Tag Archives: growing

By Matthew Huron

All cannabis is not created equal.

Just as industry experts have developed a set of tools to assess artisan experiences with wine, craft beer and diamonds, our team of cannabis cultivators at Good Chemistry Nurseries- who hold decades of experience backed by extensive education in horticulture and botany- have developed a new consumer guide to evaluate the essential aspects of cannabis called STATS (Sight, Touch, Aroma, Taste, Sensation). We hope the newly developed guide will begin an industry-wide dialogue about consumer education and provide fundamental knowledge on how to evaluate the quality of a cannabis flower.

STATS was created in response to our customers’ growing desire to differentiate between high quality and low quality flower. Two years ago, a consumer may have walked into a dispensary, and may have been thrilled just to be able to buy legal and safe cannabis. Fast forward two years, and now they’re asking, “How do I recognize quality cannabis?” By introducing STATS as a consumer awareness campaign, we are hoping to meet the needs of consumers to understand the complexities of the cannabis flower, as well as opening up the industry to a more conservative market that might be overwhelmed and intimidated by the cannabis culture.

STATS, which is available at no cost at statsguide.org and at Good Chemistry dispensary locations, is designed as an interactive booklet that breaks down the complexities and characteristics of quality cannabis through the five main categories; sight, touch, aroma, taste and sensation. The short, easy-to-read tool also comes with a concise glossary, which includes definitions of cannabis-related words, and expressions that might not be palpable to a novice consumer. Here is an overview of the STATS tool to evaluate quality cannabis:

Sight: Seeing the flower can sometimes be the only evaluation option before purchase. It is important to know the visual cues for remarkable cannabis. STATS help consumers evaluate qualities including: trichome content, color, structure, size and trim.

Touch: Touching the flower can help with evaluating the cure, or the controlled drying process used to achieve proper moisture content post-harvest. STATS define how the bud should feel.

Aroma: Distinctions can be made between high and poor quality cannabis aroma. Because each flower strain can have a unique scent, STATS reviews what scents should be expected, and what smells can denote poor quality.

Taste: Different flowers strains will have unique flavor profiles. Similar to wine tasting, experience is necessary, STATS helps consumers learn to distinguish between different flavors among the flower strains.

goodchemistryteam — The development team of STATS

Sensation: The first sensation that comes from cannabis is the sensation of lift, or of being high. Varying experience levels may affect how people feel with each strain and the amount of time people feel lifted. We have identified the key categories of sensations that come from different strains including amplify, relax, relieve, and sleep.

Now, there is an easy and free tool to provide novice and aficionado cannabis users new insight and understanding into the purchase they’re about to make. Good Chemistry Nurseries developed STATS in conjunction with our Colorado-based master cultivators Duncan Cameron, Scott Toland, Heath Byington and Stephen Spinosa. Our development team came to this idea with a strong desire to address consumers’ interest in learning more about how to assess high quality cannabis.

April 12, 2016

DEA To Consider Rescheduling Cannabis, Could Mean Policy Shift

By Aaron G. Biros

No Comments

In a letter sent to lawmakers last week, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) announced plans to make a decision on rescheduling cannabis by mid-2016. The announcement could represent the culmination of a shift in the federal government’s attitude toward cannabis legalization.

Currently, cannabis is a Schedule I narcotic, meaning the government views it as lacking medical benefits and have a high potential for abuse. The rescheduling of cannabis has the potential to open the floodgates for research, including much needed clinical trials.

Derek Peterson, chief executive officer at Terra Tech, a cannabis-focused agriculture company, believes this bodes well for the growth potential of the cannabis industry. “From the perspective of quality and safety standards, I find it unlikely that rescheduling it would negatively impact the degree to which cannabis is examined,” says Peterson. “It’s unnecessarily high position on the DEA drug schedule does nothing but limit the industry’s potential for growth, stall any meaningful pharmaceutical testing and increase law enforcement’s ability to prosecute non-violent drug offenders,” adds Peterson.

The rescheduling could also potentially allow for the prescribing of cannabis for patients. Stephen Goldner, founder of Pinnacle Labs and president of Regulatory Affairs Associates, is hopeful this will lead to a greater shift in public attitude towards cannabis. “The DEA’s announcement is a clear message to all States and possibly even to United Nations policy makers: even the DEA is willing to reconsider cannabis,” says Goldner. “Since the DEA is reconsidering cannabis, state politicians and local police departments can also be flexible and move away from prohibition, towards the regulation of cannabis.”

