana Laws (OSML) submitted more than enough sig natures to qualify their measure last month, and they also accepted ballot title language revisions from the state attorney general be fore the secretary of state’s office certified the signatures last week.

The problem is, there are more procedural steps that the campaign must clear, including a 10-day period in which anyone can chal lenge the initiative’s text, before formal ballot placement can be assured. State officials have argued that the campaign risked missing bal lot printing cutoff dates, however, despite the signature certification. Activists have filed a lawsuit arguing that the deadlines suggested by state officials are “arbitrary,” and are asking the Supreme Court to force the state to put the measure before voters in November.

A major contention in the case is the fact that the secretary of state’s ballot verification process was outsourced to a third party for the first time this year, and activists argued the company slow-walked the signature certification, potentially jeopardizing their ability to meet the printing deadline.

In a June letter, Oklahoma Election Board Secretary Paul Ziriax further asserted that the governor would have needed to issue an ex ecutive proclamation to officially certify any ballot initiative by last Friday. But advocates have pushed back on that interpretation.

On Monday, the court, in a 5-4 decision, said it was assuming jurisdiction of the case and that the dispute would be “held in abeyance because the time period for filing objections to either the signatures or the ballot title has not yet expired.” That means that the justices are not ready to decide on the central question and will wait until the normal ballot placement process works itself out before weighing in.

For now, that’s welcome news for OSML, though it also raises questions about how state officials will react when it comes to preparing ballots in the meantime.

At this stage, the court could have simply issued a declaration that the campaign failed to have their petition processed in time, keeping it off the ballot. But rather than take that action, it’s temporarily letting the measure proceed through the normal challenge process despite state officials arguing that key deadlines have already passed.

Julia Kirt (D) Tweeted:

The OK Supreme Court will not rule on the State Question 820 proponents’ request that the State Election Board place the question on the ballot because the time period for filing objections to the petition’s signatures or ballot title has not yet expired:

will appear on the November ballot, drawing mixed reactions from activists and lawmakers.

Oklahomans for Sensible Marijuana Laws (OSML) submitted more than enough sig natures to qualify their measure last month, and they also accepted ballot title language revisions from the state attorney general be fore the secretary of state’s office certified the signatures last week.

The problem is, there are more procedural steps that the campaign must clear, including a 10-day period in which anyone can chal lenge the initiative’s text, before formal ballot placement can be assured. State officials have argued that the campaign risked missing bal lot printing cutoff dates, however, despite the signature certification. Activists have filed a lawsuit arguing that the deadlines suggested by state officials are “arbitrary,” and are asking the Supreme Court to force the state to put the measure before voters in November.

A major contention in the case is the fact that the secretary of state’s ballot verification process was outsourced to a third party for the first time this year, and activists argued the company slow-walked the signature certi fication, potentially jeopardizing their ability to meet the printing deadline.

In a June letter, Oklahoma Election Board Secretary Paul Ziriax further asserted that the governor would have needed to issue an ex ecutive proclamation to officially certify any ballot initiative by last Friday. But advocates have pushed back on that interpretation.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court is delaying its decision on whether a marijuana legalization initiative that was certified by the state last week

On Monday, the court, in a 5-4 decision, said it was assuming jurisdiction of the case and that the dispute would be “held in abeyance because the time period for filing objections to either the signatures or the ballot title has not yet expired.” That means that the justices are not ready to decide on the central question and will wait until the normal ballot placement process works itself out before weighing in.

For now, that’s welcome news for OSML, though it also raises questions about how state officials will react when it comes to preparing ballots in the meantime.

At this stage, the court could have simply issued a declaration that the campaign failed to have their petition processed in time, keep ing it off the ballot. But rather than take that action, it’s temporarily letting the measure proceed through the normal challenge pro cess despite state officials arguing that key deadlines have already passed.

In one of a pair of dissenting opinions that were filed, Justice Dustin Rowe said that he would have denied the petitioner’s request for emergency relief outright, complaining that the court’s order “does not provide clear di rections to Respondents as to how to proceed while the matter is held in abeyance.”

“Delaying this matter, which could culminate in changes to ballots which have already begun to be produced, undermines the Election Board’s capacity to fulfill its lawful obligation to voters and threatens the voting rights of portions of the electorate—particularly our men and women serving in uniform overseas,” the justice argued, referring to the fact that ballots much be printed early in order to have time to mail them to mil itary personnel across the world.

