SENSIBLE BC P. 6

MERNAUGH TRIALP. 8

TAXMAN COMINGP. 12

FREE Issue #33

Summer 2012

CREDITS

PublisherTed Smith <hempo101@gmail.com>

Editor-in-ChiefAndrew Brown <editor@hempology.ca>

Associate EditorRyan Fink

Graphics EditorOwen Smith <rainbowensmyth@gmail.com>

Web EditorDieter MacPherson <dietermacpherson@gmail.com>

ContributorsGayle QuinOwen SmithKyla WilliamsRyan FinkTed SmithM. Allister GreeneAmie GravellDebbie Stultz-GiffinAl GrahamJesse Stamm

Cover illustration by Sean Newton

For advertising or general inquiries please contact:<hempo101@gmail.com>

For editorial questions, letters, or information on submitting:<editor@hempology.ca>

ISSUE # 33Summer 2012

The Cannabis Digest will not be held responsible for claims made within the pages of the newspaper, nor those made by advertisers. We do not suggest or condone illegal activities, and urge readers to research their country’s laws, and/or talk to their doctors, before engaging in any activities that could be deemed as illegal or dangerous to one’s health.

826 Johnson Street V8W 1N3Phone: 250-381-4220www.hempology.ca

Colour the Cover Contest!!!!1st prize: a 55/45 Hemp/Cotton printed T-shirt

2nd prize: a special prize pack3rd prize: a Hempology 101 gift pack

Colour in the cover of this issue—with markers, pencil crayons, paint, crayons, or anything spurred by your imagination—and you

could win a prize!

Bring your entry to the club, or take a picture and email it to <hempo101@gmail.com> by Sept. 15th, 2012 Winners will be contacted shortly after—make sure to include some contact information.

Entries will be judged on originality, effort, and all around hempiness.

CONTENTS

Trial by Fire...............................................P.03Updates, Warnings, Suggestions..........P.04Editorials............................................P.05Sensible B.C.............................................P.06Mernaugh Trial.........................................P.08John Cook, Medicine Man.......................P.11The Taxman has Come.............................P.12The U.S. Pot Vote.....................................P.14Cannabis Resin Extraction......................P.16The Church and Cannabis........................P.18Native American Fight for Sacrament......P.20Wordsearch / Comics..............................P.22

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012

By Ryan Fink

The past decade has seen much progress in what is fast becoming a revolution sur-rounding government drug policy and so-cial attitudes toward drug culture in Cana-da. The endurance and proliferation across the country of illegal medicinal cannabis providers over the past decade, alongside the blossoming of the medical pot indus-try in many states south of the border, has been a testament to both the resilience of the anti-prohibition movement and the moral integrity of its objective. Despite numerous police raids, all followed by long and expensive court proceedings, the fight against prohibition has continuously gained strength—and more importantly, public support—all in the face of being left unprotected by broken laws.

In previous Cannabis Digest articles, Ted Smith has been documenting the progression of Owen Smith’s (no rela-tion) recent encounter with the Supreme Court of B.C. Now that Owen has effec-tively changed federal law, it seems like a good time to take a step back and look at our most recent case in light of the CBC of C’s past encounters with the police and courts, as well as to look at where things might be headed, and to let you know about how you can help in this ongoing process of changing regulations and pub-lic attitudes.

To help in understanding my personal perspective on this transition, (and be-cause this is the first time I’ve written for the Digest), I’ll introduce myself: my name is Ryan Fink. My recent addition to the newspaper crew has been a kind of return. After spending nearly 10 years wandering stoned through the halls of various academic institutions, I have been glad these past few months to have been re-immersed in the world of Hempology. The timing of my return was coinciden-tal: it was a trial, or rather waiting for one, that saw me leave Hempology and the CBC of C in the fall of 2003, and I re-turned the day before BC Supreme Court Justice Johnston released his decision re-garding the unconstitutionality of the MMAR’s restrictions on processed can-nabis derivatives in my colleague Owen Smith’s voir dire.

I don’t have to tell anyone who has been following events for the past decade, but things have changed since my departure. One day soon someone will write a thick book going into the details of this radical transformation; but for now, having myself only begun to understand how things have changed and continue to change, I’ll keep my analysis simple: the situation has gotten immensely better. Moreover, Justice John-ston’s recent decision continues this trend, a trend that seems to be driven largely by a combination of the perseverance of people who are willing to fight for the right to self-medicate, and who are now cheek-by-jowl with an increasing number of judges and other powerful persons who are them-selves now willing to fight the questionable illusions tossed hastily about by conserva-tive politicians and the corporate lobbyists who bankroll them.

The greatest difference between then and now seems to be summed most eas-ily for me by comparing the outcomes of this latest court case with the outcomes of those court cases of a decade ago. Back in the early millennium, the court case was secondary to the raid that preceded it. Ten years ago a raid would cost the club

many thousands of dollars in immediate losses, and would result in lost business while members overcame their fear that the police would return any day to close the doors finally. Then the court case was a mere formality following the costly raid, a simple engagement of massive public resources for the purpose of hav-ing a judge tell us that we weren’t d o i n g a n y t h i n g w r o n g , and that the police were wrong to rob us ( h o w e v e r impossible it was for them to repay us, or be brought to justice themselves for what, from our perspective, amounted to nothing more than robbery and harassment). Nowadays the raids are accidental, the court cases monumental.