The rescheduling of cannabis could have a tremendous impact on the growth of the cannabis industry, including more clinical trials, medical research and physician participation. It could also open the door for more federal agency involvement, as the Schedule I status inhibits any EPA research on cannabis pesticide use or FDA guidance on food and drug good manufacturing practices. When reached for comment, the FDA’s press office said they could not speculate on any involvement in the matter.

April 11, 2016

An Introduction to Cannabis Genetics, Part I

By Dr. CJ Schwartz

3 Comments

What is DNA?

DNA stores information about how to build an organism. Just as a series of 0’s and 1’s represents digital data, DNA data is represented by four letters (A, C, G and T), which inherently allows DNA to store more information per unit (Figure 1).

The amount of DNA required to build a human is mind-boggling. The human genome has 3.2 billion A’s, C’s, G’s, or T’s, (called nucleotides). Cannabis has 820 million nucleotides. This is true for every cell in the organism. The DNA from a single human cell when spread out would stretch six feet long. A cell is not visible to the naked eye, yet it contains a microscopic thread of DNA six feet long! If you put all the DNA molecules in your body end to end, the DNA would reach from the Earth to the Sun.

DNA is common in all living things, and all living things are related through DNA. Humans and plants share 50% of their genes. In humans, 99.9% of the DNA is identical, thus just 0.1% of DNA differences accounts for all of the variation observed in humans. Cannabis, as a species, is more variable with approximately 1% of the DNA being different among strains. DNA is a super efficient and reliable information storage system. However, mistakes (mutations) do occur and while infrequent, these mutations account for all the differences observed within a species and is called natural genetic variation. Variation within the genomes of a species can help the species survive in unfavorable conditions (evolution) and is also the source of differences in traits, which is the material that is required for successful breeding.

Natural Genetic Variation

DNA mutations occur in every generation and these changes will be different in each individual creating natural genetic variation. Mutations (or more accurately referred to as DNA changes) will be inherited by offspring and will persist in the population if the offspring reproduce.

DNA differences maintain diversity in the gene pool, allowing organisms to respond to new environments (migration) or environmental changes (adaptation). The two most commonly described cannabis families are Indicas and Sativas. Indicas, being from cooler temperate regions, have wide leaves allowing the maximum capture of light during the shorter growing season. Sativas, being equatorial, have smaller leaves, which may be an advantage for such things as powdery mildew in a humid environment. Figure 2 shows the enormous amount of natural variation in leaves for one species with a worldwide population (Arabidopsis thaliana).

A DNA change that occurred a long time ago will be more useful to divide people/plants into different groups. For example, there are ancient DNA changes that differentiate humans originating from Europe or Asia. Other newer DNA changes allow us to further divide Europeans into those originating from Northern versus Southern Europe. Thus, different DNA changes have different values for determining relatedness or ancestry, yet every DNA change provides some information for determining heredity.

Family Trees

By comparing DNA changes among different strains, we can measure the relatedness between strains. For example, if strain A has a DNA change indicative of Kush ancestry and strain B has a DNA change indicative of hemp ancestry, we can assign strains to branches of the cannabis family tree comprised of strains that contain similar DNA changes. Figure 3 shows 184 strains that have been characterized for these changes, and the position of each strain is based on its shared DNA with neighboring strains. The two best-defined families of cannabis are hemp (blue) and kush (black). Strains within a family are more closely related. Strains in separate families, such as kush and hemp, are more distantly related.

Editor’s Note: This is the first installment in a series of articles focused on answering common questions regarding cannabis genetics. If you have questions regarding cannabis genetics, or wish to speak more about the topic please post in the comments section below. The next installment will delve into the THC synthase, gene discovery and manipulation and mapping chromosomes.

April 5, 2016

Biros' Blog

The Cannabis Industry’s Pesticide Problem

By Aaron G. Biros

3 Comments

Colorado regulators recalled roughly 65 batches of cannabis produced by two separate companies last Friday. Pesticide recalls plastered all over the news in the past few months have painted a picture of the cannabis marketplace to the public as unsafe and lacking crucial quality standards. The continued pesticide recalls in Colorado, along with poor safety standards in Washington, show the cannabis industry in an unfavorable light. The recalls include not only cannabis sold recreationally, but also medical cannabis, which should highlight a sense of urgency to deal with such a pervasive issue.

