MJ – the numbers game (updated 5apr16)

George Rebane

The importance of every social issue derives only from the numbers which underpin it. Without understanding the numbers, our response is limited to unfounded and misplaced emotions.

A major RR tenet has been the importance of numbers in the discussion/development of public policy, and the need for a numerate population to maintain our republic.  I’ve posted versions of the above tagline many times in these pages.  Now it seems that our local newspaper has given a nod to numbers when discussing the county’s new efforts to update its MJ ordinance.

As all local RR readers know, we will be asked to vote on Measure W in June (full text here).  W essentially limits the growing of MJ for only medicinal purposes and in qualifying indoor grows – no outdoor grows are permitted in the county.

In the 1apr16 Union our Sheriff Keith Royal writes an Other Voices column (here) explaining the county’s rationale for advocating a YES vote on W.  On the front page the newspaper also features a major report on MJ that contains some relevant numbers (here).   The reasons for opposing MJ grows and consumption categorize as follows – public nuisance, crime, environmental degradation, health & safety, habituation (gateway drug), and no clear financial benefit to permitting jurisdictions.

My own position on MJ, both MMJ and RMJ, is a matter of record on these pages.  Given our country’s disastrous history combatting drug use as a criminal act, I favor controlled legalization of drugs using the template of alcohol and tobacco regulations and laws as starting points.  I am sure that the final form of such drug use laws and regulations will differ from such starting points, but we have to start somewhere so that we may gain experience in order to enact reasonable and effective modifications.  The process will probably be longer than shorter, but according to my lights this beats continuing the decades long and tragic game of cops and robbers.

The key is to make illegal drug trafficking an unprofitable business as quickly as possible, and to install a flexible jurisprudence in which various approaches to legalization and controlled use can be tried and tested.  My understanding of the voter initiative process under which Measure W falls is summarized by ‘whatever the public votes in, the public must again vote to modify or abolish’.  In short, regulating through the initiative process is an expensive and cumbersome enterprise.  The natural alternative is to effect the same controls through county ordinances enacted by the Board of Supervisors, ordinances that can be subsequently modified with much less cost and delay.

I share Sheriff Royal’s outlined concerns and have no reason to reject his arguments or the Union’s report of the numbers involved.  Although the pro-MMJ argument is yet to be addressed to my satisfaction because there is no reasonable explanation given as to how the complex medicinal products can be produced in quantity and quality to satisfy the county’s presumed very large MMJ demand.  The numbers are not available.

Also, the ‘leakage’ from purported MMJ grows to satisfy RMJ demand remains a mystery.  Such leakage does occur now and will go on as long as large local outdoor grows continue production.  The proponents of this status quo argue that there is a very large (cash) component of the county’s economy tied to the local illegal RMJ industry, and that curtailing it will be disastrous to local merchants.  Again, no numbers.

All such shortcomings in the current MJ situation should be addressed through BoS ordinances instead of on stone tablets from the mountain that Measure W will create.  Other than the current BoS wishing to tie the hands of future supervisors, I see no reason why the language of W cannot simply be made into the new MMJ ordinance by the present Board.  Maybe that should be the question clarified before the 7 June election.

[update] When I saw Bob Crabb’s cartoon in this morning’s (2apr16) Union, I knew I had to filch it and include it with this post.  Thanks Bob for another outstanding contribution to Nevada County thinkers.

 

[5apr16 update]  Re PaulE's 949pm & BradC's 729am below – Excellent comments/questions by Messrs Emery and Croul. I’ll take a stab at responding within the context of developed Rebane Doctrine and with the objective of coherently, if not also reasonably, expanding it.  I hope that readers will view my thoughts with their usual critical eye, and that they will contribute their own corrections and/or variations.

PaulE’s constitutional question. The ‘business of government’ has expanded considerably in the last two centuries beyond that contemplated by the Founders.  Prodded by corporatists and progressives, it now enters and manages commerce and our private lives to an ever greater extent.  Today more than half the country (IMHO, the ignorant half) demands an even larger and more intrusive (or ‘involved’) government.  The bottom line here is that the cats are already out of the bag, and now we argue with each other as to which ones we need to chase and reincarcerate.  The constitutionality question underlying any issue, whether about MJ, EPA, trades licensing, central banking, …, can only be discussed with people who admit this state of affairs.  I presume Messrs Emery and Croul are among those.

