What's new
  • As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.

Google Earth Flyover of 600 Emerald Triangle farms at harvest

Chunkypigs

passing the gas
Veteran
Interesting Video flyover found in article on environmental harm.
if you have a good internet connection switch to HD and you can see Tom waving at you as well as naked hippy chicks trimming as you flyover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMpu0kbsV7w#t=76

Article here and it's a good one.
http://www.thenation.com/article/176955/pot-growing-bad-environment?page=0,1

As cannabis production has ramped up in Northern California to meet the demand for medical and black-market marijuana, the ecological impacts of its cultivation have ballooned. From shrunken, muddy streams to rivers choked with algae and wild lands tainted with chemical poisons, large-scale cannabis agriculture is emerging as a significant threat to the victories that have been won in the region to protect wilderness, keep toxic chemicals out of the environment, and rebuild salmon runs that had once provided the backbone of a coast-wide fishing industry.

River advocate Scott Greacen has spent most of his career fighting dams and the timber industry, but now he’s widened his focus to include the costs of reckless marijuana growing. Last year was a time of region-wide rebound for threatened salmon runs, but one of his colleagues walked his neighborhood creek and sent a downbeat report that only a few spawning fish had returned. Even more alarming was the condition of the creek bed: coated with silt and mud, a sign that the water quality in this stream was going downhill.

“The problem with the weed industry is that its impacts are severe, it’s not effectively regulated, and it’s growing so rapidly,” says Greacen, executive director of Friends of the Eel River, which runs through the heart of the marijuana belt.

That lack of regulation sets marijuana’s impacts apart from those that stem from legal farming or logging, yet the 76-year-old federal prohibition on cannabis has thwarted attempts to hold its production to any kind of environmental standard. As a result, the ecological impact of an ounce of pot varies tremendously, depending on whether it was produced by squatters in national forests, hydroponic operators in homes and warehouses, industrial-scale operations on private land, or conscientious mom-and-pop farmers. Consumers could exert market power through their choices, if only they had a reliable, widely accepted certification program, like the ones that guarantee the integrity of organic agriculture. But thanks to the prohibition on pot, no such certification program exists for cannabis products.

To understand how raising some dried flowers—the prized part of the cannabis plant—can damage the local ecosystem, you first have to grasp the skyrocketing scale of backwoods agriculture on the redwood coast. Last fall, Scott Bauer of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife turned a mapping crew loose on satellite photos of two adjoining creeks. In the Staten Island–sized area that drains into those streams, his team identified more than 1,000 cannabis farms, estimated to produce some 40,000 small-tree-sized plants annually. Bauer holds up the maps, where each greenhouse is marked in blue and each outdoor marijuana garden in red, with dots that correspond to the size of the operation. It looks like the landscape has a severe case of Technicolor acne.

“In the last couple of years, the increase has been exponential,” Bauer says. “On the screen, you can toggle back and forth between the 2010 aerial photo and the one from 2012. Where there had been one or two sites, now there are ten.”

Each of those sites represents industrial development in a mostly wild landscape, with the hilly terrain flattened and cleared. “When someone shaves off a mountaintop and sets a facility on it,” Bauer says, “that’s never changing. The topsoil is gone.” The displaced soil is then spread by bulldozer to build up a larger flat pad for greenhouses and other farm buildings. But heavy winter rains wash some of the soil into streams, Bauer explains, where it sullies the salmon’s spawning gravels and fills in the pools where salmon fry spend the summer. Ironically, these are the very impacts that resulted from the worst logging practices of the last century.

“We got logging to the point that the rules are pretty tight,” Bauer says, “and now there’s this whole new industry where nobody has any idea what they’re doing. You see guys building roads who have never even used a Cat [Caterpillar tractor]. We’re going backwards.”

Then there’s irrigation. A hefty cannabis plant needs several gallons of water per day in the rainless summer growing season, which doesn’t sound like much until you multiply it by thousands of plants and consider that many of the streams in the area naturally dwindle each August and September. In the summer of 2012, the two creeks that Bauer’s team mapped got so low that they turned into a series of disconnected pools with no water flowing between them, trapping the young fish in shrinking ponds. “It’s a serious issue for the coho salmon,” Bauer says. “How is this species going to recover if there’s no water?”

