OR: Why Marijuana Isn't Just 'Cannabis'

Ron Strider

Well-Known Member
A few of us may know, or can infer, what the genera vitis or nicotiana refer to. Fewer, perhaps, malus or pyrus. How many of us are familiar with solanum? Humulus? Triticum? Hordeum? Zea?

Marijuana. Pot. Weed. Ganja. Reefer. Whacky tobacky. There are countless names for the drug that has become a cultural mainstay in America today. But the people who grow and sell it, the people who make up -- and cater to -- the booming industry that is "marijuana," invariably refer to the drug as "cannabis." Consciously or not, this is an attempt to reform the public's view of an increasingly powerful psychoactive drug.

I am a grape grower and a viticulturist by title. I grow wine grapes for vineyard owners and wineries, so I am no stranger to the drug industry or it's marketing efforts. If I were to use the term vitis with any of my clients I would surely get a raised eyebrow and maybe, if I were lucky, a chuckle.

I grew up in the tobacco country of Virginia and North Carolina. I'm fairly certain that I have never heard a tobacco farmer refer to his crop as "nicotiana." I've worked in both pear and apple orchards and have yet to hear either referred to by their genera pyrus and malus, respectively.

The next time you're buying tomatoes or potatoes, try asking the farmer or produce manager how the solanum crop was this year. Or maybe ask your local brewer what his favorite variety of humulus for his triticum beers is, or if he prefers 2-row to 6-row hordeum.

Many of us may be familiar with "maize" (another common name for corn) or even it's origin, Z. mays. But to refer to it as Zea; that would be analogous to using the word cannabis to describe hemp and marijuana.

So what gives?

Pot growers live in a tenuous landscape. Their crop, while allowed in some states, is still federally illegal. By eschewing the long-standing colloquialisms associated with the drug, the industry is essentially rebranding itself in an effort to appear more legitimate and professional.

"Medicine" had long been preferred to "drug" when referring to marijuana, but this misnomer has faded as new recreational use laws have ended prohibition. And no one has ever gone to jail for "cannabis" possession because the legal system still refers to the drug as "marijuana."

Cannabis, as defined by its current taxonomy, is a genus. Not all of the species or varieties within this genus will produce the psychoactive compounds associated with marijuana in sufficient concentration to elicit the drug's mind-altering effects. Referring to marijuana as cannabis is a declassification; and while broadly accurate, it is by no means precise.

I can empathize with this labeling insecurity. Several varieties of vitis vinifera - Merlot, Syrah, Riesling - have fallen out of fashion with the public and are frequently bottled under proprietary names. Unfortunately for some growers, vitis doesn't have the greatest ring to it. Nor is it very specific. Vitis (as a genus like cannabis) describes everything from wild grapes, muscadines and concords to the finest Pinot Noir or Champagne. Even more specifically, vitis vinifera still encompasses every fine wine-grape of old-world origin -- some thousands of varieties.

And this is why I cannot refer to marijuana as "cannabis." The term is a buffer, a social dodge meant to suspend preconceptions about a powerful drug. It sidesteps the checkered history of -- until recently -- an illegal substance by over-simplifying the truth. But we can be forgiven for wanting to keep things simple; we are, after all (along with habilis, erectus and the Neanderthal) only homo.

Daniel Sweeney is a farmer who lives in Talent, Oregon.

Clones_-_Ricardo_Ardeungo.jpg


News Moderator: Ron Strider 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Why marijuana isn't just 'cannabis' (Guest opinion) | OregonLive.com
Author: DANIEL SWEENEY
Contact: Contact the News Team - Oregonian Media Group
Photo Credit: Ricardo Ardeungo
Website: Oregon Local News, Breaking News, Sports & Weather - OregonLive.com
 
Interesting argument. Most of the pushback about the label Marijuana come from those who see it as a racial pejorative (given its origin) and prefer Cannabis because its not charged with either drug abuse stereotypes or cultural history. I haven't spoken the word marijuana in conversation for years. Always cannabis or weed.