The short answer from a strict constructionist or ‘originalist’ perspective is that our government has no business telling people what they can grow as long as it does not directly impact the QoL of their neighbors. And yes, this itself raises many questions – what’s ‘directly impact’?  Is it something that is obvious to a 5-year-old, or so nuanced that only discerning minds can sort it out.  In the latter case the buoyant criterion for intervention becomes ‘He who pays the Piper calls the tune.’  And if we ask government to ‘play the tune’, then we seldom get to call the tune that we must inevitably fund.  Corrupt politicians paid off by special interests intervene.

The only approach to a solution is to minimize the role/size of government, and again appeal to a more common and cohesive culture to police our mutual behaviors through common values, language, customs, and traditions into which we inculcate our young. The alternatives are states like the USSR, Yugoslavia, China, … where the liberally applied government gun makes people hew to an ideologically-defined, state-imposed ‘culture’ no matter how ersatz it is to any of its multi-cultural population.  The harbingers of this solution applied are more than ample in America.

So no, the Founders’ government has no business telling us what to grow, but the Founders’ society also expected things to sort out locally among people with common beliefs and values. Today we are beyond the tipping point.  And specifically where I want government to intervene is alien to you, and vice versa.  Looking for consistency in this hodge-podge is a fool’s errand and our lawyers’ paradise.

BradC’s point, “I do not see why Nevada County farmers/growers should not be allowed to grow more than their "fair share" of MMJ (or RMJ once legal) if there is a demand for it outside the area.” For the record, I have not advocated any limits to the county’s MJ grows that are compatible with eliminating the nuisance and environmental concerns.  I continue to believe that as soon as RMJ consumption and production is legalized in CA, we will find ways to control and tax it so that people will have all they want of it at a price that also keeps Leviathan happy.

But to do that, according to my lights, will require much more efficient ways of growing and distributing the weed. This is where I see ‘big tobacco’ (for lack of a better term) moving in and efficiently growing multiple crops annually in large indoor green/warehouses, located also in Nevada County.  The quality product issuing from such CA enterprises will drive the private large outdoor grows out of business for a number of practical and regulatory reasons.  Even the mom and pops with their backyard and garage operations would be hard pressed to satisfy their cravings more cheaply.  But I’m sure that some small time operators will remain, especially if Leviathan gets too greedy on the taxes.  Bottom line is that there is so much that we still don’t know about widespread legal use of MJ in society, especially in our society.  But taking the wraps off slowly and staying flexible will let us put MJ on the shelf along with tobacco and alcohol as another ‘legal sin’ that is conditionally accepted by Americans.

Comments

[Walt]

For the MJ crowd.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3520257/The-cannabis-smoke-likely-loser-finds-international-study.html
We know how a certain demographic here, LOVES the idea of being "more like Europe".
Well,, the study is FROM Europe.

[Russ Steele]

What is the world's biggest cash crop? Wheat, Rice, Sugar Cane . . . or? Make a guess and then click on the link below.

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/what-is-the-worlds-biggest-cash-crop/

OK, then we now know what the world largest cash crop is, including some numbers. What is Nevada County's largest cash crop? OK, where are the numbers?

[Michael R. Kesti]

I agree that the numbers behind social issues must be understood in order to create appropriate legislation and regulations but the downsides of legislation via ballot initiative are more than sufficient to earn my "No" vote on Measure W.

[George Rebane]

MichaelK 742pm - The tag line on my post states a general principle and does not pose an argument for or against support of Measure W, even though a rational response to any MJ ordinance per se would require a minimum set of relevant numbers. As should be apparent from my commentary, I too would vote NO on W for the reasons stated.

[Brad C.]

Sheriff Royal's article is mostly an emotional appeal,
"The direct nuisance impacts of marijuana cultivation include obnoxious odors, increased crime, increased traffic, poisoning of wildlife including bears and deer, theft and contamination of potable and riparian water sources, huge gardens, trash and open privies, unpermitted mobile homes, trailers and other structures on vacant land, increased access and exposure to children, fires and threat of fires due to improper electrical sources and generators on dry brush, negative impacts on the environment from unpermitted grading and clearing of land and use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides which leech into the water systems."