The effects extend beyond salmon. During several law enforcement raids last year, Bauer surveyed the creeks supplying marijuana farms to document the environmental violations occurring there. Each time, he says, he found a sensitive salamander species above the grower’s water intakes, but none below them, where the irrigation pipes had left little water in the creek. On one of these raids, he chastised the grower, who was camped out onsite and hailed from the East Coast, new to the four- to six-month dry season that comes with California’s Mediterranean climate. “I told him, ‘You’re taking most of the flow, man,’ ” Bauer recalls. “’It’s just a little tiny creek, and you’ve got three other growers downstream. If you’re all taking 20 or 30 percent, pretty soon there’s nothing left for the fish.’ So he says, ‘I didn’t think about that.’ ”

While some growers raise their pot organically, many do not. “Once you get to a certain scale, it’s really hard to operate in a sustainable way,” Greacen says. “Among other things, you’ve got a monoculture, and monocultures invite pests.” Spider mites turn out to be a particular challenge for greenhouse growers. Tony Silvaggio, a lecturer at Humboldt State University and a scholar at the campus’s year-old Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research, found that potent poisons such as Avid and Floramite are sold in small vials under the counter at grower supply stores, in defiance of a state law that requires they be sold only to holders of a pesticide applicator’s license. Nor are just the workers at risk: the miticides have been tested for use on decorative plants, but not for their impacts if smoked. Otherwise ecologically minded growers can be driven to spray with commercial pesticides, Silvaggio has found in his research. “After you’ve worked for months, if you have an outbreak of mites in your last few weeks when the buds are going, you’ve got to do something—otherwise you lose everything,” he says.

Outdoor growers face another threat: rats, which are drawn to the aromatic, sticky foliage of the cannabis plant. Raids at growing sites typically find packages of the long-acting rodent poison warfarin, which has begun making its way up the food chain to predators such as the rare, weasel-like fisher. A study last year in the online scientific journal PLOS One found that more than 70 percent of fishers have rat poison in their bloodstream, and attributed four fisher deaths to internal bleeding triggered by the poison they absorbed through their prey. Deep in the back-country, Silvaggio says, growers shoot or poison bears to keep them from raiding their encampments.

The final blow to environmental health from outdoor growing comes from fertilizers. Growers dump their used potting soil, enriched with unabsorbed fertilizers, in places where it washes into nearby streams and is suspected of triggering blooms of toxic algae. The deaths of four dogs on Eel River tributaries have been linked to the algae, which the dogs ingest after swimming in the river and then licking their fur.
 

Al Botross

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Ah ja! were we're just pissing and moaning as we saw the mother fucking yellow google plane fly over doing a grid............just yesterday we looked at google earth and god dam theres everything current within a month and us standing out in the open.........Fuck google, so pissed..........

Oh and the satellite myth is bullshit they do fly over invading privacy in my opinion, google earth is not from satellite a yellow painted crop duster so they can fly low under 900'.
 
Last edited:

Chunkypigs

passing the gas
Veteran
The cannabis industry—or what Silvaggio calls the “marijuana-industrial complex”—has been building toward this collision with the environment ever since California voters approved Proposition 215 in 1996, legalizing the medicinal use of marijuana under state law. Seven years later, the legislature passed Senate Bill 420, which allows patients growing pot with a doctor’s blessing to form collectives and sell their herbal remedy to fellow patients. Thus were born the storefront dispensaries, which grew so common that they came to outnumber Starbucks outlets in Los Angeles.

From the growers’ point of view, a 100-plant operation no longer had to be hidden, because its existence couldn’t be presumed illegal under state law. So most growers stopped hiding their plants in discreet back-country clearings or buried shipping containers and instead put them out in the open. As large grows became less risky, they proliferated—and so did their effects on the environment. Google Earth posted satellite photos taken in August 2012, when most outdoor pot gardens were nearing their peak. Working with Silvaggio, a graduate student identified large growing sites in the area, and posted a Google Earth flyover tour of the region that makes it clear that the two creeks Bauer’s team studied are representative of the situation across the region.