When I was arrested back in 2003, it was by a team of police officers who were bent on dismantling the CBC of C through continued raids, who would go to questionable lengths to obtain warrants, realizing all the while that, in legal terms, their efforts would be fruitless. However, when Owen was arrested in Dec. of 2009, it was entirely circumstantial. The bakery was in a residential high-rise. One day, a neighbor down the hall was making an isopropyl extraction of THC from can-nabis in their own apartment (something the CBC of C has no part in as a rule), and another neighbor assumed that the smell was coming from our bakery, and so summoned the police. Being required to investigate the complaint, the officers’ professional responsibilities left them no choice but to treat the bakery the same as they might any clandestine drug lab, despite any reason or conscience. Where in 2003 I took it upon myself to give the officers who raided the Club a heated lecture on the amorality of their actions, morality didn’t enter the equation in 2010: it was a simple matter of coinci-dence and protocol, and of Owen’s being left unprotected by antiquated laws that were unjust from their inception, and that now cause even more harm than they did when they were first passed in the early 20th century to benefit none save the wealthy industrialists who first lobbied for their creation, and who continue to lobby for their permanence.

While cannabis is still illegal for most—as it is still dangerous to the interests of wealthy industrialists—there is a growing concern among intelligent, socially con-scious individuals from all walks of life, including doctors, judges, politicians, and police officers, who have seen the harm that is needlessly caused by prohibition laws and want to do something about it.

Throughout Owen’s recent voir dire, Justice Johnston clearly implied, by refer-ring to previous decisions as “ducking” the issue, that he was tired of the buck being passed between various courts and offices regarding the many flaws that still need to be worked out of the MMAR

(if it is not to be stricken completely and replaced with something more practical and less politically biased).

The social context that allows Justice Johnston to make common-sense state-ments and decisions in the face of a gov-ernment that would have him ignore rea-son is twofold: firstly, there are the many

court cases that have taken place arguing the inefficacy and uncon-stitutional-ity of the M M A R since it was c a re le s s l y introduced in the sum-mer of 2001; and s e c o n d l y there is the prolif-erance of casual or

even positive attitudes toward cannabis in contemporary popular media. Think of shows such as Weeds, Trailer Park Boys, Mad Men,That 70’s Show—many of the most popular television shows of the past decade have either centered around cannabis use, or featured it in special epi-sodes, such as an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer obtains a medical ex-emption (guest starring Tommy Chong). While such media have no direct effect on the legal proceedings that shape prohibi-tion laws, their influence diffuses through the social consciousness, affecting the way we as a public react to drug culture, fa-miliarizing us with it, and engendering a social environment in which eminent fig-ures such as judges and doctors can speak the truth about cannabis without fear of losing the right to practice their distin-guished professions. And so where Justice Johnston was able to contribute to what will, we hope, culminate in a scrapping of the MMAR in its entirety, the judge who presided over my case a decade ago had to simply make due with putting an end to the trial before it began when he declared that, despite many obvious indications to the contrary, the police had failed to prove that I was in care and control of the medicine they had seized in what turned out to be the last ever premeditated police raid on the CBC of C, in 2003.

What I see forming through these tri-als and tribulations is a kind of symbiosis between the courts and various activist groups, mediated by the now random and circumstantial police interventions that result from nothing more than broken laws. These broken laws force encounters between us and an overburdened judicial system. Despite the unfortunate albatross that these trials tie about the court’s neck, history has shown that in continuing to endure these processes, we not only have an opportunity to make our voice heard to those with the power to enforce change, but also an opportunity to learn directly from these people how we can continue to change our own practices and policies in order to together create a model that balances the bureaucracy’s need for insti-tutional homogeneity with the many and diverse needs and circumstances of our membership. In this sense, all of the le-gal proceedings that have happened since

the implementation of the MMAR sur-rounding the medicinal use of cannabis have, in fact, made up a sort of incredibly expensive and inefficient interim solution to the plethora of problems created ini-tially by the MMAR.

Though this relationship might seem less than ideal, it is the best tool we have at the moment for continuing to cre-ate positive change in the MMAR and the anti-prohibition movement in gen-eral. Owen’s success in his challenge to the Supreme Court was a great one, but the possession and trafficking charges pressed upon him still stand. This trial will begin on Feb. 4, 2013, and will be held in front of a jury. Our main goal will be to convince this jury that by providing our membership with a wide assortment of edible and topical products, the CBC of C is providing an invaluable service for people who need it and would oth-erwise be unable to get it. Consider the amount of knowledge and work that goes into producing so many different forms of medicine that suit so many discreet needs, from cookies to pills, and massage oil to muscle balm. And then consider that all but a couple of these products are made with cannabis that is donated by considerate individuals, and that despite this massive saving, we still sell most of this medicine at a net loss, supplementing its cost with proceeds from the sale of dry smoke; therefore, we provide these prod-ucts at a cost so low that to make them for one’s self (if one is able) would represent a significant increase in personal expense.

With this in mind, I implore any mem-bers of the CBC of C who are reading this, and who feel that any of our topical or ed-ible products have benefited their lives in a way that would otherwise not have been possible, to come forward and let us know that you would like to testify on behalf of Owen and the club next Feb., to help us show the jury and anyone else who needs convincing that Owen was providing an invaluable service to the community at the time that he was arrested. We need about 20 people, so if you are a member of the CBC of C and this sounds like something you’d like to do, please contact us at your earliest convenience.