Nonetheless, because the court ultimately held the case in abeyance for now, the ballot title will be posted in a newspaper as early as Wednesday, kicking off a 10-day period where anyone can challenge the measure, an attorney representing the campaign told Marijuana Moment on Monday.

After that point, the court would need to re solve any challenges. If nobody contests the ini tiative—or the court resolves challenges that are submitted—it’s possible that the justices could force the state to print the measure on the ballot in spite of the now-passed deadlines.

Alternatively, however, it could decide after that 10-day challenge period that it sides with the state and the measure would not go before voters this November and could be delayed until the next state election.

Still, OSML is encouraged by the latest development.

“We are thrilled the court has officially rec ognized State Question 820 has more than enough valid signatures to be considered for the November 2022 ballot,” OSML Campaign Director Michelle Tilley said in a press re lease. “It appears the court is giving itself the opportunity to order SQ 820 on the ballot if we survive the protest period.”

Senior Campaign Advisor Ryan Kiesel said that advocates are “grateful for the Justices’ thoughtfulness and expediency adjudicating this urgent matter, in accordance with Article V, Section 3 of the Oklahoma Constitution.”

“We will follow the remaining process laid out in the law, as we always have,” Kiesel said.

A representative from the secretary of state’s office referred Marijuana Moment to the Board of Elections for comment or clarification on the new court order. A spokesperson for the elec tions board did not directly respond to the court’s latest filing, but told Marijuana Moment that last week’s report on statutory and practical ballot deadlines “is common practice.”

Meanwhile, several state lawmakers who are supportive of putting the question of legalization before voters took a less optimistic position on the court’s latest filing, with Rep. Forrest Bennett (D) accusing the governor of using “his power to stall the process” for the ballot reform.

“Disappointed that new delays and barriers have made our citizen-led state question pro cess harder,” Sen. Julia Kirt (D) said. “The peo ple should have a straightforward, consistent way to petition to put changes in the ballot.”

Here’s what the initiative would achieve if placed on the ballot and passed:

The measure would allow adults 21 and old er to purchase and possess up to one ounce of cannabis, grow up to six mature plants and six seedings for personal use. The current Okla homa Medical Marijuana Authority would be responsible for regulating the program and issuing cannabis business licenses.

A 15 percent excise tax would be imposed on adult-use marijuana products, with reve nue going to an “Oklahoma Marijuana Rev enue Trust Fund.”

The funds would first cover the cost of ad ministrating the program and the rest would be divided between municipalities where the sales occurred (10 percent), the State Judicial Re

volving Fund (10 percent), the general fund (30 percent), public education grants (30 percent) and grants for programs involved in substance misuse treatment and prevention (20 percent).

People serving in prison for activity made legal under the measure could “file a petition for resentencing, reversal of conviction and dismissal of case, or modification of judgment and sentence.” Those who’ve already served their sentence for such a conviction could also petition the courts for expungement.

OSML, which is being backed by the nation al New Approach PAC, is one of two citizen efforts to put legalization on the ballot that launched this year.

The other campaign, Oklahomans for Re sponsible Cannabis Action (ORCA), tried to challenge the constitutionality of OSML’s com peting measure on a single-subject basis, but the Supreme Court rejected the argument in April.

Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) claimed in his State of the State speech earlier this year that voters were mis lead when they passed an earlier 2018 initiative to legalize medical marijuana in the state, arguing that the measure may require legislative reform.

The governor said that the ballot question passed by voters “was misleading, and it has tied our hands as we regulate the industry.”

For his part, state Rep. Scott Fetgatter (R) said in an op-ed for Marijuana Moment that was published in March that states should legalize cannabis, but he wants to see the legislature craft thoughtful regulations for an adult-use program, rather than leave it to voters at the ballot.

Meanwhile, an Oklahoma Senate committee in April unanimously approved a House-passed bill to allow for the cultivation and administra tion of psilocybin by eligible institutions for re search purposes—but the version that senators advanced omits a broader decriminalization provision that had previously been included. The legislation was ultimately not enacted before the end of the session.

What, and More Importantly Who, Defines a Dose?

BY SHAYADA TORABI

I think we can all agree that when it comes to cannabis, less is more… unless, in fact, you are looking for more in that case you should absolutely learn what your ideal range is, and the only way to explore that is to consume more.