Just about every "nuisance" he lists could be attributed to many activites going on in rural areas. Farmers are known to overuse water reserves, over-fertilize and contaminate soils, air, and water; ranchers are known to poison or kill wildlife (coyotes, deer, bears, squrrels, raccons, possums, skunks, etc. to protect their crops and livestock; just plain folks are living in unpermitted trailers, camping out, starting brush fires with lawnmowers, etc.

Sure, growing indoors in a highly controlled environment offers better odds of success compared to growing outside - but it is a lot more expensive.

[Brad C.]

Canada's first TV cannabis ad,

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-LcGAVLE9B4&ebc=ANyPxKqgWL20DFIO5pGNwEof697onY6SQi2J8tcS9E-Ad1GaSVOVQ_6dCfaS5wv_4-V0HZxO0J-AtGE-YSdJtJ-VnZDJqOhj6A&time_continue=6

[George Rebane]

BradC 845pm - Mr Croul, let's be sure we understand the scope of your critique of the sheriff's article. If his is mostly an "emotional appeal", then so are ALL other complaints in the media that lay the basis for and then invite some political response in the form of a new law or ordinance. In short, what you have accomplished here is to paint the piece as a 'nothing special' tautology. I happen to disagree, even though I wish that more numbers were available to differentiate the nuisance factors of outdoor MJ grows from other more acceptable activities.

[Name not listed....]

Tax and regulate it, eliminate the bad actors....

You think that the people causing the problems will give a crap about a ban?

Go ahead keep eating the boatload of manure that our Sheriff keep presenting.

GR, I am truly disappointed that someone with your education level cannot see past the lies that our Sheriff hands off as "the truth", especially when the proof of these lies is handed to you over and over, and over and over.....

[George Rebane]

Name not 1056am - Strong words from someone wearing a sack with eyeholes. What in those words makes you afraid to identify yourself?

[Brad C.]

Dr. R @ 831am - I kind of thought I illustrated why the sheriff's article sounded like nothing special, at least to me.. The sheriff also makes it sound like his idea of banning outdoor MJ was somehow new. But it was that way "forever", until the county came up with their ordinance(s).
If you would like numbers to look at, I suggest asking dispensaries how many pounds of MJ were sold on an annual basis in states like Colorado, Washington, and Oregon before they legalized RMJ. Compare that with pounds sold after it was legalized. Then ask yourself how much more MJ would be sold if there were no counties or cities banning dispensaries and retail RMJ sales outlets in California. Then ask yourself why Nevada County should limit the right of someone to make a living growing, processing, distributing, transporting, and selling MMJ and RMJ grown indoors or outdoors.
The sherrif needs to come up with something better than, " we need to ban outdoor MJ because a grower had a gun that he used to shoot a rat" (that was eating his MJ plants).

[Name not listed....]

Tell you what George, when you start asking everyone that same question I'll be more than happy to comply.

[George Rebane]

BradC 1227pm - You did indeed, and I did not contend your characterization, but observed that it applied to every such appeal for new government involvement. In other words, your critique therefore was also 'nothing special'.

But the comparative numbers you propose, while fine, are not IMHO the germane ones for considering W. The critical ones are 1) how many MMJ patients in Nevada County consume a steady diet of MMJ product for their wellbeing? and 2) what is the contribution of the local MJ 'industry' to the county's economy? I believe that both the county and the ASA would want to nail down those numbers.

BTW, I recall that Ms PatriciaS of the ASA was not able to give any reasonable estimate of the number of MMJ dispensaries within striking distance of Nevada County.

Also, our discussion would be more productive if you acknowledged (understood?) the nature of my support for legalizing MJ laid out in these pages.

[Russ Steele]

The more cannabis you smoke, the more likely you are to be a loser, finds international study reported on HERE.