Because patients with weakened immune systems are seeking treatment with cannabis, it is the producer’s obligation to grow cannabis safely and without pesticides. That requires proper quality controls, pesticide use standard operating procedures, very robust lab testing and an overall push to protect consumer safety from both regulators and industry leaders.

The pesticides most commonly found in cannabis products include myclobutanil, a fungicide in Eagle 20, and avermectin, commonly found in Avid pesticides. The Pesticide Action Network lists both compounds as “bad actors” and as developmental or reproductive toxins.

Largely due to federal illegality, there are no EPA-approved pesticides for use in cannabis production, thus a lack of guidelines for states to follow in regulating pesticide use. As a result, states are working to write their own lists of approved pesticides.

Until very recently, Washington had no procedure for recalls of cannabis in place. “The LCB in Washington State has implemented emergency recall rules but more clarity on what types of pesticides are harmful is needed,” says Trek Hollnagel, co-founder of Dope Magazine and a chain of dispensaries in Seattle, WA. It is no secret that the Washington State Liquor Cannabis Board (LCB) poorly regulates cannabis labs.

Reports show immense variation in different labs’ results and rampant laboratory shopping. Dana Luce, co-founder of GOAT Labs, Inc., a cannabis-testing laboratory based in Vancouver, Washington, has been clamoring for a standardized recall procedure. “The state needs to take a much more proactive approach in monitoring laboratories,” says Luce. “Using blind testing or secret shoppers would give them the opportunity to catching those labs playing below board.” Luce also believes that retail outlets should absorb the cost of recalls, which could help prevent laboratory shopping just for higher potency test results.

In Washington, regulators rely on producers to self-report coupled with random inspections; furthermore they do not even require pesticide testing. Without a burden of proof placed on the producer or even the laboratory, it is hardly a regulated market.

Those producing cannabis with pesticides listed above should know they are violating the law. According to Comprehensive Cannabis Consulting (3C), “applying pesticides off label is a violation of state and federal law and could result in criminal and civil sanctions…”

In reality, the solution to this problem is not just a quick fix, but a multitude of corrective actions to move the cannabis industry forward. Nic Easley, chief executive officer of 3C, believes it starts with educating cultivators on using pesticides properly and good agricultural practices (GAP). “Many of the pest problems prompting the illegal use of pesticides are due to poor facility design, lack of cleanliness, over-fertilization and other general plant health issues,” says Easley. “All of those issues could be greatly reduced through education in GAP.”

Then comes regulator-industry collaboration, where all parties are constantly learning. “Regulators or independent third-party groups need to be performing on-site inspections, which cultivators need to participate in openly and transparently,” adds Easley. The Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) is actively working on this aspect by offering workshops aimed at helping producers get up to speed with worker protection standards.

“Adequate standards need to be applied across the board to labs, and ongoing proficiency testing needs to take place to ensure that a lab’s facility, processes and instruments are fully validated,” says Easley. So the problem is cannabis producers still using pesticides off label and if that continues, so will the recalls. It seems the solution involves industry-regulator collaboration, more robust laboratory systems and calibration methods and educating cultivators on good agricultural practices. Additionally, more state guidance is needed in the form of research for an approved list of pesticides on cannabis and a bigger push for regulation in the form of inspections and laboratory oversight.

March 23, 2016

A Case for Compartmentalization: Problems with Perpetual Harvest Models in Cultivation, Part I

By Adam Koh

7 Comments

When newspapers and television run a cannabis story, it is frequently accompanied by photos or video of vast, cavernous warehouses filled with veritable oceans of plants. Photos used to illustrate stories in the New York Times and Denver Post serve to illustrate this point.

This type of facility design is sometimes referred to in the cannabis industry as a “perpetual harvest” model. This is because plants are harvested piecemeal – one row at a time, for example – with new plants ready to flower replacing the recently harvested ones. In this model, flowering plants of various ages occupy the same space and the room is never completely harvested and empty, hence the “perpetual” moniker. This is in contrast to more compartmentalized facility designs, in which flowering plants are segregated in smaller groups in various rooms, which are then harvested completely before the room is cleaned and new plants ready to flower replace the previous ones.