Other agricultural crops don't have to overcome this stigma, so they can be referred to by popular names.

But your article makes an interesting point. Cannabis plants that produce high amounts of cannabinoids need a name, and cannabis (which includes hemp) is technically too general. Marijuana is a more precise term for Cannabis strains and genotypes grown for their cannabinoids, and it's also the one the legal system uses.

But to a growing number of people, Marijuana is nearly as offensive as the "n" word. Soon we may have the "m" word.

Which says that Cannabis is a far more acceptable a name going forward, even if it's scientifically imprecise and/or has multiple meanings.
 
Well, sadly the Cannabis genera is split botanically into the three species, indica, sativa and ruderalis. Which is a very poor splitting IMO, and dumb and stupid and everything else. But I am a horticulturist, and not a botanist. I too grew grape cultivars in Southern Oregon and sold them to the locals in the Eugene and Roseburg area, as you cannot legally import live grape plants into Oregon. I had a small vineyard and grew Pinot Noir dijon clones 667, 777, 114, and 115, and I rooted annual pruning cuttings and sold them. I also sold my grapes to two local vineyards there. Alas, I then got divorced and she got the farm, and I do not know what she has done with the vineyard since then. Likely she pulled down the deer fence and let them eat it. I also grew a lot of weed down there. Sadly Douglas Co has voted to not allow commercial rec and medical weed growing, so maybe it was a blessing that I got divorced and left that county? I now live in a county that allows commercial weed growing, and I can get a license to grow here, as I am on the right zoning and I have water rights. Grapes do not grow well at this elevation, or I would also have another Pinot vineyard here by now.

At any rate, IMO from looking at genetic samples, Cannabis should be split into two species, the psychoactive and non-psychoactive, and maybe a third species as ruderalis. What we call Marijuana and hemp in the US. This is because the CBD gene is different in hemp plants than in marijuana plants. Yes, they can be crossed, and various hybrids abound. But that is common in a lot of plant genera. Then I would sub-divide the psychoactive species into several sub-species, and base the differences on the pshychotropic effects, and not the growth habit, as they are now classified. But likely this will never happen, and we will limp along with sativa, indica and ruderalis as species, and marijuana as psychoactive and hemp as non psychoactive fiber and seed plants. Paradigms are difficult to change.
 
Good points. As you indicate, it gets even worse with Indica and Sativa, which are at best individual judgements about effects, at least these days. It used to mean something when landrace Sativas looked and smoked VERY different than Indicas. Now everything is mixed and mingled and tweaked and homogonized. Even worse is the term Hybrid, which overlaps the others to a large degree. Of course, everthing is technically a hybrid these days.

A lot of what I buy in the WA shops comes across differently for me than how its labeled or described by Budtenders (who rarely give me accurate info). So I'm always buying grams and categorizing them myself. When I find batches I like, I go back and get some weight.

I've also learned to stick with a few growers I like. I know the strains they produce, which are fairly repeatable across harvests, so that makes it easier.

But bottom line, we've got a boatload of terms in the overall Cannabis space that are either useless, deceptive or just ignorantly wrong.

I've talked with some newbies, people in their 50's and older who never tried Cannabis before, but want to, and they are terrifically confused by all the terms and labels and products. I give them the names of a half dozen strains that are kind of reliable, and ask them to buy gram packages of those and try them. I ask them to keep notes and go around the loop toking a different strain each day of the week, trying to figure out what they like best.

That's how most of us figured things out and its still the only way I know.

But still... I have a reasonably close idea how a varietal wine will taste. Even though Pinots can vary a lot, each of them tastes very different than a Cab. We really don't have this kind of differentiation and accurate labeling in the legal pot world.

But we should.
 