With all of the disturbance from burgeoning backwoods marijuana gardens, it might seem that raising cannabis indoors would be the answer. Indoor growers can tap into municipal water supplies and don’t have to clear land or build roads to farms on hilltop hideaways. But indoor growing is responsible instead for a more insidious brand of damage: an outsize carbon footprint to power the electric-intensive lights, fans and pumps that it takes to raise plants inside. A dining-table-size hydroponic unit yielding five one-pound crops per year would consume as much electricity as the average US home, according to a 2012 paper in the peer-reviewed journal Energy Policy. All told, the carbon footprint of a single gram of cannabis is the same as driving seventeen miles in a Honda Civic. In addition, says Kristin Nevedal, president of the Emerald Growers Association, “the tendency indoors is to lean toward chemical fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides to stabilize the man-made environment, because you don’t have the natural beneficials that are found outdoors.”

Nevertheless, the appeal of indoor growing is strong, explains Sharon (not her real name), a single mother who used to raise marijuana in the sunshine but moved her operation indoors after she split up with her husband. Under her 3,000 watts of electric light, she raises numerous smaller plants in a space the size of two sheets of plywood, using far less physical effort than when she raised large plants outdoors. “It’s a very mommy-friendly business that provides a dependable, year-round income,” she says. Sharon harvests small batches of marijuana year-round, which fetch a few hundred dollars more per pound than outdoor-grown cannabis because of consumers’ preferences. Sharon’s growing operation supports her and her teenage daughter in the rural area where she settled more than two decades ago.

Add up the energy used by indoor growers, from those on Sharon’s scale to the converted warehouses favored by urban dispensaries, and the impact is significant—estimated at 3 percent of the state’s total power bill, or the electricity consumed by 1 million homes. On a local level, indoor cannabis production is blocking climate stabilization efforts in the coastal city of Arcata, which aimed to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent over twelve years. But during the first half of that period, while electricity consumption was flat or declining slightly statewide, Arcata’s household electrical use grew by 25 percent. City staff traced the increase to more than 600 houses that were using at least triple the electricity of the average home—a level consistent with a commercial cannabis operation.

The city has borne other costs, too, besides simply missing its climate goals. Inexpertly wired grow houses catch fire, and the conversion of residential units to indoor hothouses has cut into the city’s supply of affordable housing. Last November, city voters approved a stiff tax on jumbo electricity consumers. Now the city council is working with other Humboldt County local governments to pass a similar tax so that growers can’t evade the fee simply by fleeing the city limits, says City Councilman Michael Winkler. “We don’t want any place in Humboldt County to be a cheaper place to grow than any other. And since this is the Silicon Valley of marijuana growing, there are a lot of reasons why people would want to stay here if they’re doing this,” he says. “My goal is to make it expensive enough to get large-scale marijuana growing out of the neighborhoods.”

A tax on excessive electricity use may seem like an indirect way of curbing household cannabis cultivation, but the city had to back away from its more direct approach—a zoning ordinance—when the federal government threatened to prosecute local officials throughout the state if they sanctioned an activity that is categorically forbidden under US law. Attempts in neighboring Mendocino County to issue permits to outdoor growers meeting environmental and public-safety standards were foiled when federal attorneys slapped county officials with similar warning—illustrating, yet again, the way prohibition sabotages efforts to reduce the industry’s environmental damage.

Indeed, observers cite federal cannabis prohibition as the biggest impediment to curbing the impacts of marijuana cultivation, which continues to expand despite a decades-long federal policy of zero tolerance. “We don’t have a set of best management practices for this industry, partly because of federal prohibition,” says researcher Silvaggio. “If a grower comes to the county agricultural commissioner and asks, ‘What are the practices I can use that can limit my impact?’, the county ag guy says, ‘I can’t talk to you about that because we get federal money.’ ”

Faced with this dilemma, observers have proposed a spectrum of solutions. A group of patient-growers banded together as the Tea House Collective to make their low-impact farming methods a central part of their marketing to prospective members. “It’s about knowing your local farmer, the way ‘locavore’ is overtaking organic food,” says collective founder Charley Custer. Other growers tout peer pressure and education as a way to goad their fellow farmers to do better, and have put together their own guide to best practices.

Activist Greacen proposes tailoring the tactics to each style of cannabis farming. Cannabis farms on public land spread chemical fertilizers and poisons into wildlife strongholds and leave behind a mess because they have no long-term stake in the property. “It’s a lot like other kinds of rogue industry, like gold mining in Brazil,” Greacen says. “If we can’t get the feds and the cops to mobilize at the scale we need, we may need to consider going out there with large numbers of people in the early spring, walking the most vulnerable places, and scaring these guys out.”

