Last Days for Entry Into the California State Fair Cannabis Awards Competition

golden bear statue ca state fair cannabis awardLicensed cannabis cultivators have until Friday, May 19th to enter the 2nd Annual CA State Fair Cannabis Awards.

The competition is open to all licensed California state cultivators and has a variety of categories for indoor, mixed light, and outdoor grown cannabis.

A press release from the competition stated, “This is an opportunity for California’s cannabis industry to celebrate its rightful seat at the big agricultural table, alongside coveted state fair competitions for wine, cheese, olive oil, and craft beer.”

The cost for a single entry is $715 with discounts given on multiple entries.

For entry details, click here.

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

30 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Truth Be Told
Member
Truth Be Told
11 months ago

If you click on the link “for entry details” it takes you to SC Labs, a private testing company.

But what a trill to be invited to sit “at the big ag table” now that most craft growers have been de facto precluded from being part of the legal marketplace.

Last edited 11 months ago
Farce
Guest
Farce
11 months ago
Reply to  Truth Be Told

“rightful seat at the big ag table”…Yes that’s what was going to happen and then it happened. But just think of the commercial value of an award! You’ll be able to sell off your farm to interested corporate suits for bigger money, bigger value and maybe even a profit! Then you can retire and see your award-winning strain being sold in corporate-linked dispensaries everywhere!! “HUMBOLDT AWESOME KUSH” by “OG” Farms…(a wholly owned subsidiary of kraft/heinz).That is your future, permit pansies…congratulations you are winners…

Kyle
Guest
Kyle
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

Well said

tru matters
Guest
tru matters
11 months ago

“The cost for a single entry is $715 with discounts given on multiple entries.”

Well that lets out the small farmer.

Country Joe
Member
11 months ago
Reply to  tru matters

I believe that was the idea all along.

Gazoo
Guest
Gazoo
11 months ago

And the award for fasted farm to go outta business goes to…. Thank you all for playing. Make sure to fill out your tax forms on your way out.

Dusty Spritzwater
Guest
Dusty Spritzwater
11 months ago

Well at least we’re promoting healthy, carbon neutral efficient sun grown samples by requesting submissions in MAY! Putting up 7 month old buds against fresh indoor is really gonna teach the people.

Last edited 11 months ago
thetallone
Guest
thetallone
11 months ago

And how would indoor even be considered a California product? It’s not touched by the environment, and could be grown identically anywhere in the world.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
11 months ago

The outdoor and indoor don’t compete against each other.

Also, if you are not up to speed on post harvest handling and storage at a level that allows you to put out a quality outdoor product in May then you are not yet competent enough to compete in a professional marketplace.

Just look at last years results, outdoor flower did very well in the terpene categories. That would be the first thing you would expect to degrade in storage.

Dusty Spritzwater
Guest
Dusty Spritzwater
11 months ago

Mmmm. K.
I guess so. Unless you’ve sold out already. Gotta set aside a sample. The GrowOff does lab tested, all same clone competition. They have it scheduled in Fall/early winter. Indoor goes up against outdoor, and outdoor does pretty good: outdoor beat out indoor on terps and potency. Statewide. All of California, grow how you want. Humboldt sun grown beats the rest by the numbers! They used to be about $700 to enter, but now you pay $50 for the clone then $250 or so at the end for testing.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
11 months ago

The grow off is a very cool competition.

For the state fair you can submit your entrance starting in January, which is about the perfect time for outdoor to be properly cured.

I don’t appreciate the ridiculous price of entry for the state fair, but beyond that it’s proven to and promises to continue to be a good platform for showcasing the benefits of outdoor grown flower. It’s also got the potential to be a good platform for new genetics.

Redwood Dan
Guest
Redwood Dan
11 months ago

Nearly 10x the cost to enter a commercially produced bottle of wine. The discrimination continues…..

Legallettuce
Guest
11 months ago
Reply to  Redwood Dan

I recommend funding entry costs by selling weed traditionally. It’s the only way to properly represent the cannabis market.

Redwood Dan
Guest
Redwood Dan
11 months ago
Reply to  Legallettuce

As a permit pansy, I cannot condone that. Haha. 😉

Last edited 11 months ago
Shortjohnson
Guest
Shortjohnson
11 months ago
Reply to  Legallettuce

Righty-oh. I would imagine that’s the quickest way to come up w the cash. There is still a billion dollar market out there demanding product. My brother has not skipped a beat. He has managed to get rid of 120lbs of light dep this year and continues planting. He’s got a secret i don’t know.

Shortjohnson
Guest
Shortjohnson
11 months ago

I just arrived in puerto Vallarta. My buddy from Mendo who retired to Sayulita just told me they are importing bud from mendo for the PV market. I read an article last week about US bud crushing the markets in Thailand and parts of Europe.
The grey market just got bigger. Wowzers. Way bigger.

