When you login the first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account's public profile information shared by the Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect withD
I agree
When you login the first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account's public profile information shared by the Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
This is really interesting! Good graphics.
Question is whether the licenses they list in their counts are temporary/interim ones, or if they are final / ‘approved’ ones. My guess is the former.
Glad to see there are way more outdoor and mixed light than indoor!
Go Humboldt!!
To be accurate there are way more indoors in humboldt county post legalization, they are just not permitted. Usually it’s folks who once had a small medical sun grown garden, say 30 plants and when faced with abatements they had the option to either feed their families or not.
Also interesting, there are way more indoors statewide now too post legalization. in some counties (Tehama) you can’t even get a permit unless it’s for an indoor. So there goes that whole environmental sentiment. I have yet to see any proof that legalization is helping the environment. Corporate interests absolutely, but not the environment.
If you had read the original prop to legalize you would have known it was bad for the environment. It does not allow for personal recreational to be grown outdoors. It does allow for personal medical to be grown outdoors.
Thinking about starting a grow in Siskiyou county but having trouble looking up information about it. Last I herd residents can’t grow in unincorporated areas? Any information would be much appreciated, thanks.
Indoor is a hell of a lot more environmentally friendly than the way outdoors typically grown.
With outdoor you have plastic ground cloths, plastic glazing, plastic blackout tarts. You also have forest fragmentation and almost always light and sound pollution. As well as the fact that any fertilizer runoff goes directly into the environment. So does any overspray of pesticides. And the release of predator and sex to control other pests causes ecological problems.
Add to that the increased carbon footprint of that comes from the transportation of goods and personnel to more remote locations.
Nowadays with LEDs and the ability to purchase renewable power there’s just no question that indoor is far more environmentally friendly.
Of course full sun full term permaculture style cannabis can be done and some ( although few) are doing it.
Guest
Guest
3 years ago
Well These numbers are misleading. If calcannabis broke it down by sq ft of farms, humboldt would be on the bottom of the list. Example -there is a single million ACRE grow in lake county called “Humboldt standard” that isn’t on this list, even though that’s likely double what is permitted in our entire county? Another example-Have you seen Santa Barbra recently? Those mega farms are in the same category as much smaller farms in humboldt, who also have more extreme regulations and so costs.
Additionally Humboldt county had the most farms than any other county pre legalization, so it should be at the top and by a long shot. But the permit success rate for the county is under 10% and that is the figure that matters. Those 10% are more often struggling with county bureaucracy, extreme regs and costs, while the 90% are out of business and all their employees are struggling as well, rippling out to the entire community. Our small legacy farmers are getting wiped out, please show us those numbers calcannabis.
I’ll be very happy of the county ups their game and applies the appropriate resources to getting the paperwork done — however (and this is HUGE), there’s no way to shortcut the State requirements, (mandated by 64) so little will be “quick”.
Most people simply don’t realize how many of these requirements that people complain about (and blame the Counties) are 64 driven and can’t be skipped.
Someone mentioned that it’s basically ‘mean’ to make promises that sound easy while the oppressive requirements still remain. I agree.
One must have 5 acres for the permit, which eliminates people like me. I have a 250 sq ft greenhouse on a small rural parcel. It has been supporting me for many years but no way to make it legal.
Sure they might approve a project like promised but as most know, there is still the state requirements and that can take a while depending on where your located and water board and cequa, etc.
That is a great question kym and still tbd. I personally think it’s way too little way too late, and more propaganda than anything for the purpose of ending a medical cannabis loophole and to ease enforcement via satellite for the county. if our county cared about the future for legacy cultivators who made this product they are capitalizing on world famous, 2k sq ft permits would have always been easy and free too.
Most people do not understand that this new allegedly easier micro permit was a trade off for their sacrificing of their medical cannabis cultivation rights (up to 99 plants). 99 plants exceeds 2000 sq ft in many cases and the only fee was $100-150 to your cannabis doctor for a script over the phone and all in minutes. Working with the county is not exactly efficient.
In addition to the medical rights sacrifice the county also made changes to counter the measure s lawsuit unsuccessfully that day, which will end up as another huge waste of taxpayer money.