However much ground has been bro-ken in this ongoing fight, the law is still broken, and so there will doubtlessly be more senseless confrontations between a frustrated court system and a legaliza-tion movement that, though it is stronger now than ever, continues to grow with increasing momentum, and continues to gain influence and change society in ways that seemed impossible 10 years ago. And so, with the support of the media, the courts, many politicians, and the majority of the public, Owen will go back to court next year to beat charges of breaking a broken law that has since been declared unconstitutional. Let this “trial by fire” continue, and let it burn away at the far-cical restrictions imposed by the MMAR, leaving behind what will fundamentally amount to a restoration of the basic right of all living beings to eat, smoke, and drink as they like.

3

j

Trial by FireA R e t r o s p e c t i v e L o o k a t t h e F u t u r e o f C a n a d i a n D r u g P o l i c y

Issue Number 33

By Gayle Quin

I’m celebrating this issue more than I do most. I’ve just had my 11 month check-up and I’m all clear of cancer. I can’t thank everyone enough for all your love and concern. My heart swells with joy as I feel all the good wishes pouring in. Once again, I humbly thank you.

I’ve been inspired to finally write a book, and seeing as how I don’t have time to write a book—let alone three or four of them—I’m going to start a blog. Maybe I’ll call it “What’s in Gayle’s Head?” Any ideas?

Did you come to 4/20 this year? What a day! Centennial Square was packed from Douglas St. to the McPherson Playhouse, with clouds of sweet smoke billowing between (look for pics on Hempology’s web page if you couldn’t attend). The costume contest was lots of fun, and a big thanks to Sacred Herb for the prize bong.

Before I forget, Hempology is go-ing legit! (remember too legit to quit? that’s us!). We are proud to announce the opening of the Hempology 101 on-line store. You can find all our t-shirts, postcards, stickers, buttons, and soon Ted’s book—the Hempology 101 Text-book. You can find the store at the top right hand corner on the Hempology 101 web page, or at <www.hempology-101store.ca> Hempology’s Team 420 gear is now available there too, with a new edition of the CBC t-shirt at the print shop as I write.

Team 420 keeps thumping along. We meet three times a week now: Tuesdays for dodgeball at Hillside and Quadra, Thursdays for dodgeball on the lawn be-hind the law courts on Quadra st., and Saturdays for soccer on Hillside between Quadra and Blanshard. Meeting time: 4:20! And remember, every Thurs. after welfare day is a drop in bring-some-thing-to-throw-on-the-BBQ day. Also, July 14 is the annual dodgeball tourna-ment, and this year it’s being held outside for the first time ever at Royal Athletic Park. It’s great fun playing, and almost as much fun (and free) to come and watch. And if you want to participate half way through, I’ll have cheerleading costumes available for four cheerers.

Reach For the Pot is in the semi-finals now, with games running close. It’s been very entertaining. Remember, if you can’t make it out Wednesdays to the band shell in Beacon Hill Park, we put it all on

Hempology’s YouTube channel. Win-ners of the coveted trophy bongs will be announced in the next Cannabis Digest issue. Keep a lookout as the summer goes on, as Reach For the Pot is going to be hosted in several cities across Can-ada as we go on a tour to promote Ted’s book, and these shows will also be posted to the web. It’s always fun watch-ing activists butt heads. There are always lots of laughs. Next week is our annu-al joint roll-ing, poetry reading, t-shirt, pipe, and bong contests. I’ll a n n o u n c e the winners in the next issue of Cannabis Digest.

We live life everyday, it’s never too late or too soon to start training for the TC 10k, which may be walked as well as run. Herb (aka Ted) crossed the finish line this year in 59 minutes and 18 seconds, with a bong-hit station that just about took him out half way through the race. Technical difficulties ensued once again, so no photos of that, just lots of coughs. You can watch a video of the race on Hempology’s YouTube channel. Special mention to Karli “Go Team Go” for be-ing there to participate—you rock girl!

Hempology will be celebrating 17 years on Sept. 5. As always, we will meet at Centennial Square and march to the Leg. building for a postcard photo. It’s a great and fun night. Also Hempol-ogy 101 starts at UVic during the first week of Sept., with university clubs days usually running Tues. to Thurs. of the following week (not always though, so watch out for dates to come online or on the board at the club).

With that, I’d like to give James a huge thank you for his help with the reeferendum that passed on campus last year, stating that we should be allowed to smoke inside the circle. But our work there is not done yet. In Sept. we should receive a letter from University Admin

with an official OK to return to our tra-ditional meeting place.

Another confusing issue still under-way is our bakery trial. Justice Johnston agreed with us on our constitutional challenge and granted that we should be able to put our tea and butter through a

strainer, but he is still proceeding with Owen’s possess ion c h a r g e s . We’re look-ing at a 20 day jury trial, com-m e n c i n g Feb. 4. We got into trouble for only bring-ing four wit-nesses to our c o n s t i t u -tional chal-lenge, so we are hoping

for between 10 and 15 witnesses for the next round. If you want to help change Canadian law, come join us and help defend Owen and all the other won-derful bakers. You can read more about the court case in the past year’s worth of Cannabis Digest issues, and on the Hempology 101 website.

