GROWN IN THE USA?

Article Tools

Image Gallery

Print

E-mail

Comments

RSS

While Conrad salutes the efforts of Sholts and others for whom the separation is mandatory, in his view, "We're stronger when we work together. Part of the process of the federal government is dividing and conquering. It's better for us to recognize commonalties [and to] resist convoluted methodologies."

For hempsters, the post-Prohibition marijuana reforms were a backdoor method of securing the fortunes of petrochemical and timber interests (DuPont and Hearst), who wanted hemp out of the way. It is these and not drug laws across the-board they wish to undo.

Though President Clinton has yet to weigh in on the industrial hemp issue, he signed an executive order a year and a half after taking office setting national defense priorities for "the production and alloca tion of `food resources' (which is defined to include hemp)."

HEMP ORGANIZERS say about ten statesare in the midst of passing pro-hemp laws, but concede that they won't matter practically as long as the DEA is given final say.

At the end of the day, the development of a new hemp agriculture in this country will depend more on consumer demand than some economic imperative that the United States become a hempen kingdom. There is perhaps too much ease with which its supporters refer to the well-known environmental degradations of cotton. (There's a reason they call it King Cotton.) Inasmuch as some people want to point to hemp's rich history in the life of the nation, cotton's is richer and it's not forgotten. Domestic cotton production topped eight billion pounds last year. Likewise with trees; it may be good to throw hemp into the mix of pulp sources for making paper but virtually no one believes that forestry's epitaph will be written on hemp paper.

In the coming year one may anticipate the continued development of hemp commerce in the United States and some political waves on the state level. Hemp organizers plan for about ten states to pass pro-hemp laws in the spring and fall but readily concede it won't matter practically as long as the DEA is given final say. Politically, the prospects for a domestic hemp agriculture rest with Washington. Unless the DEA shifts its stance, either the White House must issue an executive order, or the Congress must pass a special law, for hemp to be grown in this country. Theoretically, the DEA leaves open the possibility that it will actually approve one of these registration applications. Theoretically, time moves backwards if you run fast enough.

As consumers demand natural fiber products, and business people and farmers learn how to grow, reap and process such fibers, the diverse marketplace of the future will take form. But there is nothing inevitable here, no "Hemp is coming" skywriting to descry on the far horizon. If and when hemp happens, it will be because—as a nation we made it happen.

RSS | Comments | E-mail | Print