I do not know anyone personally with a 2k sq ft permit trying to work in this new system, it would be worth asking if anyone has even applied—-im on it. most of the 2k sq ft farms I know of got abated and signed away their right to grow per the advice of the county via a compliance agreement. Others expanded their cultivation areas to make it make economic sense considering the cost of compliance, and many of those small farms got denied for permits. Will they get access to the easy micro permit? Doubtful . Then we have those who would love a 2k sq ft permit know their property is not adequate, either the house is not permitted, they do gray water, have compost toilets or steep driveways or weird land right issues with their parcel. It’s not wise to invite the county out in those cases and most won’t.
So yeah Knowing the county, this micro permit it’s unlikely to help. I think most folks on that scale would prefer their medical rights back, over opening up this can of worms with a county that consistently works against them and their entire community’s well being.
I think the county should rubber stamp small farm permits, just like the county does for out of state and other mega farms. Maybe the county could spend over $700k fixing a bridge on the way to a group of small farms, like they did for the 8.5 acre out of state rolling meadows project ? I know folks out in alderpoint and salmon creek sure would appreciate a safe functional road and not having To pay out of pocket for that to get their permit approved. or maybe Ford can “dance on his desk” as he works to change the laws in favor of the small farmers like he seems to have done for sun valleys million sq ft mega farm? Then we would be talking about real and effective change. But small farms have never been the priority for our county. I think it relates to bias and lack of awareness about the culture.
So no not as advertised at all. for me this change was for the purpose of ending a medical cannabis loophole making enforcement via satellite easier for the county. Before this law change medical cannabis users had their plants cut unlawfully and it was a huge liability, and lawsuit waiting to happen. That is the only reason they made this change if you ask me 🙂
There are multiple 1-8 acre farms in lake county and you only need 21 acres roughly to hit a million sqft so I think they are spot on. I happen to be a owner of a licensed nursery and I can tell that I know personally of over million sqft of canopy I have seen from customers in lake county. Check your database again.
Lake County has a total area of 1329 mi². That is 850,560 acres. I’m pretty sure that if he/she rechecks the database there will not be a million acre farm (or anything else) there.
There is not any million acre grow in lake county. The largest license issued so far in lake county allows just 80 acres. Lol a million acres…thats hilarious.
The entire lake county land acreage is only 850,600 acres so you are stating the impossible.
Guest
Humco rotten to the core
3 years ago
When asked on KMUD whether a 2k square foot farm was even profitable. Mr Ford said he didn’t know!
Not legal it is profitable. Legal you need at least 5k grow area and do everything from seed to final trim to cover the extortion fees. The powers to be wanna claim for marketing they are supportive of small farms hence the “quick” permit process. i.e, see we approved three 2k sqft permits, oh, the 22 acre environmentally damaging grow pay no attention that, that’s uncle Jeff’s, besides for every 1 Jeff we approve 3 little guys that’s fair, Humboldt leads the way in small farms. Fuck Legal!
Guest
JB
3 years ago
I know from having downloaded and sorted the State license list, that the vast majority of those licenses counted (close to 80%) are NOT full annuals, but rather Provisionals that will be dead by the end of this year if not pressed through CEQA and completed.
The majority of the grows aren’t in santa barbara proper, they’re in places like Lompoc and Santa ynez and buelton area
Guest
Legallettuce
3 years ago
One last thing though. Just 6,235? A state with a 40 million+ population. Yea, those numbers work, lol. 791 Narcs but only 189 busts so you got a 75% chance to not be legal, those are great odds even if you do get Narced out.
Guest
Trinity Farmer
3 years ago
The CDFA hates small farms. For example, one of their licensing requirements is that licensed cultivators must be open 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year minus national holidays, for at least 2 hours per day. No allowable vacations or closures. The farm must make the premise available for inspection whether or not notice is given. They are not nice to work with, but there’s no other choice. Good luck if you want parental leave: no such thing. They want the big boys to succeed and they make it as hard as they can for the little guy.
Also, less than 50% inspection rate?! What the hell?! At least inspect your licensees! And yes, I’ve been inspected every single year….
Guest
Radio Head
3 years ago
Hey Trinity Farmer.
When they asked the hours of my Humboldt farm, I told them 10:30am – 2:30pm and that it was closed from December 15 to March 15 every year. ‘It’s an outdoor operation, can’t do anything in the cold winter, we work hard and need a break’. They finally relented.
Don’t be bullied!