The perpetual harvest setup appears impressive and lends itself well to portraying the volume of production being achieved in large facilities. This is likely why I have seen such models, or similar ones, copied in other states. Prospective entrants to the industry have also approached my firm with such designs in mind for their cultivation facilities. However, we generally advise against the perpetual harvest facility model, as this type of design imposes serious difficulties upon operators. Problems arise primarily in the areas of pest and contamination mitigation, ability to properly observe pesticide use and worker safety guidelines, and inefficiencies in lighting and HVAC usage. The problems noted are linked to the perpetual harvest design and can be mitigated with increased compartmentalization. Before getting to my recommendations, however, lets run down the issues created by the perpetual harvest model.

AdamKohcultivation — Photo credit: Denver Post

Lighting and HVAC Inefficiencies

In many photos I see of perpetual harvest facilities, the ceilings are extremely high, as are the light fixtures in most cases. This is likely the result of one of the main perceived advantages of such spaces, which is that they require minimal construction prior to getting up and running. There are no walls to be put up or ceilings lowered, and the lack of compartmentalization makes running wires and ducting much easier.

However, whatever capital was saved in initial construction will likely be burned up by increased ongoing operational costs. High ceilings such as those in the above photos mean more cubic footage that climate control systems must cool or heat. Additionally, due to the great height of the light fixtures, plants are not getting the most bang for their buck, so to speak, compared to designs that allow lights to be lowered appropriately to provide optimal intensity and spectrum. Double-Ended High Pressure Sodium (DE HPS) lamps are probably the most common type of lighting in use for flowering by commercial cannabis cultivators today, and they are ideally situated about four feet above the canopy when running at full capacity.

For businesses aiming for a no-frills production model with minimal attention to the light management needs of individual cannabis cultivars (or strains, as they are commonly referred to), then this consideration may be moot. However, those operations attempting to produce the highest-quality flower and plant material know the value of proper light management, as well as the fact that some cultivars respond differently than others to intense light. Indeed, I have observed cultivars that produce more when light intensity was decreased, while others thrived under intense light that would have seriously damaged others. This makes the one-size-fits-all approach to light management I’ve seen in most perpetual harvest designs generally detrimental to the quality of the final product, in addition to using the same amount of energy, or more, to achieve that lower quality result.

Difficulties in Pest and Contamination Mitigation

Such a design makes it easy for a small pest incursion to become a full-blown infestation. Because plants about to be harvested are sharing space with plants just beginning their flowering process, this means that both current and future harvests will be affected, or even lost entirely if the pest problem is severe. Having plant groups of different ages share the same space is generally unadvisable. This is because older plants, particularly those close to harvest, are weaker and more susceptible to pests by virtue of the fact that their life cycles are nearing an end. On the other hand, a more compartmentalized facility design provides physical barriers that can contain mites and mildew spores to some extent, limiting the damage done by individual pest incursions.

One of the essential tasks in an indoor cultivation operation is sterilizing just-harvested spaces to ensure that the subsequent run gets off to a clean start. This task could conceivably be performed in a perpetual harvest model; say, for example, trays, trellis frames, and other equipment are scrubbed after a row has been cut down and removed for drying or processing. However, due to the fact that there are always other plants in the room, it seems impossible for any plant group to get an assuredly clean start, as other plants may be harboring bugs, mold spores, or viruses, despite not showing signs or symptoms. The presence of plants also eliminates the possibility of using cleaning agents such as bleach, which gives off harmful fumes, but is sometimes necessary to completely sterilize an area that might have previously experienced some amount of powdery mildew or botrytis.

In Part II of this series, I will discuss some problems with pesticide use and worker safety regulations as well as provide recommendations for compartmentalization in cultivation facilities. Stay tuned for Part II of A Case for Compartmentalization: Problems with “Perpetual Harvest” Models in Cultivation, coming out next week.

January 28, 2016

California Legislature Votes to Slow Local Bans on Cannabis Cultivation

By Aaron G. Biros

1 Comment

SACRAMENTO, CA- Lawmakers in California voted to pass Assembly Bill 21 this morning, a bill aimed at slowing local municipalities from placing bans on cultivating cannabis. Earlier this week, the California Senate passed the bill in an overwhelming 35 to 5 vote, sending it to the Assembly.