At the other end of the spectrum, he adds, are “touchy-feely small-scale organic folks who just need some more water tanks” so they can capture their irrigation supply in the winter, when it’s plentiful. In between, “you have this vast new industry of fairly large-scale operations on private lands,” where progress is limited by the unyielding federal opposition to cannabis. “The fundamental thing we need is a shift in the stance of the US Attorneys,” he says, “who have blocked efforts to regulate cultivation.” This would allow local governments to set limits on the impact and scale of these operations, license those who agree to abide by the limits, and mow down plants at farms that refuse to get licensed.

Another approach comes from state Fish and Wildlife researcher Bauer, who wants cannabis farmers to know that he doesn’t care what they’re growing, only how they grow it. He’s willing to consider permit applications for farmers to use water from local creeks so that his agency can regulate how much they take, at what time of year, and how to keep the pumps from sucking fish out of the streams along with the irrigation water. “We’re not going to tell you that you can’t do your project,” Bauer says. “We’re going to tell you the right way to do it.”

As evidence that his agency is truly indifferent to the legality of the growers’ trade, he recalls what happened last summer when his team searched cannabis farms for evidence of environmental violations. “I think people were shocked because we didn’t touch a plant,” he says. “They thought we were there to whack their crop.” Instead, the growers were simply cited for illegal water diversion and dumping sediment into the creek. One of the raided farmers said he’d apply for a permit, Bauer says, but he never did.

That grower’s reluctance to come under the umbrella of regulation illustrates one of the central problems in curbing cannabis’s impacts: marijuana growing remains, at its roots, an underground enterprise practiced with an outlaw mind-set. Even though cannabis cultivation has flourished under the ambiguous auspices of California’s medical marijuana laws, the people who are best placed to serve as watchdogs over environmental abuses in their remote areas still feel bound by a code of silence to protect each other from the law.

Sharon is one such person—and it isn’t because she’s happy with the growth of the marijuana business. The relatively large operations in her rural valley have brought noisy generators to the hills where she used to take quiet walks. “There’s a buzz of industry now in my neighborhood,” she laments. Even though her neighbors raise their cannabis under natural light, they rely on generators to power the fans ventilating their greenhouses and to supplement the natural light. Water has become a point of contention as well in late summer, when outdoor plants are at their thirstiest. Sharon shares a water supply with the adjoining properties, which has run dry repeatedly as a nearby family has scaled up its cannabis growing. When that happens, the handful of households who depend on that system have to wait until the creek gradually replenishes their tanks before they enjoy the convenience of running water again. But even so, Sharon couldn’t imagine asking a government agency to intercede if her neighbors’ water use exceeded legal limits. “The taboo is deeply embedded in me,” she says. “I would be an N-A-R-C, and they would be justifiably angry with me.”

These attitudes die hard, and they are rising to the surface as Humboldt County considers a local ordinance requiring cannabis growers to register with the county and meet minimal environmental standards or risk being deemed a nuisance. But a hearing on the ordinance drew a skeptical public. “Registration sounds to me like ‘Come and turn yourself in,’ ” Bonnie Blackberry of the Civil Liberties Monitoring Project told the county supervisors last month. “It seems like that’s asking an awful lot, and I’m not sure you’re going to get a lot of people who will do that.”

The cannabis boom shows no signs of slowing down. Its growth heightens the challenge of bringing the industry into the bright sunshine of environmental protection—not to mention occupational safety and health, farm labor, and payroll and income-tax laws. But that is likely to prove an impossible task so long as the message from Washington is that the right scale for cannabis farming is no farming at all.

Seth Zuckerman October 31, 2013 The Nation Magazine
 

Pahaska

New member
i took a look on google earth by myself,
it's very impressive !

interesting article, thanks chunkypigs
 

HidingInTheHaze

Active member
Veteran
It sickens me to see the media beat the drum on marijuana production and it's ecological effects. All the while the world turns a blind eye to our own food crops which are hosed down in one of the worst chemicals known to man, Monsanto's own highly carcinogenic Glyphosate herbicide.

Agriculture as a whole is dirty and damaging, but why just focus on such a minute part of the big picture.

Agriculture and industrial farming as we know it is long over due for change.
 