Not been inspected yet. But have heard (at least one) Inspector is reasonable, personable, and by the book. She assured my friend she would give a minimum of 24 hour notice before an inspection. 🤞🏼
I too have firsthand experience with outdoor operations being shutdown during the winter season without any inspector issues. Not much to inspect with 4 ft of snow on the ground. They had no issue with that.
Thanks for the good words! How long ago did you have that experience? We are transitioning from mixed light to outdoor only, but are accessible all-year round, so I cannot blame the snow, unfortunately.
Recently, things have changed for the worse:
This was over the past few months: an overly aggressive inspector who would not leave us alone during the delivery of our son (NOTE: the women are generally better informed and easier to work with than the guy inspectors).
There is still potential for litigation, so I have to be careful with what I say:
The inspector threatened my license with a 30 day suspension if I did not speak with him about my “deficiencies” DURING my wife’s medical emergency – the induction of the birth of our son. There were none, btw, and I was cleared of all “deficiencies” during the call. I had given written notification to this inspector that I had a medical emergency and that all necessary information had been provided to him. Should have been case closed.
He would not leave me alone even though we were at the hospital. The staff were shocked that the guy at the other end of the phone yelling at me was a CDFA inspector. Total fucking asshole.
And yes, the head of the agency knows all about this, as well as all the other directors.
You know what happened next? More inspections, more harassment: 2 weeks after the birth of our son, METRC inspection, science amendments not approved; basically a retaliation campaign against us for complaining about this inspector.
I’ve already had an inspection on Jan. 4th for my Metrc. Yes, the ladies were very nice and I look forward to working with these people in the future.
However, the CDFA protects its own, is overly aggressive towards family-operated farms, and has power-abusing, asshole inspectors on its staff, who it protects.
Let me repeat this: my license was threatened with suspension if I did not speak to the inspector DURING my wife’s emergency induction for the birth of our son. What a fucking asshole agency.
And yes, if that guy ever contacts me again, there will be a lawsuit. He steps on my property, sheriff will be called. That’s all I can do and it sucks.
Wow! That is outrageous!! Really bad that upper management did not intervene!
The conversation regarding my hours occurred about 15 months ago. I don’t have a lot of snow. I didn’t make any excuse for closing, only the truth. ‘We don’t work on the farm in those months. We work hard. We need a break’. (Wish I didn’t have ongoing, never ending paperwork happening year round at this stage). If your situation is similar, I suggest you consider telling them the same thing. ‘We are closed from _______ to _______ every year’……
Otherwise. I can only think that you are being subjected to a major experience in learning to not have someone else trigger you. Considering the insensitivity and disrespect of your family, I can imagine that as very challenging.
Yep. You’ve set boundaries with the Asshole Inspector. Let them know. Then it’s their move.
Hope things smooth out soon, and your focus can be on supporting your wife and your new son!
Soo.. comparing small farm statistics in general to these..is hardly encouraging.. more “permits” means little in reference to the productivity and well being of small farms.. it doesn’t mean shizit..
USDA statistics on small farms
‘Most farms are small, but most production is on large farms..
Gross cash farm income (GCFI) includes income from commodity cash receipts, farm-related income, and Government payments. Family farms (where the majority of the business is owned by the operator and individuals related to the operator) of various types together accounted for nearly 98 percent of U.S. farms in 2019. Small family farms (less than $350,000 in GCFI) accounted for 90 percent of all U.S. farms. Large-scale family farms ($1 million or more in GCFI) make up about 3 percent of farms but 44 percent of the value of production.’
However, Organic and Local food production seems to be moving up!
‘Organic and Local Food. The Census found robust growth in organic production over the last five years, both in terms of sales, number of certified farms, and acres transitioning to organic. This, coupled with a consumer shift to local food markets, is changing the face of U.S. agriculture.’
Btw, it a court battle between the State and Harrens Labs, it was today revealed that of the 9,950 State licenses issued in total, 8,280 of them are Provisionals and only 1,670 are Annuals.
That’s 83% of the licenses in the State that will be gone by the end of the year if they don’t manage to get the rest of the way through CEQA (which is the big holdup).
There’s a bill right now working it’s way through, maybe SB1355, that will extend provisional licenses for 7-8 years. I read it quickly once, but without a doubt the state has to find a way to provide more time for the CEQA process. It’s incredibly burdensome and fraught with delays.