Yeah, I have been smoking and growing weed since 1972. And these bud tenders try to tell me what is what? I tell them I like Durban Poison and GDP, and they hand me Cinex and OG Kush to try. Typically because they are almost always out of DP and GDP, and they do not know what either high is really like. Or how the strains are related. Then I will find a Cherry Pie and a Grape Ape in the case, and wonder why they are even being paid. In PDX the snazzy overly bright lighted places have these babe-tenders that have not a clue as to what they are selling. They are just there for show, like at the strip clubs. So I just ignore them all. Its a new breed and a new business, and still being shaken out. Even sites like Leaf ly are completely clueless as to the actual history of many strains. Dave Watson has spread his lies so many places about how he developed every strain in California and Amsterdam, and people believe it?

The funny thing is that even the land races are turning up weird in terms of genetics. Hemp is genetically more closely related to indica, but it is generally accepted that hemp is more closely related to sativa. The terms themselves are way off as well. Sativa means 'wild', but it has been the most cultivated 'species', and indica means from India, but it is from Afghanistan. indica is wrong even if you include old India when it was Pakistan and India and Bangladesh. And ruderalis... which today should/would be called sativa, since it has never really be cultivated until recently to get auto genetics. If you look on various genetic test sites like Galaxy you see some strains are actually many strains, and all over the map. Particularly strains with the name White Widow and OG Kush. Also strains that are thought to be either sativa or indica are actually turning up the opposite. So there is no baseline, and there is simply no meaning to these terms. But they are used anyway.

I have a collection of old land races (see my thread on my 70s seed collection on this site), and they are all the real deal as far as early Mexican and Colombian strains go. No indica in any of them. Mexican strains were thought to be from Manila, as that is what the Spanish logged their hemp, calling it "Manila Hemp." Genetically, the Mexican land races are turning out to be closely related to sativas from India. Colombian land races are turning out to be more closely related to sativas from Thailand. And hemp strains are more closely related to indicas from Afghanistan. Hard to debate the genetics. I want to get my Lebanese Bekaa Valley strains tested, as they have 2 distinct phenos from the same seeds; one is an long leaf low growing indica phenotype, and the other is a tall upright skinny leaf sativa phenotype. So they are true mutts... obviously hybrids.
 
Yeah, I've been toking since the late 60's, and did some growing over the years for personal use.

What blows me away here in WA is that every grower now thinks they have to deliver "new and amazing" strains every year. They won't grow any of the older strains as they claim the market wants stuff named "Tangie Strawberry Candy Face Melt" or whatever. So they basically put the genetics in a "blender" and hope they get something they can market as "new and wonderful".

But the more they do this, the less interesting the strains become. Finding Durban (which I love, and is about as close to a landrace as I can find in a shop) is getting really hard, and even older hybrids like Jack Herer are becoming challenging to locate.

Growers think the path to sales success is to sell stuff that nobody else does. And if that means inventing a new strain name for whatever the heck they just grew, they'll do it.

One shop in my town has a budtender who is almost as old as me, and he knows what he's talking about, but he struggles with all the kids and their Whiz Popper fake strains.

Hopefully a premier cannabis market will develop using older genetics and even landraces for those of who remember what it was like, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
Yes, this Amsterdam NorCal melting pot of pot genetics is sad. Bubba's Purple Sister's White Gooey Gorilla Chunder OG is all becoming one basic strain. There is no going back to the land races from them, genetically. Or worse, my nephew just smokes generic 'sativa' oil. WTF is that? He looks at my box of 20 some odd strains in pop lid cans and shakes his head. Of all the 'new' strains, the only ones that I like are Blue Magoo and GDP (or Grape Ape). And they are not really new. I am growing Durban Poison now, and 2 Lebanese land races. And Grape Ape. I am looking for that old Lebanese hashish high. And a morning wake 'n bake. And GDP/Grape pain relief.

I was looking onto getting a micro grow license here and growing the land races of old, but there does not seem to be much demand for them here. I would have to grow Blue Widow's Dutch Pineapple Skunk Fart to get a premium. Not sure I want to do that. Durban Poison I could sell all day here though. That is still popular. I am sure I could sell Colombian Black as well (Wacky Weed). And maybe bring back African Black Magic. Lebanese might be to subtle for them.
 