Chunkypigs

passing the gas
Veteran
the level of resolution is amazing in some places. you can zoom in on someones hemorrhoids in certain parts of the US.

Google has a way for you to get your house blurred out and if you have trouble counting past 99 like so many homeowners in Humbolt it might be worth looking into.

I'm surprised at how much light dep is going on compared to trees.
 

Sativa Dragon

Active member
Veteran
It sickens me to see the media beat the drum on marijuana production and it's ecological effects. All the while the world turns a blind eye to our own food crops which are hosed down in one of the worst chemicals known to man, Monsanto's own highly carcinogenic Glyphosate herbicide.

Agriculture as a whole is dirty and damaging, but why just focus on such a minute part of the big picture.

Agriculture and industrial farming as we know it is long over due for change.

The change you refer to is called Permiculture, the way we used to farm.

There is no proof that Glyphosate is cancer causing, Rats and dogs and mice fed glyphosate over a wide range of doses showed no cancer related effects directly due to the compound. EPA has stated that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that glyphosate is not carcinogenic in humans.

The MSDS has no mention of Carcinogenic Effects. It is more likely that the surfactants are the cause of this rumor started by the media beating the drum on pesticides when it was a big deal and they had no other stories.

It sickens me when the media distracts us while the new world order and the lizard people from space are trying to enslave the human race.

peace
 

Chunkypigs

passing the gas
Veteran
Found a few old articles about this video.

http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2013/jan/4/growing-dilemna/

Kym Kemp / Friday, Jan. 4 @ 7:44 a.m. /

“A standard of environmental and social responsibility is needed for marijuana agriculture to be compatible with these rural landscapes in the long run,” asserts the final screen shot of The Green Rush Google Earth Tour.

The video (above) which was produced by a student and a faculty member associated with the the Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research (HIIMR) uses recent and startlingly intimate Google Earth images to probe the growth, scope, and environmental impact of cannabis farms in the Humboldt hills. This video, seen last November on LoCO, is part of a budding movement by scientists and scholars to both study and attempt to influence the agricultural practices of marijuana growers.

Changing technology and changing attitudes in the marijuana growers’ community have recently allowed scientists and scholars to begin studying Humboldt cannabis farms in a way never before possible. Professionals and academics are using the internet as well as traditional media to publish their findings not only to their peers but to the public at large. They hope to influence growers towards more responsible environmental practices.

“We’ve got to get [growers] to start coming in. We want to work with them to conserve water,” explains Scott Bauer of the Department of Fish and Wildlife (Formerly the Dept. of Fish and Game) who recently delved into Google Earth to observe water usage in a single tributary of the South Fork of the Eel River. The watershed is a spawning area for the endangered Coho salmon. Using the well-known online map site as well as other technology, he and fellow state scientists estimated that marijuana growers were likely removing up to 18 million gallons of water per season from this one tributary.

And he thinks that number might be conservative. “I don’t think we are overestimating the amount of water drawn out of the Eel,” worries Bauer. “I think we are underestimating.” He is concerned that without intervention the increasing amount of water used to fuel Humboldt’s cannabis farms could irretrievably weaken certain species. Using both Google Earth and Geographic Information System (GIS) that allows more precise measurements, his group studied a watershed of approximately 23,600 acres. They examined it closely counting each marijuana plant and using the measurements of the greenhouses to estimate plant counts. In that watershed, the group calculated that there were 286 greenhouses, 281 grows and approximately 20,100 marijuana plants. (That comes out to just under a plant an acre or about 540 marijuana plants per square mile.)

Using estimations of average water usage per plant per day supplied by growers, Bauer’s group then calculated the amount of water that those plants would use— a whopping 18 million gallons of water per season. And, he said that because of Google Earth, they had the ability to check closely for water storage situations. Bauer said, “There were very few ponds and tanks out there.” So in order to keep marijuana plants alive and thriving during the hot summer months, water was likely pumped directly from tributaries to the Eel—diminishing streams and creeks and endangering wildlife.

The numbers given above are just estimations but Bauer says they are necessary for his department’s long term goal of developing a “water budget” for each watershed. They hope to figure out average flows in each waterway during the late summer months. Then they hope to figure out how much is necessary to maintain water health and allow fish populations, etc. to thrive. From that they will be able to derive numbers on how much water can be withdrawn from each watershed.