It’s definitely not 1355. I find nothing like what you describe in process, and while following all related bills religiously have heard nothing of the sort. This would have been HUGE news among the industry rags and consulting groups.
I call wishful thinking on the 7-8 year thing, but am perfectly willing to accept the evidence when produced.
“MAUCRSA, until January 1, 2022, authorizes a licensing authority, in its sole discretion, to issue a provisional license if the applicant has submitted a completed license application to the licensing authority, including evidence that compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or local cannabis ordinances is underway, if applicable, as specified.
This bill would extend the repeal date of these provisional license provisions to July 1, 2028.”
Definitely thought this would be the outcome. Too many local jurisdictions would lose out. Hopefully an affordable template for CEQA compliance will come about.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
This is really interesting! Good graphics.
Question is whether the licenses they list in their counts are temporary/interim ones, or if they are final / ‘approved’ ones. My guess is the former.
Glad to see there are way more outdoor and mixed light than indoor!
Go Humboldt!!
To be accurate there are way more indoors in humboldt county post legalization, they are just not permitted. Usually it’s folks who once had a small medical sun grown garden, say 30 plants and when faced with abatements they had the option to either feed their families or not.
Also interesting, there are way more indoors statewide now too post legalization. in some counties (Tehama) you can’t even get a permit unless it’s for an indoor. So there goes that whole environmental sentiment. I have yet to see any proof that legalization is helping the environment. Corporate interests absolutely, but not the environment.
If you had read the original prop to legalize you would have known it was bad for the environment. It does not allow for personal recreational to be grown outdoors. It does allow for personal medical to be grown outdoors.
I always knew it was bad for the environment that’s why I advocated and voted against it
So if I have a medical license I can grow in my backyard?
In Siskiyou County, no outdoor growing is allowed, medical or not.
Thinking about starting a grow in Siskiyou county but having trouble looking up information about it. Last I herd residents can’t grow in unincorporated areas? Any information would be much appreciated, thanks.
I’m glad of that, too.
Would have liked to see dispensaries listed.
Indoor is a hell of a lot more environmentally friendly than the way outdoors typically grown.
With outdoor you have plastic ground cloths, plastic glazing, plastic blackout tarts. You also have forest fragmentation and almost always light and sound pollution. As well as the fact that any fertilizer runoff goes directly into the environment. So does any overspray of pesticides. And the release of predator and sex to control other pests causes ecological problems.
Add to that the increased carbon footprint of that comes from the transportation of goods and personnel to more remote locations.
Nowadays with LEDs and the ability to purchase renewable power there’s just no question that indoor is far more environmentally friendly.
Of course full sun full term permaculture style cannabis can be done and some ( although few) are doing it.
Well These numbers are misleading. If calcannabis broke it down by sq ft of farms, humboldt would be on the bottom of the list. Example -there is a single million ACRE grow in lake county called “Humboldt standard” that isn’t on this list, even though that’s likely double what is permitted in our entire county? Another example-Have you seen Santa Barbra recently? Those mega farms are in the same category as much smaller farms in humboldt, who also have more extreme regulations and so costs.
Additionally Humboldt county had the most farms than any other county pre legalization, so it should be at the top and by a long shot. But the permit success rate for the county is under 10% and that is the figure that matters. Those 10% are more often struggling with county bureaucracy, extreme regs and costs, while the 90% are out of business and all their employees are struggling as well, rippling out to the entire community. Our small legacy farmers are getting wiped out, please show us those numbers calcannabis.
What do you think about the new quick permit process for small farmers? Do you see it as being as advertised?
I’ll be very happy of the county ups their game and applies the appropriate resources to getting the paperwork done — however (and this is HUGE), there’s no way to shortcut the State requirements, (mandated by 64) so little will be “quick”.
Most people simply don’t realize how many of these requirements that people complain about (and blame the Counties) are 64 driven and can’t be skipped.
Someone mentioned that it’s basically ‘mean’ to make promises that sound easy while the oppressive requirements still remain. I agree.
One must have 5 acres for the permit, which eliminates people like me. I have a 250 sq ft greenhouse on a small rural parcel. It has been supporting me for many years but no way to make it legal.
Sure they might approve a project like promised but as most know, there is still the state requirements and that can take a while depending on where your located and water board and cequa, etc.
