Time is running out on North Dakota State University having time to plant and develop industrial hemp varieties this spring, but the university continues to work toward that goal.
D.C. Coston, vice-president for Agri-culture and University Extension at NDSU, said they haven't found the funding yet to start a research plot.
"We're searching for a sponsor to get the structure built," Coston said last week. "I don't know if we'll be able to find funding sources in time to get it up this spring."
He estimates it would cost from $80,000 to $90,000 to put in a couple of acres of field plots surrounded by the type of security the Drug Enforcement Administration requires.
Some of those requirements include a high fence with barbed wire on top, and electronic monitoring equipment so that no one could gain entry without being detected.
"We need a large enough structure with at least 2 acres of actual planting area to do that kind of research," Coston said.
The DEA notified NDSU in November 2007 it could begin research after a judge hearing oral arguments in an industrial hemp lawsuit brought my two North Dakota producers admonished the DEA for not acting on NDSU's request.
NDSU had sent the DEA an application in September 1999, after the North Dakota Legislature ordered NDSU to begin industrial hemp seed cultivation.
According to court documents, the DEA continued over the years to ask questions of Burton Johnson, NDSU associate professor of sunflower, minor, and new crop production, requesting such things as specifics on the security designs.
But Johnson never received any DEA approval after answering questions and submitting designs.
In 2003, NDSU submitted a request to the North Dakota Agricultural Products Utilization Commission (APUC) for fencing and security system funding and it was approved.
Court documents say DEA instructed Johnson to spend the funding, construct the fence and put the security measures in place. The DEA wanted to come out after all the security devices were in place to inspect it, but the agency refused to give NDSU the assurance that they would then allow the research.
The facility was never built, and the funds returned to APUC.
Coston is looking for research funding sources, and APUC may be among them.
But after a long winter and snow and water still standing in NDSU fields this April, it is doubtful there will be time to get the structure built and inspected in time for planting season.
Coston said when research begins, there will be several places he could obtain plant material from to begin breeding.
"I'm sure Manitoba will be one of those," he said. "You would think if industrial hemp can grow well in Manitoba, it will grow well here."
Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress began action on a federal industrial hemp bill last week.
According to VoteHemp, an organization that promotes hemp production, a bill was introduced in the House on April 2 that would remove restrictions on industrial hemp cultivation.
HR 1866, "The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009" was introduced by U.S. Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Ron Paul, R-Texas, along with nine other Republicans and Democrats.
"It is unfortunate that the federal government has stood in the way of American farmers, including many who are struggling to make ends meet, from competing in the global industrial hemp market," said Paul. "Indeed, the founders of our nation, some of whom grew hemp, would surely find that federal restrictions on farmers growing a safe and profitable crop on their own land are inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a limited, restrained federal government."
Eric Steenstra, VoteHemp president, said he hopes under a new administration, the DEA will "prioritize hemp's benefits to farmers."
He said in this economic downturn, jobs could be "created overnight," because now several companies import hemp raw materials to make products that are "worth many millions of dollars per year."
At the same time, North Dakota State Rep. David Monson, Osnabrock, and Wayne Hauge, Ray, N.D., are awaiting a decision from their appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
They appealed dismissal of their 2007 lawsuit in November 2008, and are waiting for a decision sometime this year.
According to Adam Eidinger, of VoteHemp, they based their appeal on the assertion there was no possibility the hemp crop could be diverted into the market for drugs because it will be grown and the seed extracted right on the farm.
In addition, the North Dakota producers asserted that the Commerce Clause does not allow DEA to regulate industrial hemp farming in North Dakota.
According to court documents, the DEA again attempted to assert that the appeals court should not hear the case.
The appeals court disagreed.
The court again admonished the DEA for not acting on the North Dakota producers' application, just as a former court in Bismarck, N.D., did in 2007.
VoteHemp said the question before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is "whether or not federal authorities can prosecute state-licensed farmers who grow non-drug oilseed and fiber hemp pursuant to North Dakota state law."
"If (the appeal) is successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own hemp farming laws without fear of federal interference," Eidinger said.
News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Farm & Ranch Guide
Author: SUE ROESLER
Contact: Farm & Ranch Guide
Copyright: 2009 Farm & Ranch Guide
Website: NDSU Still Looking For Funds For Industrial Hemp Research Site
D.C. Coston, vice-president for Agri-culture and University Extension at NDSU, said they haven't found the funding yet to start a research plot.