On that note, our newest product, Eccles squares, were inspired by the fact that we ran out of leaf and were tired of turning still-good medicine into compost, as well by the crown prosecu-tor—Peter Eccles—who saw no reason to not ingesting the whole plant. If you need extra fibre in your diet, these squares are for you. If you have a touchy digestive system, try them in small bites, one at a time, and wait 1-2 hours for testing sensitivities. If you go over-board though, no matter who you are, expect explosive results! Eccles squares are made of dates, oats, currants, hemp-hearts, granulated lecithin, and Budda Ball or Ryanol tailings. Yum!

The next newest product is Stalke-nal—once again born of not wanting to waste—and what a success it is! As we sell the raw herb, we de-stalk it to the customer’s satisfaction, and collect it all day in the stalk bucket. We also make an-other stalk product, kamut puffs, where the stalk is cold-infused for one month,

from full moon to full moon. It is not decarboxylated (see our recipe book on-line) as the Stalkenal is. It is easy for you to do at home, too! Just keep a small jar on the table to put your stalk in. Once it’s full, fill the jar with oil and leave it for a month, or decarboxylate it first and then cook it into the oil. The decarbox-ylation process converts the two-thirds part inactive THC acid into active Δ9-THC, thus creating a superior analgesic. Anyone taking three or four Ryanols at a time should try substituting one or two of them with a Stalkenal—depending on how much muscle relaxant vs. pain man-agement you need. Also, if you find that you’re having to smoke more than you’d like to, try eating one Ryanol and one Stalkenal upon rising (or more depend-ing on your condition). I usually take two to three of each at a time on a bad pain day, two or three times throughout the day. If I need more than that I just switch to Cannoil (and the lozenges, made with an oil similar to Cannoil, just saved me from another abscessed tooth).

The biggest news for now in some ways is that Revenue Canada wants us to start paying taxes like we are a real store. We all pay our personal taxes, and have always been willing to pay other taxes if only we could get a business license or an Exemption 56. The BC Compassion Club has been working on this same is-sue for the past year, and we have hired a tax lawyer to help us. Ted will be writing expanded articles as things progress. So far it looks like we will have to raise our prices a little, they will be going back to where they were before we lowered them a couple of years ago. My apologies.

To finish, If you want to help with the coming changes, or just keep up to date with all that’s happening, please come to the Hempology 101 board meetings (first Tues. of every month at 7:30 pm at the Club) or the Thurs. afternoon meet-ings at 1 and 2 pm to see if there is a committee you might want to join. But for sure put the AGM on your calendar, on the first Tues. in Oct. at the usual time and place.

All that being said, and seeing as how I’m writing this in the tub (and luckily haven’t dropped it all in the water yet) I’m going to hedge my bets and sign-off here, wishing you all a happy, hempy summer.

4Updates, Warnings, and Suggestions

Gayle with her life-saving medicine

Mondays at 3PM PST

Be part of the live audience chat room at www.cannabisculture.com

Watch well-known Cannabis activist and BC Marijuana Party candidate Mik Mann (also known as Opus) as he brings you News, Activism,

Grow Tips, Videos & more—plus contests to WIN FREE STUFF!!

OPUS LIVE!Cannabis Culture and the Pot TV Network proudly present:

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012

Publisher’s Note: Great Plains of Hempology

Ted Smith

By the time you are reading this I should be touring around the country promot-ing the Hempology 101 Textbook and the many benefits of cannabis. It seems fit-ting that it is coming to life just after my 43rd birthday. The first 42 years of my life have been a lot of fun. The next 42 years are going to be a lot of hard work.

There are several reasons I say this. Dealing with the Canada Revenue Agency is certainly one reason my life has become more intense lately. Incorporat-ing the Cannabis Buyers’ Club of Canada will destroy the comfortable benevolent dictatorship I have created for myself in the early stages of the group’s existence. Changing the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations to allow for edible and topi-cal cannabis products will have a huge impact on the ability of drug companies to control the market for cannabis-based medicines and they will fight us every

step of the way. We still have to prepare for Owen’s jury trial next Feb.

My real work over the next 42 years, though, has more to do with industrial and home-made hemp products. There is no doubt legalizing cannabis will have huge benefits for both cannabis consum-ers and the general public. Legalizing cannabis could turn the world’s econo-mies around when you consider the ex-tra revenue gained from taxation and the savings in the criminal justice system. Health care costs will go down with legalization and the world should be a happier place.

Unfortunately, humanity has created an even bigger problem than the War On Drugs.

Accelerated climate changes will dra-matically impact everyone on the plan-et. We should expect temperatures and ocean levels to rise, while facing more in-tense storms and UV rays. Since most of the world’s population and food sources are close to sea level, we can expect mass population movements to higher ground but are not able to move soil so easily. If I live a full life of 84 years or more, the world will be a very different place when I die.

Hemp could provide environmen-tally friendly alternatives to many of the harmful products we use today. Cannabis can be grown around the world, provid-

ing people almost everywhere with a potential source of food, fuel, building materials, medicine, and other products. This plant could be our saving grace when it comes to dealing with the nega-tive impacts of climate change, as it is so easy to grow, manufacture, and use.