For first-timers or those less experienced, it really is best to start with a low dose and increase from there.

Cannabis is a tricky subject when it comes to gauging effectiveness because depending on what cannabinoid (or combinations of cannabinoids) you’re taking, what form factor, and of course how much, can all factor into how the consumer is going to feel.

But rather than getting entangled in answering “what is the right dose for me” because after all, I think most of us can agree it is subjective and based on a few different inputs the primary being your own unique biochemistry. The better question to be asking is “What Defines a Dose”? And more importantly to me “Who Defines a Dose”?

When you look at standard dosing of regulated adult-use marijuana, there are some parameters usually put in place that are pretty consistent market to market. We see edibles sold in no more than 100mg packs, with pieces or servings broken down into 10mg, 5mg, or even 2.5mg which in the industry is known as a “microdose”.

As a long-time cannabis consumer, I’ve been swirling around this idea for a while. Originally I had a peer question if most consumers are actually overdosing themselves. Not in the sense of a negative effect, but asking “How much is too much” to be coherent and functional doing day-to-day activities.

So it starts the rabbit hole of exploring, especially from a brand or manufacturing perspective, what can I legally do, and what humanly works best.

I think the majority of people looking to incorporate cannabis don’t want to be blitzed out of control, they are simply looking for relief from aches, a good night’s rest, and of course just relaxation as an alternative to other vices.

I think it is really important to start to understand why 10mg is the limit “per serving” and why 100mg is the limit “per item”. Is there some scientific evidence that 10mg is the best standard place to start? I think so many things in our industry are not based on anything substantial and are in fact, shots thrown in the dark that then we establish a whole market around it is mindboggling… hence this opinion piece.

When you look at it from a hemp lens, we are not capped on how many MG of a cannabinoid we put in “per serving” or “per item”. I’ve seen products with up to 1000mg of Delta 8 THC, without any sort of regulation or quality control of what that might to do someone in the wrong hands.

You also have to consider that CBD is nonpsychoactive and at 10mg will affect the same person differently than if it was 10mg of THC which we know is psychoactive, yet as an industry, we’re throwing around random numbers of effective mg that are inconsistent.

So I’m back at square one, I’m not sure if there is supposed to be a free for all when it comes to mg, and I’m also not sure who decides what

is the best dose or range of a dose for products to stay capped within.

Is there such a thing as too much? I’m honestly asking.

Another thought that cemented some of this was a recent conversation I had for the podcast with Lauren Gockley, the Co-Founder of CODA Signature, a Colorado-based edible manufacturer.

I recently got to try some of their THC, CBD, and CBN products and couldn’t help but notice they had one, in particular, that was called Strawberry Daydream, it was a 1:1 and they offer it in 5mg:5mg CBD to THC but they also offer it ibn 1mg:1mg CBD to THC which I thought was so fascinating given my curiosity with dosing as of late.

Lauren was sharing on the episode (which I highly recommend you listen to at tobebluntpod.com) about how difficult it has been to navigate marketing these lower dose products when the perception of a consumer, seasoned or not, is to buy the highest % of cannabinoids available to them.

I think our minds think we need and want the best bang for our buck so we always go with a higher percentage, because the reality is, you’re paying roughly the same price for less mg of these lower strength products.

But to bring it full circle, just because we can buy more, does that mean it’s better for us, and what would happen if we just took 1mg of THC at a time, versus 2.5mg, 5mg, or 10mg, etc?

And so I wanted to challenge this idea, to explore what and who are defining doses. Is it regulators placing some arbitrary cap for safety precautions or is it brands who are looking to differentiate themselves from the competition, or is it simply creating new avenues for new consumers to explore cannabis in an even more microdose and personal experience to help them get to exactly where they want to be?

trigger-ready soldiers in front a pair in back might prove more difficult than a dispensary staffed by four persons with liberal arts de grees who’ve never even thrown a punch, let alone operated a firearm in defense of their business and life.

Few cannabis dispensaries opt to staff these contractors full-time at the door of cannabis stores. Instead, they reserve their services largely for the transportation of large quan tities of cannabis, and cash that federal regu lations precludes from entering many states’ banking systems.