"We're searching for a sponsor to get the structure built," Coston said last week. "I don't know if we'll be able to find funding sources in time to get it up this spring."
He estimates it would cost from $80,000 to $90,000 to put in a couple of acres of field plots surrounded by the type of security the Drug Enforcement Administration requires.
Some of those requirements include a high fence with barbed wire on top, and electronic monitoring equipment so that no one could gain entry without being detected.
"We need a large enough structure with at least 2 acres of actual planting area to do that kind of research," Coston said.
The DEA notified NDSU in November 2007 it could begin research after a judge hearing oral arguments in an industrial hemp lawsuit brought my two North Dakota producers admonished the DEA for not acting on NDSU's request.
NDSU had sent the DEA an application in September 1999, after the North Dakota Legislature ordered NDSU to begin industrial hemp seed cultivation.
According to court documents, the DEA continued over the years to ask questions of Burton Johnson, NDSU associate professor of sunflower, minor, and new crop production, requesting such things as specifics on the security designs.
But Johnson never received any DEA approval after answering questions and submitting designs.
In 2003, NDSU submitted a request to the North Dakota Agricultural Products Utilization Commission (APUC) for fencing and security system funding and it was approved.
Court documents say DEA instructed Johnson to spend the funding, construct the fence and put the security measures in place. The DEA wanted to come out after all the security devices were in place to inspect it, but the agency refused to give NDSU the assurance that they would then allow the research.
The facility was never built, and the funds returned to APUC.
Coston is looking for research funding sources, and APUC may be among them.
But after a long winter and snow and water still standing in NDSU fields this April, it is doubtful there will be time to get the structure built and inspected in time for planting season.
Coston said when research begins, there will be several places he could obtain plant material from to begin breeding.
"I'm sure Manitoba will be one of those," he said. "You would think if industrial hemp can grow well in Manitoba, it will grow well here."
Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress began action on a federal industrial hemp bill last week.
According to VoteHemp, an organization that promotes hemp production, a bill was introduced in the House on April 2 that would remove restrictions on industrial hemp cultivation.
HR 1866, "The Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009" was introduced by U.S. Reps. Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Ron Paul, R-Texas, along with nine other Republicans and Democrats.
"It is unfortunate that the federal government has stood in the way of American farmers, including many who are struggling to make ends meet, from competing in the global industrial hemp market," said Paul. "Indeed, the founders of our nation, some of whom grew hemp, would surely find that federal restrictions on farmers growing a safe and profitable crop on their own land are inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of a limited, restrained federal government."
Eric Steenstra, VoteHemp president, said he hopes under a new administration, the DEA will "prioritize hemp's benefits to farmers."
He said in this economic downturn, jobs could be "created overnight," because now several companies import hemp raw materials to make products that are "worth many millions of dollars per year."
At the same time, North Dakota State Rep. David Monson, Osnabrock, and Wayne Hauge, Ray, N.D., are awaiting a decision from their appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
They appealed dismissal of their 2007 lawsuit in November 2008, and are waiting for a decision sometime this year.
According to Adam Eidinger, of VoteHemp, they based their appeal on the assertion there was no possibility the hemp crop could be diverted into the market for drugs because it will be grown and the seed extracted right on the farm.
In addition, the North Dakota producers asserted that the Commerce Clause does not allow DEA to regulate industrial hemp farming in North Dakota.
According to court documents, the DEA again attempted to assert that the appeals court should not hear the case.
The appeals court disagreed.
The court again admonished the DEA for not acting on the North Dakota producers' application, just as a former court in Bismarck, N.D., did in 2007.
VoteHemp said the question before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is "whether or not federal authorities can prosecute state-licensed farmers who grow non-drug oilseed and fiber hemp pursuant to North Dakota state law."
"If (the appeal) is successful, states across the nation will be free to implement their own hemp farming laws without fear of federal interference," Eidinger said.
News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: Farm & Ranch Guide
Author: SUE ROESLER
Contact: Farm & Ranch Guide
Copyright: 2009 Farm & Ranch Guide
Website: NDSU Still Looking For Funds For Industrial Hemp Research Site