Key Findings:

• Persistent users likely to be lower paid and have relationship difficulties

• Research found abusers ended up in a lower social class than their parents

• Also more prone to be in less skilled, prestigious jobs and to run into debt

• Study by Californian university followed children from birth up to age of 38

I wonder if this study will be used in the pro-Measure W ads?

[Patricia Smith]

George, I did not catch your post asking the number of dispensaries within "striking distance" of NC. I don't understand the nature of your question as going out of the county is the problem - no matter how many dispensaries are in Sac. Do you also suggest we buy our groceries, clothing, cars, and home goods out of the area? If so, our county will soon be boarded up!

The other problem is that a dispensary doesn't necessarily have the strain of MMJ that works for your particular condition. And if they do, it might not be available in a tincture or capsule. Caregivers and Collective can grow specialty strains especially for each patient. You can't get this kind of service in Sacramento.

[George Rebane]

PatriciaS 506pm - Haven't tried to inject anything new into the MMJ dispensary issue, for I simply don't know. But from your current comment, it appears that not only the availability of such regional dispensaries is not known, knowing about them would not serve the needs of NC MMJ patients. That thousands of local patients need such individual concoctions does boggle my little brainbone, and doubly so when those exotic potions are being homebrewed all over these hills. Am I the only one having trouble digesting this kind of a demand/production/distribution market??

[Patricia Smith]

Sorry George, for decades MMJ users have been pushed underground by overzealous law enforcement so naturally they are gun shy about being identified. That makes it impossible to give you the numbers your very orderly minds demands.

There are websites that list dispensaries by geographic location, but it only lists the ones that advertise with them so it's far from complete. If you are really interested, go to Weedmaps.com/Sacramento to get a rough idea of how many dispensaries are out there and the limits of the products they offer. (Mind you, some of these dispensaries are set up for patients, and some are thinly disguised RMJ outlets. You can tell by the products they offer.)

Healers have been making home brewed concoctions since the beginning of time - it's not a new concept!

I also don't understand why our claims that "thousands" of patients use MMJ in NC "boogles your little brainbone." Hundreds show up regularly at every BoS meeting that has MMJ on the agenda.

How many medical patients are in NC? Many thousands. That a small percentage of them find cannabis more effective is not that far-
fetched.

But glad to read that you are voting No on Measure W. I really hope that if it fails, you find yourself on the citizen's committee to suggest reasonable regulations for outdoor cultivation as I believe you would at least do your homework to be informed before you speak.

[George Rebane]

PatriciaS 555pm - As a MMJ proponent, don't you think that doing the numbers on MMJ dispensaries is your job, not one to be undertaken by those in opposition?

You are confused about what "boogles" my mind. It's not the number of MMJ patients, it's the demand/production/distribution scheme that supports your "many thousands" of county MMJ patients from kitchen table top pharmacological suppliers. I hope that difference is not too difficult to handle.

[Patricia Smith]

No George, I don't think it's my job to substaniate the number of dispensaries, the number of patients, or the number of grow sites. Numbers are not my priorty - patients are, whether it is one or a thousand. Is there some magic tipping point where providing for patients becomes acceptable? I think you would agree that the moral obligation to allow patients the right to medicate as their doctor's recommend is no business of the state.

Many of your questons about medicine making would be answered if you would attend one of our informative seminars. I think you would find it illuminating. The next opportunity is "Never Give Up Hope," on April 20, at the Foothills Event Center. I invited you before, but got uncharacteristic crickets from you. Dr Burnell Vasser (formerly of YubaDocs) will explain CBD's, how they work and when they don't. Hope to see you there.

[George Rebane]

PatriciaS 923am - Patricia, your "whether it is one or a thousand" appropriately highlights the gulf between progressive thought and policy making and that of the rest of us. Conservetarians would advocate markedly different public policies to respond to the needs of one or thousands. That progressives don't consider such bases for their prescriptions explains why we are so scared of your ideology being implemented by governments.

Of course I do think that sane adult patients should be able to medicate themselves without government intervention even absent their doctor's recommendation.

Finally Patricia, my questions about MMJ "medicine making" focuses on the ability of lay pharmacologists to produce complex concoctions (according to your own adductions) of appropriate quality in hundreds of primitive environments. It's the scale of the problem (yes, those pesky numbers again) that I'm trying to understand. And I don't think I am alone.