To Bauer, the amount of water withdrawn isn’t the only concern. He says,

…what concerns me the most about people diverting water illegally for marijuana is not so much the total amount over the course of a growing season …but how it is diverted. If there are 300 growers in a watershed and 150 of them all kick on their water pumps first thing in the morning and the cumulative impact is to dry up sections of stream, well then, it’s game over for the fish and other aquatic life. I’ve seen one pump in a stream turned on and have no discernible effect at the point of diversion, yet 800 feet downstream a long section of riffle was dewatered, killing a half dozen steelhead.

He is also concerned about how grading causes sediment runoff. Among other problems, sediment can destroy spawning areas, kill bottom dwelling organisms, and injure fish. He says that government agencies have been working for years and spending millions of dollars to “fix the old logging areas and my hunch is that we’ll be doing that with marijuana grows in the future….We’re spending millions to fix these old roads. I have this feeling that in the future we’ll be spending millions to fix the marijuana grows.”

Anthony Silvaggio, Ph.D, who is a faculty member of the Humboldt State University Sociology Department and associated with the Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research (HIIMR), is also worried about the effect of grows on the environment. This is why the Green Rush video (see above) was created. He explains that the Green Rush video is

…simply exploratory research, with the intent to produce a visual to educate the public and those concerned with environmental protection about the distribution and magnitude of marijuana agriculture in the county. As a researcher who has visited numerous sites that have been degraded by industrial marijuana agriculture, it is our job to produce work that informs people about the impacts of the industry, and to help cultivate community awareness around the issue of ecological harms. As an environmentalist, one goal is to help design [best management practices] for the industry.

Both Silvaggio and Bauer have used the newest updates on Google Earth to examine the amount and effects of marijuana growing in specific areas. The Green Rush video stitched together Google Earth photos showing the extent of growing in an area. One of the most dramatic scenes shows an aerial view of Humboldt County with a rash of red spots tossed across a small chunk of land in the southwest section. Each of those red spots represents a grow and, according to a caption on the video, there are over 600 grows in the area shown. According to Silvaggio, some of the red dots could represent grows as small as 50 to 100 plants but most are larger. He says,

The majority of the grows represented are 100 plus plant grows, which most insiders (growers, law enforcement, etc.) say is the general minimum for this classification of industrial….After a rigorous inventory of the site, we are very confident that the overwhelming majority of the sites represented industrial grows.

The effects of even smaller grows can add up, Silvaggio explains.

…[T]his is a question of cumulative impacts. In additional to the impacts of industrial grows, we more than likely have over a 1000 small scenes that could have water, topsoil, forest cover, fish, and erosion impacts.

Some people, however argue that marijuana industry is being unfairly targeted. First of all they say that many, if not most, growers utilize good environmental practices. The blog, One Good Year, makes a very effective argument that Humboldt has a

long-established community of responsible growers…who are community-oriented and environmentally responsible; who farm organically and improve the private land they’re living and farming on; who don’t use poisons; and who store water (with or without a permit) in the winter for use during the dry months instead of sucking it from dwindling creek flows.

Furthermore, some argue that lumber companies and vineyards are the cause of much more damage to the environment than marijuana farms. For instance, one comment on the LoCO says,

every single green diamond clearcut kills more than just the trees involved. You could fit the surface area of every illicit grow into a couple green diamond clearcuts, and green diamond clearcuts by the thousands.

Bauer, on the other hand, argues that there are regulations in place to deal with the lumber and wine companies but more importantly,”Water diversions are water diversions, whether they are for grapes or marijuana.”

Silvaggio is much more forceful. He says,

Its not either-or. To put it frankly, a salmon really does not give a shit if it’s a logging company or a grower spewing pesticides and silt into its home. Both cause environmental damage and kill fish. It is really harmful to environmental restoration efforts to say “let’s just ignore the eco-impacts that the marijuana industry has on critters.”

It is known that in some watersheds timber companies are contributing to environmental damage more than growers… [Which is causing the most damage] depends so many things - the watershed, the type of logging going on now, the level of damage past logging has already done to the watershed and the type, and scale of growing…

As an environmental sociologist, I know that state supported industrial logging practices devastated and continue to harm ecosystems and timber communities. This is not deniable…

However, he says,

One point we want to make is that the timber industry has a spectrum of regulated practices, and even though they are and have been insufficient in protecting critter and ecosystem, there are regs they must abide by and inspections, etc.