The bill, AB 21, won unanimously in a 65 to 0 vote this morning, according to a lobbyist on behalf of CalCann Holdings. The bill now heads to Governor Brown’s desk to sign it before it becomes a law. The governor has twelve days to sign it into law because of an urgency clause.

“Over the past several months, local governments throughout the state have been banning marijuana cultivation and dispensaries right and left,” says Aaron Herzberg, attorney and partner at CalCann Holdings. CalCann Holdings is a California-based medical marijuana holding company building a portfolio of licensed MMJ businesses and properties.

“Assuming Governor Brown chooses to sign this bill into law, cities will have the time to take a more reasonable approach to this issue and, ideally, allow licensed marijuana to be cultivated and distributed throughout the state,” adds Herzberg. “This is a vitally important piece of legislation that fixes a serious drafting error, and the sooner it can be signed into law, the better.”

The bill fixes an important mistake in the regulations that previously allowed the state to license growers operating in municipalities without written laws in place yet by March. Because of that deadline, cities were rushing to ban growers and dispensaries before they lost autonomy to regulate them. Governor Brown is expected to sign the bill into law, which would curb municipalities from shutting down cannabis businesses.

January 25, 2016

Biros' Blog

Sustainability of Cultivation in 2016, Part I

By Aaron G. Biros

4 Comments

A few weeks ago, it was that time of the year when people set new year’s resolutions hoping to accomplish a set of goals or somehow better themselves. More often than not, those expectations never get met and those resolutions remain unfulfilled, lofty ambitions.

The cultivation of cannabis is a production process that is notoriously inefficient and energy-intensive. Indoor growing requires a very large carbon footprint. In 2015, we saw the country’s cannabis market grow to roughly $2.7 billion. Looking forward to 2016, we can expect more growth with multiple states voting on recreational sales including California and Nevada, leading to more growers and a higher volume of cannabis production across the nation.

I am suggesting a resolution for cultivators to adopt: Grow your cannabis more sustainably. This might seem unattainable, but the key to a good resolution is a force of habit, setting small goals to improve your production process and make your operation more efficient, ultimately saving you money and reducing your carbon footprint. This series will delve into some of the tools cultivators can use to grow cannabis more sustainably.

Environmental, social and economic sustainability are the three pillars of sustainability to keep in mind. Many describe it in terms of people, planet and profit in reference to the Triple Bottom Line of 21^st Century Business. Essentially, cultivators should adjust their standard operating procedures and business model to include their responsibility to be environmentally, socially and economically sustainable.

The challenge of growing cannabis efficiently is understandably daunting. A research study published in the journal, Energy Policy, suggests, “One average kilogram of final product [dried flower marijuana] is associated with 4600 kg of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere.” That translates to an enormous carbon footprint, the equivalent of roughly three million cars.

The use of pesticides is also a tangible social and environmental issue of sustainability because of the potentially harmful effects on the cultivation environment and the consumer. Just last week, Denver recalled almost 100,000 edibles due to concerns of dangerous pesticide residue. Growing pesticide-free marijuana is more sustainable across the board for obvious reasons; it is safe for the consumer, less harmful to the environment and more marketable as a clean and safe product.

There are a lot of tools in the cultivator’s arsenal they can use to work toward a more sustainable operation. Some of these include more energy efficient technology, like LED lighting and efficient HVAC systems. Some tools require more effort to implement like moving toward greenhouse growing, using post-consumer products, support fields, composting and others.

In this series, we will hear from growers offering advice on some of the steps you can take to grow your cannabis with sustainability at top of mind. Alex Cooley, vice president of Solstice, a cultivation and processing business in Washington, will share some insights on the sustainable technologies you can implement to improve efficiency in your grow operation. Stay tuned for Part II of Sustainability of Cultivation in 2016.

December 18, 2015

From Produce to Cannabis: The Future of Indoor Agriculture

By Aaron G. Biros

1 Comment

Throughout the United States, a majority of cannabis for medical and adult use is grown indoors, which requires a tremendous amount of energy and is generally inefficient. State regulators and cultivators alike are beginning to notice the benefits of greenhouse and outdoor-grown cannabis, primarily for energy efficiency and environmental sustainability.

Basil plants ready for packaging and shipping at the Edible Garden facility in Belvidere, New jersey

Terra Tech, a publicly traded company, cultivates environmentally sustainable produce through its subsidiary, Edible Garden, in Belvidere, New Jersey. Utilizing Dutch hydroponic cultivation methods, integrated pest management and computer-controlled automation, Edible Garden grows certified organic herbs such as thyme and basil in their greenhouses in New Jersey.