Here in Canada we have incredible potential for developing and marketing hemp products. Canadian farmers grow more hemp seed than anywhere else in the world, with the vast majority of it be-ing used for food and body care products. While there is certainly more room for hemp food products like hemp ice cream to appear on the market, there are so many more to come. Paints and stains, for example, could be made out of hemp seed, replacing the extremely harmful paints used by most people today.

Using hemp seed for biofuel might seem very extravagant given what it can be sold for in stores, but for farmers who grow it on a large scale it might make a lot of sense very soon. I look forward to the day I am driving a hybrid electric-hemp fuel car. When it comes to hemp fibers, Canada is not even close to see-ing large scale hemp paper, clothing, or building material production, but that will change, too.

Most people now understand the futil-ity of the war on cannabis and are ready to legalize cannabis. Few realize how

important reviving the hemp industry is. When some see how expensive hemp oil and hemp seed is, they shrug it off, un-derestimating how good it is for them-selves and agricultural communities. As more is grown and sold each year prices will go down relative to other products, as the industry matures with more com-petitors and investments get paid off.

One of my main missions in life is to prove how good hemp seeds are for health. For the last couple of years I have been getting myself in better shape, adding some muscle and improving my endurance. I have been a vegetarian for almost 16 years and believe eating hemp seed has helped me avoid problems and keep me in wicked shape. In fact, I re-cently ran a 10 km race in Herb (our 12 foot tall and 8 foot wide pot leaf cos-tume) and completed the race is just un-der an hour.

Hopefully, the Hempology 101 Textbook will help many cannabis consumers real-ize they are missing out on many of the plant’s most important benefits. It is also my hope it reaches out to those who are interested in saving our species from the accelerated changes to our environment that we are witnessing. Cannabis can help our species thrive, and it is my in-tent to see that happens.

EDITORIAL: Personal Production Under Attack

Andrew BrownEditor

With another recent push by the Harp-er Government to make it clear that medical patients will be loosing the right grow their own medicine, there is a fair amount of anger and anxiety in the med pot community. First and foremost, we need to be honest about the true cause of the problems that have

resulted from personal grow licences—the illegality of the product for the gen-eral public.

Cannabis is a plant with a long histo-ry of religious, medical, and recreational use, and is currently by far the world’s most popular recreational “drug.” When a product, like cannabis, has a high de-mand with limited availability, it cre-ates a valuable commodity—the issue of supply and demand—and the black market fills the void.

In 2001, when the MMAR program was implemented, it gave the opportu-nity for ill Canadians to have access to medical cannabis, with one of the sup-ply methods being personal produc-tion. Now we have a small handful of the population legally able to produce a product that a huge percentage of Ca-nadians want. Lets not lose focus that

the large majority of people licenced to produce cannabis legitimately need it—many of which are on permanent disability with very low incomes, and can not afford to purchase meds, but can indeed afford to grow them. But with this, there are a few rogues who are looking for blanket protection from the MMAR in order to produce for the black market. This is no different than people seeking prescriptions from doc-tors for opiates that they can sell on the black market. The only reason abuse of the program exists is because it is exclu-sive to those able to get a doctor’s signa-ture on some forms. Many people who need the medicine can’t even get their doctors to sign, either.

What will happen to the legitimate medical users? Many will not be able to afford their meds, they will lose the

therapy of gardening and producing their own meds, and some will likely be targeted by criminals who want to in-tercept shipments or rob them of their meds. Couriers and mail delivery people may also be put into harms way. Prices are said to be set by the distributer, so won’t likely be much different than cur-rent street prices.

I know this all sounds obvious and re-dundant, and damn it it should, but for some reason the obvious solution—full legalization—is eluding our elected of-ficials. We need to stop making a simple issue complicated. Our government is throwing all this propaganda about the dangers and abuses of grow licences in order to distract the public from the gi-ant polka-dot elephant dancing in the room—prohibition doesn’t work!

5

July 14 Dodgeball TournamentRoyal Athletic Park

July 17 Hempology 101 Textbook release, Sacred Herb 12-2Start of cross-Canada tour

July 21 Reach for the PotToronto Vapour Central 9 pm

July 24 Reach for the Pot Kitchener City hall 4:20

Aug. 23 Reach for the Pot Medicine Hat 4:20

Sept. 5 Hempology 101 17th Anniv.City Hall march to Legislature

Sept. 12, UVSS Hempology 101 Club Lecture Series Begins

22 lectures, 3-4pmOct. 2 AGM 8pm

826 Johnson St., Victoria

Oct. 31, 7pm Courthouse- Halloween

Annual Costume Contest

Nov. TBA Mount Alice Univversity Convention

Dec. 19, 7pm Ministry of Health- downtown

Cannabis Caroling

Jan. 20 CBC 17th Anniversary

Jan. 27 UVic Convention

Feb. 4 Jury Trial begins

Mar. 17 VIU Convention

Mar. 23 UBC Convention

Apr. 20 4/20 at Centenial Sq.