Farce
Guest
Farce
11 months ago

Sorry- Long post here…”Pending wage claims against a licensed Trinity County farm include photographs of freezing working conditions, with one worker reporting he sought shelter inside a steel shipping container, without access to drinking water, a bathroom or light.
In interviews, two workers told of laboring on the farm for 11 days behind a locked gate, under spartan conditions. They provided copies of work logs that showed as many as 21 workers who put in 13- to 14-hour days gathering the hThe container was unheated to protect cannabis that was to be fresh frozen, but workers said on the last two days, as temperatures fell below freezing, they secretly brought in a propane heater. According to interviews, the majority of workers were from Argentina, recruited by a compatriot who met them at a grocery store parking lot, then led them up the twisting dirt road.
The owner of that farm, Samuel Elias Schachter, made no reference to how workers would be accommodated on his remote 12-greenhouse farm atop Browns Mountain, files at the county planning office in Weaverville show.
But neither was there an expectation he should house those working on the 3,200-foot ridge, nearly an hour from town, his bookkeeper told The Times. It has long been common practice for cannabis workers in Northern California’s Emerald Triangle to sleep in their cars, or bring tents.
“I’m not quite sure why they’re saying they need housing,” said Jeannine Greenslade, who said she was asked by Schachter to respond to The Times’ questions on his behalf.

Nor did Greenslade see an issue with the padlocked gates on the long mountain road leading up to the farm. Cannabis operations, by their nature, require security, she said. “Anybody can come and go,” she said. “Nobody’s holding them.”
Workers interviewed by The Times said they did not know the padlock combinations. “No podíamos salir,” one worker said. We couldn’t leave.
“In our case, it’s not like [human] trafficking,” another said, “but we don’t like that they closed the gate … because we want to stay free.”
Where Schachter’s bookkeeper and his workers most disagreed was the matter of pay.
Two workers from the 2021 season and four from 2022 allege they were promised payment after the harvest, and then were told there was only money enough for partial pay — as little as $900 for 117 hours work. The 2021 workers filed a federal civil suit seeking $160,000 in wages and damages. The 2022 claims were filed with the state labor department, and averaged $9,400 apiece. One of those claims was dropped, without details of how it was resolved.
“He has paid everyone,” Greenslade said, contradicting the workers’ signed statements that they are owed wages.
Schachter took the labor condition allegations seriously, said Greenslade. “We’re doing what we need to do legally to comply.”
She said, though, that California regulations in regard to cannabis cultivation workers were vague and contradictory. She said it was unclear, for example, if the bands of workers who move from farm to farm at harvest time are “employees” or “independent contractors” or, Greenslade said, “just trimmers.”
Workers speaking to The Times said Schachter threatened to report them to federal immigration authorities, or castigated them.
“You can play the victim all you want,” he told a worker in text messages shared with the newspaper. “No one is going to care that it’s taking longer than expected to get paid.”
Another worker who filed a federal civil suit against Schachter over wage claims described a similar exchange.
“He was like, ‘Come on, bring it on … nobody’s going to hear you,'” the worker told The Times. “‘Nobody’s going to help you to do that to me. Nobody’s going to listen to you.'”
A criminal lawyer representing Schachter on unrelated domestic violence charges said he was unaware of the labor violation allegations.
That attorney, Thomas Ballanco, is himself a licensed cannabis grower and in separate matters is representing five workers who seek $105,000 in unpaid 2021 wages from a licensed operation in Hayfork. He said labor issues such as these are a facet of California cannabis’ long history of operating underground, hidden from the law.
“This is how employees were located, how they were treated and how they were paid,” Ballanco said. “Nobody wanted anybody to know anything. It was all cash. Nobody was on the books. …
“That’s not to excuse misbehavior,” he said. “It’s a partial explanation of why it’s so rampant.”
From…https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/cannabis-workers-face-death-exploitation-18085428.php
My take- THIS is “Legalization” and these are the kinds of people we empowered with “legalization”. Every greenhouse being “legally permitted” by guys like this shuts down another mom n pop. So yeah- Congratulations! on handing over our livelihood to the worst kinds of assholes not to mention the corporate mega-grows (who are probably doing the same kinds of stuff w/ migrant workers). It’s one thing to ask friends to work with you under difficult conditions but another entirely to go into your nice house/mansion each night and leave the helpers that you grabbed from a parking lot out in the cold and rain. Despicable. And the counties sell permits to these guys because they pay the county fees. “Legalization”…

Truth Be Told
Member
Truth Be Told
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

It’s good to know labor laws and the rights of employees were honored up until legalization. I guess the stories of wage theft, poor working conditions, rape and murder were all false.

Dusty Spritzwater
Guest
Dusty Spritzwater
11 months ago
Reply to  Truth Be Told

Hasn’t gone away with legalization. This pisses me off. We’ve always paid the few folks working first. We have to compete with these shitheads. The State could have capped the acreage. That would have reduced the number of assholes going out after more than they could deal with. People try to grow more than they can handle, go out and “hire” a bunch of people to actually do it, then you need to grow more to compensate, then there’s a surplus, price drops, then sorry; now that you’ve done all the work for me, you have to wait to get paid til after your visa expires…

Truth Be Told
Member
Truth Be Told
11 months ago

State legalization, just like the green rushers, was greed driven. All they could see was millions in new taxes and fees rolling in.