Poinsettias ready for distribution at Edible Garden facility in Belvidere, New Jersey

Edible Garden is certified by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), which provides internationally recognized benchmarks and guidance for managing food safety and meeting standards. According to Ken VandeVrede, chief operating officer of Terra Tech, the company plans to take these cutting-edge practices and standards from cultivating produce to the cannabis industry to grow quality, sustainable and safe cannabis in states where it is currently legal.

The company is actively making its operations more environmentally sustainable via greenhouse cultivation, Dutch style hydroponics, shipping locally, and integrated pest management. “We plan on implementing guidance from our two years of GFSI certification and our organic certification along with all of our practices from the food side and bring them to cannabis; for us, it is just another plant,” says VandeVrede. With the help of computer automation, he says they can cultivate cannabis at the commercial scale, creating more homogeneity by removing human elements and utilizing environmental controls. Through computer automated blackout curtains in their greenhouses, they plan to minimize energy usage by using natural sunlight when possible.

“The procedures are very similar across industries so we are creating our own internal standards for cannabis cultivation,” says VandeVrede. “We are trying to be at the forefront of the industry and set the standard for growing cannabis, because right now, there are no standards in place.”

Mint plants ready for harvest at the Edible Garden greenhouse

Terra Tech has already started its move into the cannabis industry via its subsidiary, IVXX LLC, which makes medical cannabis extracts for dispensaries in California. The company has also broken ground on cultivation and production facilities in Nevada and dispensaries in California, and submitted an application for licenses in Maryland. “Terra Tech is doing everything with vertical integration in mind; we will control the cultivation, bringing experience from our agricultural background to cultivate high quality and high yield cannabis, making oil and extracts with it to sell in our dispensaries,” adds VandeVrede.

Looking to the future of cannabis cultivation, Terra Tech’s plan is to keep environmental sustainability at top of mind. “As a company we are growing indoor, but moving toward greenhouse cultivation across the board”, says VandeVrede. “Our focus on expansion will be [include] greenhouse-grown cannabis, which is a lot more efficient, saving us money but more importantly reducing our overall carbon footprint.” With more companies adopting these sustainable farming practices, the industry might soon usher in a new era of environmentally friendly cannabis cultivation.

December 3, 2015

Consumer Trends: Analyzing Oregon’s Dynamic Markets

By Aaron G. Biros

No Comments

Oregon was the second state to legalize medical marijuana in 1998 behind California that introduced legislation measures two years earlier in 1996. In the past two decades, Oregon has grown its medical market, treating more patients and producing exponentially more cannabis. Since October 1^st of 2015, Oregon’s recreational sales have been made legal, creating potential opportunities for dispensaries to target this emerging market.

In that first week of recreational sales alone, dispensaries in Oregon made over $11 million in revenue. That figure is more than double what Colorado made in its first week and significantly larger than Washington’s figures posted.

puregreenpdx — The exterior storefront of PureGreen in Northeast Portland, Oregon

Matt Walstatter, president and founder of PureGreen, a dispensary located in Northeast Portland, Oregon, says that while recreational customers are limited to seven grams of flower per day (no concentrates or edibles yet), they have noticed an uptick in sales of certain strains.

“Up until October 1^st of this year, our sales percentages have been very consistent with about 66% to 72% flower sales since we opened and around 20% concentrates and 10% edibles, with the remainder consisting of topicals and non-medicated products,” says Walstatter. “Now we have an influx of a new type of customer so we do around 80% of sales in flower since the introduction of recreational sales on October 1^st.”

When analyzing the top-selling strains, Walstatter’s figures show an inclination of customers and patients to prefer high-THC strains when buying flower. Girl Scout Cookies, a very high THC, low CBD strain, consistently sells the most at over 2000 grams per month. “People that smoke flower generally want high-THC strains, while people that seek CBD overwhelmingly do not smoke as much and prefer ingesting edibles, tinctures, capsules or other products with low THC content,” adds Walstatter.

PureGreen keeps a select few high-CBD strains on their shelves, including Cannatonic, which is known for its approximate 1:1 ratio of THC to CBD. “Out of twenty five strains on my shelves, I usually keep two or three high-CBD strains because they have their niche, even if they are less sought after, it is certainly worthwhile to carry them,” says Walstatter.