Apr. 24-July 3 Reach for the PotBeacon Hill Park 7 pm

Hempology Board Meetings are the first Tuesday of every month

at 7:30 pm

www.hempology.ca for more info

HEMPOLOGY 101 CALENDAR OF EVENTSUNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA

STUDENT SOCIETY HEMPOLOGY 101 CLUB

FREE, NON-CREDIT LECTURES SERIES 2011/12

Room: Vertigo

Sept. 14 Cannabis Before Christ21 Marijuana Tax Act of 1937

28 Cannabis Around the World

Oct. 5 Hemp Products12 Cannabis Research19 Cannabis Chemistry26 Cannabis Activism

Nov. 2 Cannabis in the Media9 READING BREAK

16 Medical Uses of Cannabis23 Medical Cannabis in Canada

30 History of the CBC of C

**WINTER BREAK

Room: Cinicenta

Jan. 11 Hemp History18 History of Prohibition

25 Economics of Legalization

Feb. 1 Growing Cannabis8 Cannabis and Your Health

15 READING BREAK22 Med. Cannabis Products

March 1 Cannabis and the Law8 Social Impact of Prohibition

15 Pot in Politics22 Health Canada and the MMAR

29 History of Hempology 101

WEDNESDAYS @ 3:30pmPUBLIC WELCOME

watch live onlinewww.stickam.com/hempology101

watch old lectures on www.hempology.ca

Issue Number 33

By Amie Gravell

Decriminalization: Shuffling descrip-tions of criminality and shuffling percep-tions of criminality.

I first heard about the Sensible BC campaign from Dana Larsen when he spoke at the 13th Cannabis Convention at UVic. I came into marijuana advo-cacy and activism through a deep desire to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves, and have traditionally op-posed the idea of decriminalization in lieu of legalization.

There are plenty of reasons to support legalization instead of decriminaliza-tion. Decriminalization doesn’t address the most negative aspects of prohibi-tion—organized crime, the continuing illegality of production and supply, or the subjugation of growers. Legalization of marijuana is vastly preferable.

But if legalization is the dream, it doesn’t always seem attainable. I keep telling myself it has to be legal within ten years, but I know many people that have been thinking that same thing for the past few decades. We’ve come close be-fore, and yet marijuana remains illegal—but not in the same way as it always was.

The legalization of medical marijuana has increased the visibility of marijuana users and has provided a safe venue for people to stand up and start busting those stoner stereotypes, particularly that marijuana makes you less productive and unsuccessful. As medical marijuana users have infiltrated the public sphere, pub-

lic opinions of marijuana use and mari-juana users have improved. Head shops are thriving, dispensaries are operating in cities across Canada, and while we have a long way to go, we have come a long way.

Medical legalization has given the marijuana community a legitimate, safe voice for advocacy and activism, however, it has changed the way we advocate and the language we use. The freedom medi-cal marijuana users have to advocate for marijuana has contributed to a dearth of medicinal advocacy and somewhat of a void of recreational advocacy. Recreation-al users (to appropriate a Nixonian term) are the silent majority of marijuana us-ers and likely always will be—occasional tokers will always outnumber daily users (medicinal or otherwise). Though there will always be people who will never ad-mit to using marijuana publically for a host of reasons, all of which are valid for them. If recreational personal use were decriminalized, the number of voices to publically call for marijuana legalization would increase exponentially.

Our movement has become somewhat disjointed by the legalization of medici-nal marijuana. There is a growing polarity between medicinal users as “legitimate” and recreational users as “illegitimate,” when our end goals are the same—legal-ization of marijuana for all and an end to the astoundingly ineffectual and costly war on drugs. Anything that can allow recreational users something of the same safe voice that medical marijuana users have will help us unify and fight for our

common cause together, more effectively.I have opposed the idea of decriminal-

ization as an action proposed by govern-ments, mostly because I fear that prog-ress will stymie there and full legalization will never happen. However, the idea of decriminalization as a result of commu-nity action is different. Forcing the pro-vincial government to decriminalize is a far cry from accepting the government’s shrill compromise of decriminalization.

Marijuana is something that doesn’t need to hide in the dark. It has been forced to by prohibition and the more marijuana users we get out into the pub-lic, it seems, the better public opinion of marijuana gets.

I interviewed Dana Larsen recently about the Sensible BC campaign, and intend to volunteer as much as I can to ensure the initiative’s success.

To start off, what is Sensible BC?Sensible BC is a campaign to decriminal-

ize the simple possession of cannabis in Brit-ish Columbia.

Could you explain a bit of background on the police act and what its signifi-cance is? What is the Sensible BC Polic-ing Act?

The Police Act is the legislation which au-thorizes and empowers all police officers in the province. Police are under control of the province, including the RCMP. It is fully within provincial jurisdiction to set police priorities and direct the police through the Police Act.

Sensible BC has prepared legislation called the Sensible Policing Act, which will decriminalize marijuana in the province. The bill we’ve written has three parts.

The first part is an amendment to the Po-lice Act, forbidding officers from taking any action, including search and seizure, in cases of simple cannabis possession. This will effec-tively decriminalize possession in B.C. The second part adds cannabis to the section of the Liquor Control Act which covers posses-sion by minors.

This empowers police to search and seize cannabis from minors in exactly the same fashion as if it were alcohol.

The third part mandates the Attorney General to write to the federal government and ask that they remove cannabis from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act so that B.C. can tax and regulate it like alcohol and tobacco. This section also mandates the provincial government to do a commission and then create the laws and regulations which will be used when the federal govern-ment does remove cannabis from the CDSA.

It seems very straight forward; do you think it will be difficult to get enough signatures? How many are needed? When do people vote?