[Patricia Smith]

George, 9:23, When we are talking about people's health, numbers should not apply. Do patient's with rare diseases not deserve the same protections of someone with a common ailment? And we have gone round and round about the lack of data gathering processes to get accurate numbers that you so desire. I'm not withholding the information - it simply doesn't exist. Without a data gathering mechanism in place, you are asking the impossible (save going door to door census style gathering data) - and who has the time or resoures to do that (save the gov't)?

You are assuming hundreds of people are making medicine. That could be true or it could be wildly off. Most medicine makers serve many patients but some people do make their own medicines. There are processes that are simple and there are processes that are complex depending on one's needs. Professional labs give us the ratios we need to get specific results for kids like Silas.

Again, I invite you to learn more about this subject since you are obviously interested.

[George Rebane]

Patricia 137pm - Believe me Patricia, I'm trying to get my head around the logic that illuminates and informs your world. I'm simply unable to do it.

Your "Do patient's(sic) with rare diseases not deserve the same protections of someone with a common ailment?" is a case in point. Your unqualified answer must be YES. I can't even conceive of an answer without injecting a qualification - YES, if cost were not a factor; NO, if cost is a factor. Common ailments are common because of their number vs rare ailments, and society for ages has correctly provided more resources for managing common ailments for reasons which to me are obvious, but to you perhaps are not.

A society takes care of the margins only after the median corpus is secure, else it commits suicide. When and how to address the margins then becomes a question of competing values.

[Patricia Smith]

George, 2:41 We are not asking anyone to pay for our meds so it shouldn't matter if it only helps one or many. We are asking to be able to help ourselves - and to pay taxes to contribute to the common good.

[George Rebane]

PatriciaS 548pm - Maybe we're circling in on this. We've never considered the state having to pay for someone's MMJ. In this debate the only factors have been the leakage of MMJ to RMJ, and the reported nuisance factor that comes with every neighborhood MJ producer. If only MMJ will be permitted in the county, then the voters still need to know what is the scope (i.e. numbers) of the problem of MMJ grows and pharmas in their vicinity - that has to do with what is the MMJ demand that needs to filled by local MMJ producers.

Today all the voters have to go on is the current data reported by the sheriff, and if they have nothing better offered to them, then they will vote for W no matter how much you and I cluck our tongues (for different reasons) at their supposed error.

[Paul Emery]

George

In your view what business does the government have in telling people what medicines people can grow in their own backyard. What is the Constitutional justification of that?

[Don Bessee]

Heroin Poppies Mr. Paul? Scotch Broom? Save the poison oak! Do we grow willow bark to nibble or do we take a refined aspirin? I find it hilarious that acetylsalicylic acid is also known as ASA. ;-)

[Diogenes]

Don 10:51 PM
Actually Don, we do. Willow Bark Tea is readily available for sore throat. Check the internet. I'd hazard you're ignorant of the range of plant based remedies available the Briar Patch as well. SMH

[Brad C.]

Dr. R @ 1254pm - While I do acknowledge your support for decriminalization and/or regulated legalization of MJ, and I support the "local grown" movement, I do not see why Nevada County farmers/ growers should not be allowed to grow more than their "fair share" of MMJ (or RMJ once legal) if there is a demand for it outside the area.

Whereas the sheriff paints with a brush so broad that his "nuisance factors" could apply to many non MJ related activities, and makes fear driven arguments in an attempt to persuade the "lightly read" audience; I am more concerned with the general notion of whether or not to create overly restrictive ordinances or ballot initiatives.

I think the idea of banning all outdoor growing is far too restrictive and general a concept considering the amount and variety of open space in Nevada County, much of it not near populated areas or adjacent residences.

MMJ (and all the handwringing associated with it) is going to be just a blip on the radar once RMJ is the law of the land. So, why go down the road trying
to quantify, exactly, the amount of MMJ required by MMJ patients at a given moment in time within the county?

I can see where policy wonks might want to have some figures to fiddle with. The ABC bases the number of liquor licenses available in each county on the number of residents in that county. But liquor stores and pharmacies are considered just general businesses, so it up to individual business owners to determine if they want to open additional competing business in a given area. Maybe MMJ dispensaries will be treated more like pharmacies and RMJ smoke shops more like liquor stores.