“Because Oregon has such a well established cannabis culture with less novice customers than other markets, our more popular strains are consistent over multiple months so we built a brand around knowledge and education,” Walstatter says. “Our budtenders usually come from a background involving the plant whether they were involved in cultivation, trimming or processing, and then they go through extensive training to be able to recommend certain strains for different ailments or preferences.”

Walstatter offered some tips for dispensary owners and employees at the Las Vegas Marijuana Business Conference in November where he sat on a panel with other industry experts called What Patients and Consumers Want: Strain Trends, Product Mix & CBD vs. THC. “Understanding your customer’s needs and their buying habits plus properly managing your inventory is the key to success,” says Walstatter. “We have a couple of exclusive growers that went through an extensive review process, they tend to rotate through different strains while we have some grower-specialists that grow only one strain very consistently.”

Walstatter prides himself in his team’s exceptional customer service. “People do business with people they know, like and trust, so authenticity is very important to us,” he adds. “Over delivering on value in the form of knowledge, expertise and service is crucial to growing your brand and business.” Having a high quality product mix, knowledgeable staff and inviting atmosphere are a few of the ingredients to running a successful dispensary.

“It can take up to six months or longer to bring a new strain from seed to sale, so if it is a popular strain, it is very important to have a backup grower,” Walstatter adds. He likens his dispensary to a farm-to-table restaurant where the menu is constantly changing: “This time of year, there are some greenhouse and outdoor crops that do well on the shelves but strains can go in and out of season.”

While edibles and concentrates are not yet available for recreational sales, state regulators are closely monitoring other state’s rules and progress to map out a timeline for their introduction. This would effectively create another new emerging market, opening up potential opportunities for dispensaries in Oregon to diversify.

October 23, 2015

The Organic Certification of Cannabis

By Aaron G. Biros

1 Comment

News of potentially harmful pesticide use on cannabis grown in Colorado, along with new legislation in California that would develop guidelines for pesticide use, highlight the need to cultivate cannabis that is not only safe to consume, but also environmentally friendly. Cannabis cultivation is a rapidly expanding industry and as growers scale up their operations, the question of sustainability remains.

cleangreencertplants — Chris Van Hook performing a routine inspection of a Clean Green Certified crop

Clean Green Certified is a third-party certification program that incorporates aspects of the USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP), international organic programs and sustainable farming practices. Cannabis is not eligible for USDA organic certification because it is not a federally recognized crop, so Clean Green Certified is the closest certification nationally available. More than 200 cultivators are currently Clean Green Certified in California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Nevada.

Chris Van Hook, attorney and founder of Clean Green Certified, started the program in 2004 out of requests from growers to certify their cannabis as organic. Van Hook has decades of experience working in environmental law and USDA organic certifications. “About 95% of the Clean Green Certification is based on the USDA’s NOP,” says Van Hook. “The Clean Green Certified cannabis farmer would be eligible for an organic certification as soon as it becomes available, so we are helping the industry get accustomed to the regulations, inspections, and audits that come with getting organically certified.”

plants clean green vert — A close-up of an outdoor Clean Green Certified crop

Getting Clean Green Certified requires an initial application. Upon inspection, Van Hook’s program examines all the inputs, including water and energy usage, nutrients, pesticides, and soil, along with inspecting the actual plants for agricultural vitality. “We follow the plants from seed to when it is harvested, checking for clean surfaces and containers, as well as drying, curing, trimming, and processing practices,” says Van Hook. “Just like organic farming, the cultivator needs to be an engaged manager and heavily involved with the plants. Much more monitoring is involved to prevent pest problems from getting out of control without using pesticides.”

The initial screening process takes into consideration traceability and legal compliance, which in cultivation and processing alike is an eligibility requirement. “We use USDA organic standards as guidance for processor facility reviews as well, which include concentrates and edibles manufacturers, breaking it down to labeling, food handling, standard operating procedures, mock recalls, and more,” says Van Hook.

“In a market so used to a lack of oversight, there definitely are some challenges, but we are bringing the necessary agricultural and food handling regulations into the cannabis industry,” adds Van Hook.

The option to grow organically and acquire a third party certification for it can benefit cultivators across the country looking to market their product as environmentally sustainable and pesticide-free.