It is very challenging to get enough signa-tures. The BC Initiative Act requires 10% of registered voters in all of B.C.’s 85 ridings to sign on within a 90 day period. Missing even one riding means the initiative fails. The only successful effort ever was the recent anti-HST campaign.

The next referendum is scheduled for Sept. 2014. Any initiative that gets enough sig-natures by early 2014 will get on the ballot.

That is why we will not start collecting the official signatures until fall of 2013. Be-tween now and then, we will be register-ing support from people across the province. Our goal is to get enough people registered so that when the time comes to collect official signatures we can do it easily and quickly from those who have already registered their support.

It is very important that people register their support for the Sensible BC campaign. We need hundreds of thousands of people across the province to register for this cam-paign to be successful.

Why amend the police act rather than pushing for some other change in legisla-tion about marijuana?

There are limits on what a province can do because the Controlled Drugs and Sub-stances Act is federal law. We recognize that decriminalizing possession at the provincial level is only a first step towards a fully legal-ized, taxed and regulated system.

Amending the Police Act is one of the few things that B.C. can do as a province to reduce the expense and negative impact of police interactions over cannabis possession.

Has there been any opposition to Sen-sible BC this early in the game?

We have had no opposition at this point, but we haven’t formally launched the cam-paign yet. However, the vast majority of people in B.C. believe that possession of can-nabis should not be a crime. The BCNDP also officially supports the decriminalization of cannabis.

There have also recently been endorse-ments of cannabis law reform from for-mer Mayors of Vancouver, former Attorney General, current mayors across B.C., health and policing officials, and other high-profile figures.

I know there are a number of people that would say that this initiative isn’t enough—that decriminalization isn’t enough—what would you say to them?

I agree that decriminalization of posses-sion is not a complete solution, and that we need to move to a fully legalized system for cannabis. However, this is an important first step, it is something that is within pro-vincial jurisdiction, and this will put con-siderable pressure on the federal government to go further and allow B.C. to fully regulate cannabis like alcohol or tobacco.

Does Sensible BC have a considerable amount of support?

Yes. We have received support from a wide number of political figures, health care pro-viders, law enforcement officers, and aca-demics. We are still in the process of gath-ering endorsements and planning out this lengthy campaign. I fully expect more prom-inent figures and organizations to endorse this initiative as the campaign progresses.

And finally, how can people help if they want to get involved?

Please come to <www.SensibleBC.ca> and register, then register your friends and family, and get them to register their friends too. We have free promotional mate-rials available for those who register, such as buttons, t-shirts, fridge magnets and other fun items. If you believe in cannabis law re-form then please join the Sensible BC cam-paign. This is our chance to actually change the laws and make history for our cause, our province and our country. This may be the most important cannabis campaign ever in BC history. Please join us now, together we can make this important first step towards ending the harmful war on cannabis.

6

j

A S e n s i b l e B CD a n a L a r s e n s p e a r h e a d s a n e w i n i t i a t i v e t o d e c r i m i n a l i z e

TRUTH

www.wearechangevancouver.orgwww.wearechangevancouver.org

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012

Issue Number 338

By Al Graham

In early May, I headed to Toronto to at-tend the Ontario Superior Court case of Matt Mernaugh. This case is about an ill Canadian who proved in an Ontario Court that he could not access the Health Canada medical marijuana program, a program that’s suppose to be available to all sick Canadians. Why couldn’t he get access it? It all boils down to Matt’s in-ability to find a doctor willing to sign the Health Canada paperwork for him. From there his lawyer proved he wasn’t alone.

This all happened a few years ago when Matt, a graduate of St. Clair Col-lege’s journalism program and the Hum-ber School for Writers, was arrested for growing cannabis. Matt relies on medi-cal marijuana to ease the pain brought on by fibromyalgia, scoliosis, seizures, and depression, and proved his medical necessity in his original trial. Matt and his lawyer, Paul Lewin, proved that he couldn’t find a doctor that was willing to sign his application and that there were many more Canadians fighting for this same right.

One witness at Matt’s original case was a patient who was refused 117 times. At one point Paul assumed that many of these doctors had never signed a Medical Marijuana Access Regulations (MMAR) form. It seems that the judge agreed as he said there was an “overwhelming refusal” by Canadian physicians to participate in the scheme. The end result was that the court declared the rules that govern medical marijuana access and the prohi-bitions laid out in sections 4 and 7 of the CDSA Act were “constitutionally invalid and of no force and effect.”

This is not the first time that the MMAR have been found invalid. Previously, the Ontario Court of Appeal had recognized that depriving someone with a serious ill-ness from medical marijuana, when it re-lieves their pain, is a violation of the Cana-dian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As a result the federal government created the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations to allow people, when supported by a medical doctor, to legally possess and grow canna-bis for medicinal purposes.

When Matt and Paul first won this case many people in the country didn’t realize what the outcome meant. That was until they were told that the Judge had given the government ninety days to change our cannabis laws or it would become legal for all. At that time, B.C. lawyer Kirk Tousaw compared the case to that of Henry Morgentaler, the abor-tion doctor and advocate whose consti-tutional win eventually led to the wide-spread legalization of abortion, one that “became legal without any real regula-tory scheme surrounding it.”

While it was sweet victory it was short lived. The government fought this deci-sion and won a temporary “stay” (put the judge’s decision on hold) until the On-tario Superior Court could hear the gov-ernment’s appeal.