That is a great question kym and still tbd. I personally think it’s way too little way too late, and more propaganda than anything for the purpose of ending a medical cannabis loophole and to ease enforcement via satellite for the county. if our county cared about the future for legacy cultivators who made this product they are capitalizing on world famous, 2k sq ft permits would have always been easy and free too.
Most people do not understand that this new allegedly easier micro permit was a trade off for their sacrificing of their medical cannabis cultivation rights (up to 99 plants). 99 plants exceeds 2000 sq ft in many cases and the only fee was $100-150 to your cannabis doctor for a script over the phone and all in minutes. Working with the county is not exactly efficient.
In addition to the medical rights sacrifice the county also made changes to counter the measure s lawsuit unsuccessfully that day, which will end up as another huge waste of taxpayer money.
I do not know anyone personally with a 2k sq ft permit trying to work in this new system, it would be worth asking if anyone has even applied—-im on it. most of the 2k sq ft farms I know of got abated and signed away their right to grow per the advice of the county via a compliance agreement. Others expanded their cultivation areas to make it make economic sense considering the cost of compliance, and many of those small farms got denied for permits. Will they get access to the easy micro permit? Doubtful . Then we have those who would love a 2k sq ft permit know their property is not adequate, either the house is not permitted, they do gray water, have compost toilets or steep driveways or weird land right issues with their parcel. It’s not wise to invite the county out in those cases and most won’t.
So yeah Knowing the county, this micro permit it’s unlikely to help. I think most folks on that scale would prefer their medical rights back, over opening up this can of worms with a county that consistently works against them and their entire community’s well being.
I think the county should rubber stamp small farm permits, just like the county does for out of state and other mega farms. Maybe the county could spend over $700k fixing a bridge on the way to a group of small farms, like they did for the 8.5 acre out of state rolling meadows project ? I know folks out in alderpoint and salmon creek sure would appreciate a safe functional road and not having To pay out of pocket for that to get their permit approved. or maybe Ford can “dance on his desk” as he works to change the laws in favor of the small farmers like he seems to have done for sun valleys million sq ft mega farm? Then we would be talking about real and effective change. But small farms have never been the priority for our county. I think it relates to bias and lack of awareness about the culture.
So no not as advertised at all. for me this change was for the purpose of ending a medical cannabis loophole making enforcement via satellite easier for the county. Before this law change medical cannabis users had their plants cut unlawfully and it was a huge liability, and lawsuit waiting to happen. That is the only reason they made this change if you ask me 🙂
There are not a million acres in all of Lake County. There certainly is not a million acre grow there. C’mon man.
Yeah, as someone who follows the licensing databases … he’s just full of it.
There are multiple 1-8 acre farms in lake county and you only need 21 acres roughly to hit a million sqft so I think they are spot on. I happen to be a owner of a licensed nursery and I can tell that I know personally of over million sqft of canopy I have seen from customers in lake county. Check your database again.
Lake County has a total area of 1329 mi². That is 850,560 acres. I’m pretty sure that if he/she rechecks the database there will not be a million acre farm (or anything else) there.
I don’t need to check the database again, but you do need to check the claim again:
// “there is a single million ACRE grow in lake county called “Humboldt standard” that isn’t on this list”//
Btw, I didn’t add the emphasizing capitalization to the word “ACRE”, the writer did that themselves.
You’re talking sf and the write clearly was talking acres. A million acres is an area ~ 40 miles by 40 miles.
Additionally, you’re adding up multiple farms to even get to your million sf while the writer says “single grow”.
Read much?
Actually, we, profarms had 30 acres of canopy in lake county both in 2020, & 2021. But this year we chose not to cultivate because of market flooding.
I misspoke because I had sun valley’s 1 million sq ft grow on my mind. Its 26 acres, the biggest in Northern CA-
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200926005027/en/Halo-and-Green-Matter-Purchase-Bar-X-Ranch-to-Establish-the-Largest-Cannabis-Grow-in-the-Northern-California-and-Southern-Oregon?fbclid=IwAR348ufq-C5rhM0fY6aQP5FGtpTmpfMu4Q2eyfcJC2Lm4E0GWYCXUj5K034
JB Im a woman and yes its 1,600 acres, not 1 million, I had Sun Valley’s 1 million sq ft grow on my mind and 500 other things.