Funny you should mention Lebanese, Big Sur. I was introduced to cannabis while living in Portugal and Denmark in the late 60's/early 70's. All we had (ALL!!!) was black Afghani hash and Lebanese Blonde. So that's all I was familiar with when I returned to the US in 1973, moving to southern Colorado.

It was a huge shock to go from that traditional hashish to Mexican swag weed. I couldn't believe cannabis could be so good in one area and so bad in another. But over time, some Columbian and some half decent Mexican and Central American weed showed up, but it wasn't until some friends who were medics in the Air Force got connected to Thai Stick that I stopped longing for European hashish.

Thai Stick was good, very good at that time. A traditional tropical sativa. Still better (in my memory) than Durban. That tided me over until NorCal growers and their sensimilla flowers started to show up in Colorado.

But now the genetics has soared into fantasy land. Still damn potent weed, but i just don't know what to expect most of the time, and I miss the original Thai Stick. I buy flowers that are supposedly Thai genetics from time to time, but its not the same stuff.

I would dearly love to enjoy some Lebanese blonde hash or Afghani black again, or the original Thai, assuming it's the original genetics and method of production. That would be a glorious return to my past. But unlikely in the US after everything that's happened in the Middle East and Afghanistan. Based on watching some episodes of the Strain Hunter show, it sounds like even those areas have been polluted by hybrids and don't produce anything like the old product.

Still, I'm glad I got to thoroughly experience Old World Cannabis when I was young. Just one of many things that I'm nostalgic about. Price of getting old, I guess. But beats the alternative.
 
Ah yes, Thai peaked during the Viet Nam war era. It is all gone now. There are some good YouTube vids on Thailand and what it was like growing it then (an industry), and what it is now (nothing there now). The people there say the good stuff is still being grown in Laos. I have some original skinny stick Thai seeds in my collection from back in the day. I smoked a boat load of skinny stick Thai. Before Thai became fat sticks dipped in hash oil that just put me to sleep. Thai grows funny though, and I have yet to grow any. I am working on Durban. The best Durban is really good stuff, and said to be of Thai origin. Original Colombian Gold is also of Thai origin. At least that is what the genetic testing of modern Colombian Gold is showing. I have gobs of 1970s Colombian seeds, and Mexican seeds. We were spoiled rotten in NorCal in the 1970s. Good Mexican loose colas (and bad bricked), Colombian (good gold, green, red and bad bricked red and brown), Thai, Cambodian, Panamanian, Ganja from India (the best weed that I have ever smoked), Jamaican, hash from Lebanon, Afghanistan, Mexico (crappy), Morocco, Israel, and Nepal (and even Hawaii), Kona Gold, Maui Waui, and early African from Nigeria (Black Magic), and then the early local NorCal strains like Big Sur Holy, and later sinsemilia skunk, haze, purple, and lots of early land race and crosses from Big Sur and the Santa Cruz mountains, and later narcotic fat Thai sticks. Then of course the barrage of Emerald Triangle stuff. I have several seed stocks of closely held strains from Mendocino and Humboldt. They typically sold for $400 an oz in SF. Lawyer weed. No Durban back then, and no Brazilian. For whatever reason, they were rare in NorCal.

I am growing 2 phenos of Bekaa Valley land race Lebanese now. They are the basis of the red and blonde hashish that came of of there. Some of the early samples have that red Lebby hash taste to them. I got these seeds from friends in Europe. I am not longing for the strain of old, I am growing them here now. A dream come true. Legal weed, and growing the best older strains from around the globe. I never thought that is would ever happen. But alas... here is a Lebby sativa pheno blooming for me now. I believe that it is the basis of the early harvest blonde hashish coming out of there. Its all sparkly, but the camera does not pick that up.

RSC_sativa_bloom.JPG
 
Back
Top Bottom