Even without blowing off the one acre cap, legalization allowed for several times more production than the legal market could absorb.

Expensive compliance requirements were piled on top of the taxes and fees, imposing ruinous costs that unpermitted growers are exempt from.

What could go wrong?

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
11 months ago
Reply to  Truth Be Told

State legalization was ultimately driven by the general public’s desire to see a change in the laws around weed possession and use.

As is typical, most people don’t take the time to understand the things they vote for and don’t have a sufficient understanding of the industries the laws impact to make a thoughtful choice even if they did read it.

The way it was done has sucked for producers and hit our area especially hard. But consumers don’t care, they just wanted to be able to have and buy weed without legal risk. And they got that.

Truth Be Told
Member
Truth Be Told
11 months ago

I don’t disagree. The tragedy is the voters and consumers could have gotten what they wanted without destroying legacy producers. But the details of legalization were dictated by politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists. And they also got what they wanted.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
11 months ago
Reply to  Truth Be Told

We definitely failed, as a community, to successfully advocate for our interests and educate the urban voters that ultimately made the choice for us about the risks and potentials of legalization.

I don’t know if there is anything that we really could have done though, at the end of the day a ragtag band of rural outlaws doesn’t have a great history of out maneuvering the kind of organized political/financial interests that drive California policy decisions of this magnitude.

A friend who worked with hcga in the early days told me a humorous and illustrative story about how they made their big fundraising push and mustered up 250k to take to Sacramento and employ a lobbying firm. He said the man they spoke with almost laughed in their face before explaining that the alcohol industry spends 2.5 million every year on lobbying to maintain their influence in Sacramento.

We just weren’t actually ready for this challenge and our “representatives” were all too happy to abandon us for the more lucrative and agreeable forces that are already well integrated with the CA political machine

Farce
Guest
Farce
11 months ago
Reply to  Truth Be Told

The tragedy was were there in the details of the prop that nobody read or wanted to believe. It was always going to go this way. Now it is. Permitted farms have ethnic minorities working their farms for little pay and terrible conditions but now it is okay because they are “legal”! And yes- some of them have illegal immigrants who are desperately poor and they take advantage of them…but now they do it “legally”!! I never knew a mom n pop who treated their friends or neighbors so poorly- and yet the mom n pops were shut down and run out. We could have had a much better form of “legalization” if we insisted on it and held back…but we did not. We folded so quick. So yeah- Enjoy!!!

Truth Be Told
Member
Truth Be Told
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

Agree the details were there for anyone paying attention. But Prop 64 just piggybacked on the already approved state legalization which already favored consolidation and corpratization. It was obvious the fix was in when I read the requirement that collectives and cooperatives were being shut down.

Thatguyinarcata
Guest
Thatguyinarcata
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

I think your emotions on the topic have closed your memories of events. Me and most small growers that I know were actively and vocally opposed to prop 64. So were a number of formally organized advocacy groups representing small farmers and locals concerned about the economic health of our region.

The sad reality is they we have very little influence in state wide propositions, we simply don’t have the numbers. Where we failed is in reaching out to the large urban populations of consumers to the south and getting them to understand that we all needed to demand a better deal. We failed to do that and the corporate money that was just chomping at the bit to dig into the weed market had an easy lay up telling the city folks to vote for “legal weed”.

Are there bad actors locally they supported and have now exploited this shitty framework? Yep. Are there locals who were naive and/or uninformed and thought that prop 64 was well intended? Yep. But the majority that I interacted with knew it was a bad deal, did what they could to advocate against it, and have made their own choices about how to adapt to the changes just like they always have. Ultimately, none of this was up to us. We didn’t have a seat at the table. And all any of us can do when faced with historical and social tides way beyond our scope is try to ride the waves as they come to the best of our ability

Entering a world of pain
Guest
Entering a world of pain
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

No big suprise that many of the shittiest actors were the ones able to go legal. Lots of the biggest growers I’ve known were the ones who treated their workers the worst.
Every penny robbed from someone else is one more in their pocket.

Conversely I’ve known some big timers that were the best people I ever worked for & treated everyone fairly and with respect. But they were family grows and been here since the 70s & 80s

Farce
Guest
Farce
11 months ago

Nice! Unfortunately nearly every decent grower I knew got plowed under with this “legalization” yet I saw terrible humans buy permits and blow up huge scenes, treating others like crap along the way.. And it still is today- happening right now!

Squeeler
Guest
Squeeler
11 months ago
Reply to  Farce

Every Argentinian in Hayfork has a story of not getting paid by a licensed Farm after working hundreds of hours. The bosses promise to pay when the crop is sold, but rarely keep their promises. Where else in the world can you rely on migrant labor and then Not pay them for six months or more!

shortjohnson
Guest
shortjohnson
11 months ago
Reply to  Squeeler

Arizona and Texas happens regularly w KB homes.