check it out fellas – https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200926005027/en/Halo-and-Green-Matter-Purchase-Bar-X-Ranch-to-Establish-the-Largest-Cannabis-Grow-in-the-Northern-California-and-Southern-Oregon?fbclid=IwAR348ufq-C5rhM0fY6aQP5FGtpTmpfMu4Q2eyfcJC2Lm4E0GWYCXUj5K034
And if your wondering about the Ford dancing on his desk comment to open the door for Sun Valley to get their 1 million sq ft farm approved in the flood zone, here’s that as well- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.times-standard.com/2019/05/10/commission-approves-humboldt-county-coastal-cannabis/amp/
There is not any million acre grow in lake county. The largest license issued so far in lake county allows just 80 acres. Lol a million acres…thats hilarious.
The entire lake county land acreage is only 850,600 acres so you are stating the impossible.
When asked on KMUD whether a 2k square foot farm was even profitable. Mr Ford said he didn’t know!
Not legal it is profitable. Legal you need at least 5k grow area and do everything from seed to final trim to cover the extortion fees. The powers to be wanna claim for marketing they are supportive of small farms hence the “quick” permit process. i.e, see we approved three 2k sqft permits, oh, the 22 acre environmentally damaging grow pay no attention that, that’s uncle Jeff’s, besides for every 1 Jeff we approve 3 little guys that’s fair, Humboldt leads the way in small farms. Fuck Legal!
I know from having downloaded and sorted the State license list, that the vast majority of those licenses counted (close to 80%) are NOT full annuals, but rather Provisionals that will be dead by the end of this year if not pressed through CEQA and completed.
Exactly
Did the same thing too
There were like less than 20% of cultivation permits listed were annuals
Santa Barbara !
Santa Barbara county
The majority of the grows aren’t in santa barbara proper, they’re in places like Lompoc and Santa ynez and buelton area
One last thing though. Just 6,235? A state with a 40 million+ population. Yea, those numbers work, lol. 791 Narcs but only 189 busts so you got a 75% chance to not be legal, those are great odds even if you do get Narced out.
The CDFA hates small farms. For example, one of their licensing requirements is that licensed cultivators must be open 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year minus national holidays, for at least 2 hours per day. No allowable vacations or closures. The farm must make the premise available for inspection whether or not notice is given. They are not nice to work with, but there’s no other choice. Good luck if you want parental leave: no such thing. They want the big boys to succeed and they make it as hard as they can for the little guy.
Also, less than 50% inspection rate?! What the hell?! At least inspect your licensees! And yes, I’ve been inspected every single year….
Hey Trinity Farmer.
When they asked the hours of my Humboldt farm, I told them 10:30am – 2:30pm and that it was closed from December 15 to March 15 every year. ‘It’s an outdoor operation, can’t do anything in the cold winter, we work hard and need a break’. They finally relented.
Don’t be bullied!
Not been inspected yet. But have heard (at least one) Inspector is reasonable, personable, and by the book. She assured my friend she would give a minimum of 24 hour notice before an inspection. 🤞🏼
I too have firsthand experience with outdoor operations being shutdown during the winter season without any inspector issues. Not much to inspect with 4 ft of snow on the ground. They had no issue with that.
Thanks for the good words! How long ago did you have that experience? We are transitioning from mixed light to outdoor only, but are accessible all-year round, so I cannot blame the snow, unfortunately.
Recently, things have changed for the worse:
This was over the past few months: an overly aggressive inspector who would not leave us alone during the delivery of our son (NOTE: the women are generally better informed and easier to work with than the guy inspectors).
There is still potential for litigation, so I have to be careful with what I say:
The inspector threatened my license with a 30 day suspension if I did not speak with him about my “deficiencies” DURING my wife’s medical emergency – the induction of the birth of our son. There were none, btw, and I was cleared of all “deficiencies” during the call. I had given written notification to this inspector that I had a medical emergency and that all necessary information had been provided to him. Should have been case closed.
He would not leave me alone even though we were at the hospital. The staff were shocked that the guy at the other end of the phone yelling at me was a CDFA inspector. Total fucking asshole.
And yes, the head of the agency knows all about this, as well as all the other directors.
You know what happened next? More inspections, more harassment: 2 weeks after the birth of our son, METRC inspection, science amendments not approved; basically a retaliation campaign against us for complaining about this inspector.
I’ve already had an inspection on Jan. 4th for my Metrc. Yes, the ladies were very nice and I look forward to working with these people in the future.