It may come to pass that the NIMBY people who don't like wood fire smoke, open burns, MJ odors, rural music events and weddings, barking dogs, race tracks, shooting ranges, wood chipper dust, gold mines, the sound of industrial processes, etc. will try to prohibit MJ also. That is too bad because there are good people up here who are just trying to make a living by growing and developing MJ products for an emerging industry. You have to start somewhere.

[Brad C.]

New Industry for MJ???

https://www.youtube.com/embed/H4_XZE3r3oU?rel=0

[Todd Juvinall]

I say make cars out of hemp. What a concept!

[Brad C.]

Yes, Todd, it is just around the corner. Maybe tesla will start buying the coach work. They will be developed in the Skunkworks!

https://www.weedhorn.com/this-car-is-made-entirely-of-hemp-1099601493.html

[Don Bessee]

Skunkworks, good one BC. LOL

[George Rebane]

Please note that I respond to PaulE's 949pm and BradC's 729am in the 5apr16 update above.

[Brad C.]

Dr. R, Thanks for you response. I imagine "big tobacco" "big cannabis" will want to work the economy of scale business models where convenient.
But, as with beer, wine, and distilleries; there will be successful local and regional craft MJ producers.
Mergers and acquisitions will take place as successful outlets buy out others to try to expand their market share, etc.
I wish the county would lead (from the front - not behind) and develop or support development of a "demonstration 'forest'" research incubator for MJ growing, breeding, processing, etc. in order to attract people to the area while the industry is still in its infancy.

[Brad C.]

Oaksterdam could do a university extension program...
To the point about people coming from out of the area to purchase MMJ, this woman mentions that not all strains are available everywhere,
http://oaksterdamuniversity.com/alumni-success-story-barbara-blaser/

[Paul Emery]

Todd

Just a reminder that George Washington was a major hemp cultivator.

http://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/the-man-the-myth/george-washington-grew-hemp

[George Rebane]

BradC 1204pm - sounds like a plan.

[Bill Tozer]

More is always revealed to the patient, no pun intended.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/04/09/marijuana-use-may-be-a-one-way-ticket-to-socioecon.aspx?source=yahoo-2&utm_campaign=article&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=yahoo-2

[Todd Juvinall]

I responded to a Nevada County Peeps post on Facebook a while ago. I asked a question. "Does anyone have the statistics of how many addicts started with MJ?

A firestorm erupted. My goodness those MJ pacifists are sure a bunch of nasty people. You should read their responses. What a hoot!

[Don Bessee]

OH DUDE, What a buzzkill BT. ;-)

[Todd Juvinall]

LOL! The people with the anger did not smoke their MJ today!

[Don Bessee]

Todd, the growers real anger is from the numbers that are becoming clearer to the public beyond the drug culture crime headlines. The National Institute of Health tells us that 6 percent or so of Americans in 2013 had a medical diagnosis of Marijuana Use Disorder. Primarily dudes under 45. That and the numbers of addiction for youth in high availability areas that are unacceptably high. Undeveloped brains not getting a chance to grow. Given that the numbers are always historical we have yet to really comprehend the bad news from the 90%+ Pure THC products that are flooding the drug culture. Kids with vape pens with who knows what in their insert cartridge is protected by too many for profit that they say is about patients. Its not about medicine for those who hide behind the front groups.

[Todd Juvinall]

I was having a fun time with the potheads over there. Patricia Smith showed up to alert them to me as if my simple question was some trick. Jeeze she is strange. Anyway the potheads are still telling the world ho wonderful MJ is and how they have been smoking it since high school with no side affects, except remembering and twitching. LOL!

[Don Bessee]

It is interesting how many times over the last 7 years the pot growers speak of not understanding and being confused in their court papers and public testimony. It has always been more than playing stupid its about not wanting to comply in any way, its always been about never even trying to understand the neighborhoods and families needs. They can not fathom that we don't want to be a plantation at the home owners expense.

[Todd Juvinall]

When you read Pat Smith's stuff I can see the confusion.