Unprofessional Thieves are ShootingUp, Pistol-Whipping, and Terrorizing Dispensaries at Record Levels

Perhaps armed robbers like Mister Jacker view cannabis dispensaries as too high-risk. They are, after all, generally not located in an area with low police-presence like Mr. Dealer. Mister Jacker also reasons that the death by gunfire of individuals with extensive criminal records and even active warrants like Mister Dealer’s employees would result in less law enforcement attention than the death by gun fire of, say, a vinyl-records afficionado and a junior at the local arts college both working at a local dispensary.

So, we’ve ruled out dispensaries in well-po liced, well-populated locations for well-coor dinated robbers who prefer to stay out of jail. While we might believe that there are throngs of sinister criminals with carefully-laid devi ous schemes polluting the planet, the reality is, most crime is impulsive, and most crim inals are not particularly discerning about the crimes they commit.

There were over 80 armed robberies of cannabis dispensaries in Washington State between January 1 and April 20 of 2022. The Chairman of the Washington Liquor and Cannabis Board stated to NPR that “The number of these robberies is shocking”. In one, two teenagers aged 15- and 16-years-old shot and killed a 29-year-old dispensary em ployee, and were quickly caught thereafter. Much like liquor-store robberies, these are crimes of convenience.

Industrial Zoning of Dispensaries Puts Customers and Business Owners At-Risk

Many townships and cities however have zoned cannabis dispensaries much like “vice” businesses such as strip clubs and pornogra phy distributors, forcing them into largely vacant industrial areas with low police pres

ence. Customers and dispensaries alike may face a markedly higher risk of robbery given the response time for law enforcement in such zones.

What about the armored trucks moving about millions in cash and cannabis? How of ten does a Mister Jacker put together schemes on them?

A Review of the News Shows Law Enforcement Officers Regularly Rob Cannabis Armored Trucks

As Mister Jacker likewise reasoned, tar geting armored trucks does not seem to be a wise move for criminals interested in avoiding incarceration, at least those without the protection of a badge. In both Kansas and California, law enforcement officers have been forced to return cash that was illegally seized from cannabis trucks during stops.

State agents would not be actively robbing cannabis businesses if cannabis were federal ly legal. Until then, government officials like Sheriff Dicus of San Bernardino will continue masking over wildly illegal behavior by state agents against cannabis companies. Sherriff Dicus, after the Justice Department ordered the return of more than $1 million taken from cannabis trucks, surreally stated that his deputies “are not highway robbers”, when they were effectively found to be exactly that by the Justice Department. While the $1 mil lion plus was ordered returned, these sheriffs were not arrested for armed robbery and/ or conspiracy to commit it. Seemingly they should have, given that their behavior seems to meet the elements of the crime, namely the use of force or threat of use of force to relieve another party of their rightfully held property.

Grain of Salt: Liquor and Convenience Store Robberies are Old News

While media coverage of cannabis dispen sary robberies might now be common, this is largely due to the reality that the news is driv en by novelty. Liquor stores and convenience stores, especially those with lottery options, are regular targets for armed robbers. While sensational stories on liquor store robberies sometimes make the news, such as one out of NorCal recently where an 80-year old liquor store owner shot a robber’s arm off, the bulk of such robberies go unreported as they are simply too commonplace, and thus not par ticularly informative.

Will cannabis robberies follow this same path, and simply become a part of doing business that fades out of the news cycle? Most likely, but not until cannabis dispen saries become more the norm and less of a new thing.

Ending Cannabis Prohibition Normalizes the Product and Mitigates Risk

As I’ve noted throughout my writings here, an end to cannabis prohibition nationally would lead to an epic boom in the American economy. It would also mitigate the cash-re lated risks associated with the cannabis in dustry as it now stands.

Will the Mister Jackers of the world start targeting quasi-legal cannabis in an aggres sive, well-strategized manner? Only time will tell, but until then the stick-up kids will con tinue robbing wherever there is ready cash and intoxicants on-hand, whether the liquor, cannabis, and convenience store.

It isn’t the place of this article to consider the societal supports and foundations that would need to be reinforced to mitigate the risk of economically motivated crime undertaken by societally disadvantaged and/or antisocial persons. However, do keep in mind that the improvements to education, after-school programs, the availability of arts and music in public school, and all other social programs that can receive funding through cannabis will reduce overall crime and improve the level of our society.

End Cannabis Prohibition, Build a Better Tomorrow in America.

The end.

By, Michael John Westerman, Esq. American Writer & Attorney www.mjwestermanlaw.com