However, the CDFA protects its own, is overly aggressive towards family-operated farms, and has power-abusing, asshole inspectors on its staff, who it protects.
Let me repeat this: my license was threatened with suspension if I did not speak to the inspector DURING my wife’s emergency induction for the birth of our son. What a fucking asshole agency.
And yes, if that guy ever contacts me again, there will be a lawsuit. He steps on my property, sheriff will be called. That’s all I can do and it sucks.
Wow! That is outrageous!! Really bad that upper management did not intervene!
The conversation regarding my hours occurred about 15 months ago. I don’t have a lot of snow. I didn’t make any excuse for closing, only the truth. ‘We don’t work on the farm in those months. We work hard. We need a break’. (Wish I didn’t have ongoing, never ending paperwork happening year round at this stage). If your situation is similar, I suggest you consider telling them the same thing. ‘We are closed from _______ to _______ every year’……
Otherwise. I can only think that you are being subjected to a major experience in learning to not have someone else trigger you. Considering the insensitivity and disrespect of your family, I can imagine that as very challenging.
Yep. You’ve set boundaries with the Asshole Inspector. Let them know. Then it’s their move.
Hope things smooth out soon, and your focus can be on supporting your wife and your new son!
// “How long ago did you have that experience?”//
No issues the last two seasons.
// “I cannot blame the snow”//
Actually the ground in our valley is rarely covered in snow — we did just come through the deepest snow since 1963 is why I mentioned the 4ft.
I’m sorry you’ve had to go through that. It’s not been an issue at all in our valley
Why is San Diego green? Did they fuck up and think it was Monterey?
Also, 13k is not a social media number to lead with if your goal is to impress people with your audience size…
Who proofs this shit?
Our representatives are corporate sellouts and could give 2 shits about any of us except around election time !!!!$$$$$
That isn’t news.
Soo.. comparing small farm statistics in general to these..is hardly encouraging.. more “permits” means little in reference to the productivity and well being of small farms.. it doesn’t mean shizit..
USDA statistics on small farms
‘Most farms are small, but most production is on large farms..
Gross cash farm income (GCFI) includes income from commodity cash receipts, farm-related income, and Government payments. Family farms (where the majority of the business is owned by the operator and individuals related to the operator) of various types together accounted for nearly 98 percent of U.S. farms in 2019. Small family farms (less than $350,000 in GCFI) accounted for 90 percent of all U.S. farms. Large-scale family farms ($1 million or more in GCFI) make up about 3 percent of farms but 44 percent of the value of production.’
https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2016/SmallFamilyFarms.pdf
However, Organic and Local food production seems to be moving up!
‘Organic and Local Food. The Census found robust growth in organic production over the last five years, both in terms of sales, number of certified farms, and acres transitioning to organic. This, coupled with a consumer shift to local food markets, is changing the face of U.S. agriculture.’
https://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/2017-ag-census-reveals-some-bright-spots/
Btw, it a court battle between the State and Harrens Labs, it was today revealed that of the 9,950 State licenses issued in total, 8,280 of them are Provisionals and only 1,670 are Annuals.
That’s 83% of the licenses in the State that will be gone by the end of the year if they don’t manage to get the rest of the way through CEQA (which is the big holdup).
There’s a bill right now working it’s way through, maybe SB1355, that will extend provisional licenses for 7-8 years. I read it quickly once, but without a doubt the state has to find a way to provide more time for the CEQA process. It’s incredibly burdensome and fraught with delays.
It’s definitely not 1355. I find nothing like what you describe in process, and while following all related bills religiously have heard nothing of the sort. This would have been HUGE news among the industry rags and consulting groups.
I call wishful thinking on the 7-8 year thing, but am perfectly willing to accept the evidence when produced.
Hayforker, were you thinking of SB 59?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB59
“MAUCRSA, until January 1, 2022, authorizes a licensing authority, in its sole discretion, to issue a provisional license if the applicant has submitted a completed license application to the licensing authority, including evidence that compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or local cannabis ordinances is underway, if applicable, as specified.
This bill would extend the repeal date of these provisional license provisions to July 1, 2028.”
I’ll bet that’s the one.
Thanks for the find.
Definitely thought this would be the outcome. Too many local jurisdictions would lose out. Hopefully an affordable template for CEQA compliance will come about.