…The bottom line is that right now we have an already impaired ecosystem, one that people are putting immense energy and resources into helping rehabilitate, and this is getting further exploited by yet another unregulated, environmentally exploitative industry—industrial scale pot farmers.

According to Silvaggio, growers (and other rural residents) can reduce their impacts by calculating their water usage, creating a water budget, and maintaining water storage. (See detailed information here or here.)

Silvaggio also suggests,

if you are going to grade or clear land, get a permit.
do not use pesticides
hire a certified forester to cut your trees
talk to Dept. of Fish and Wildlife about water diversion and storage
reading this article which provides more information on what practices to avoid
He adds that growing indoor is not the solution. “Indoor cannabis,” Silvaggio says, “is not better for the environment, as it requires fossil fuels and other inputs that leave a huge ecological footprint both locally and globally.”

Silvaggio isn’t absolutely anti marijuana growing. He believes that

Growing marijuana may actually be a legitimate compatible use for some of the logged over tanoak forest. The question is what are the best management practices of the marijuana industry.

However he says, “as an enviro sociologist, I wish growers would spend just a fraction of the time (and money) they spend on researching their plant nutrients, strain types, big trucks, etc, and devote that fraction of time to researching eco-friendly cultivation practices. The fish and forest would appreciate it.”

#####################################################################################

http://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetrut...ptures-carnage-of-emerald-triangle-pot-grows/

Pot-smoking hippies can be such hypocrites sometimes.

To illustrate: students and faculty at the Humboldt State Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research have created “The Green Rush Google Earth Tour” – a video flyover of a 24,000 acre watershed in the Southern Humboldt. It’s beautiful, rugged country, save for the herpes-like red dots representing over 600 industrial pot grows. Researchers found 286 greenhouses, 281 grows, and roughly 20,100 pot plants (or one plant an acre, and 540 plants per square mile) in the area.

The grows are using an estimated using 18 million gallons of water per season, most of which is illegally pumped directly from tributaries to the Eel River — choking off vital streams and creeks, and endangering wildlife. Out of control, unregulated pot growing is picking up where the logging industry left off: clear-cutting, grading, creating run-off, and ruining the environment.

As one researcher eloquently put it: “a salmon really does not give a shit if it’s a logging company or a grower spewing pesticides and silt into its home. Both cause environmental damage and kill fish. It is really harmful to environmental restoration efforts to say ‘let’s just ignore the eco-impacts that the marijuana industry has on critters.’”

“A standard of environmental and social responsibility is needed for marijuana agriculture to be compatible with these rural landscapes in the long run,” the video concludes.

We would add that there’s a reason moonshiners aren’t cutting down trees to distill whiskey in the Emerald Triangle. Alcohol – a more toxic, addictive and destructive drug than cannabis – is legal, taxed, regulated, and so cheap it renders such bootlegging profitless.
 

jayjayfrank

Member
Veteran
so this is a rippers dream right?


also just read somewhere that you only need some 35,000 acres to supply US demand...

if this is 20,000 just in humboldt than all the weed in the US comes from Cali...

even if its not really 35,000 and twice that at 70,000 or even 4x at 140,000... still a small amount of land needed to supply the US.

or the numbers just dont add up because prohibition....


you know what else would help the rivers and fish? not damning them up and diverting the water to farms/ranches...
 

justpassnthru

Active member
Veteran
That area being "Gold' country and given the price of gold the past few years, it is highly likely that some of the damage to the streams is from a new "Gold Rush" in the gold country.

Shame on Google trying to bring down outdoor growing! jpt
 
L

longearedfriend

ripper's dream ? lol

sure if the ripper's dream is to get shot in the face

I for one think it's crazy what's going on in california, might not agree with polluting the environment but having farms of weed is impressive
 

mapinguari

Member
Veteran
That area being "Gold' country and given the price of gold the past few years, it is highly likely that some of the damage to the streams is from a new "Gold Rush" in the gold country.

Shame on Google trying to bring down outdoor growing! jpt

Gold Country is mostly south and east of the Triangle.
 

supermanlives

Active member
Veteran
water is fine here in my area but no salmon only trout. the impact from pot growers is problematic but so aint commercial food crops. lots of fert funoff from regular legal shit too.
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top