After several rumoured dates the ap-peal was finally heard by the Ontario Su-perior Court at 10:30 am on May 6, 7, and 12, at Osgood Hall, in Toronto. Due to medical reasons, I missed day one of this appeal, but did make it to the city for day two. When I arrived at the court house there was a crowd of supporters present to greet Matt before he headed inside. By the time I entered the court

room it was pretty full with what looked like legal people, but I was still able to find a seat. Many of those who fol-lowed behind me were not so lucky, but were able to get a seat in a second room opened for spectators.

When Justice Doherty got started he reminded the second room that the same rules apply in that room as they would in a regular court room. This would include the recording of this case. Apparently this reminder was due to a group of peo-ple who where broadcasting the previous

day’s proceedings live on the internet.When things got started Paul opened

up with a one hour submission that he was finishing from Monday’s appear-ance. He talked about the Hitzig (page 14 paragraph 9) case and continued with the many conditions that benefit from cannabis. From there he reviewed some of the testimony from the patients who had testified in the original case. This in-cludes a MS patient known as FS whose neurologist had retired and now cannot find a doctor to re-sign the required pa-perwork. This patient wrote to a long list of government-type officials trying to get help, but got little to no response.

Justice Doherty reminded Paul that you cannot find things unconstitutional be-cause one or two people are being denied access to a program. Paul then reminded the judge that there are more than one or two people being affected. At that point Paul talked about another patient from the original case who was on morphine until a person suggested cannabis. Before giving it a try the patient researched it for eight months. Then when they talked to the doctor about their research and their experimentation the doctor was amazed with the results but refused to sign.

Paul talked about patients who were nervous and scared to approach their doctors, knowing that patients are being threatened to be released or were treated unfairly and ridiculed. He even reminded the judge about a doctor who removes patients from his office for even asking about therapeutic cannabis. Some pa-tients are being told by their doctors that their medical licenses would be threat-ened if they signed the application. Paul’s list of patients included people ranging from a mom who was in car accident to an injured fireman.

While Paul was reminding the justices about the number of patients having troubles, Matt sat in the front row look-ing at his notes.

One Justice then spoke up and said that if a doctor says no it means no, and

that is the way system works. But Paul argues that doctor’s are not educated on cannabis. This prompted the judge to ask him how he knows this which Paul re-plied with “doctors say no without even asking their patients about its benefits.”

From there Paul talked about patients who are refusing to take opioid medica-tion and prefer the cannabis route. He re-minded them that a doctor testified that most of them don’t know much about opioids and if they did Canada wouldn’t have an opioid problem.

Paul kept talking about the patients as he mentioned that some of them are waiting up to eight years to find a doctor, and this only after having to travel across the country. He then read off a part of his factum about how patients have the right to reject treatment suggested by their doctors.

When Paul finished up he asked the court to extend Matt’s rights to grow and consume cannabis until this case is de-cided. This was granted.

When it came to the prosecution’s turn, they said that doctors do have the right to say no to therapeutic cannabis and argued that the application paper work says that all medications have to be tried. At that point, Justice Doherty said that the doctor must consider them and not necessarily have had tried them. He says that if a patient says no because of the side effects then they have been considered which at that point the judge tossed his book down on table.

The prosecution continued on that all medications must be tried and that can-nabis should be a last resort. He argues that the Hitzig (p.142) case agrees with this at which point the court looked at the language and thought it was reason-able. It appears it agreed cannabis was a drug of last resort.

When the prosecution tried to men-tion that the program was fair, Justice Doherty had another opinion. He said that during the Morgenteller case they heard about how patients were forced to travel across the country as they now have to do with cannabis. He used ex-amples like that there are 150 doctors willing to sign in B.C. but only 23 in Manitoba, and only 3 in Quebec. In the end it reflects that cannabis is not equally available to everyone across the country.

When the crown completed their submission the court adjourned for a break. When I returned the main court room was full, so I headed on over to the overflow room where the monitors were set up.

When it comes to these cases other parties are allowed to make submissions before the Justices on how they interpret things. These people are called interveners and Matt’s case had no shortage of them. This would include the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, as well as a list of HIV/Aids groups which included the Canadian Aids Society, the Canadian HIV/Aids Legal Network, and the HIV & Aids Legal Clinic Ontario.

When the prosecution was finished the interveners took their turns. But when Justice Doherty found out that Ryan Dalziel of the British Columbia Civil Liberty Association was present he got a chuckle out of those in attendance when he commented: “You guys have a big budget if you’re here.” Mr Dalziel politely reminded him that he was here to make a submission as it goes against his civil rights as well. Other than that he was here to make two points.

The first points he talked about were related to the Hitzig case before moving onto one called Ferguson. When he fin-ished up he said it clearly points out that the legislation is the root of the problems.

His second point was that the system isn’t equal across the board and isn’t fair to all Canadians. He also reminded the Judges what the patients go through when searching out doctors, then fin-ished off by comparing this to the suc-cessful Terry Parker case.

Justice Doherty then asked about sec-tion 7 and an illusory defence? When I asked Paul what this was he said “the judge was referring to the principle of fundamental justice that a defence to a charge must not be illusory. In this case the medical defence to marihuana charg-es is illusory.” 

Lawyer Paul Burnstein, who was the lawyer in the Hitzig case, was there representing the HIV/Aids groups. Mr. Burnstein talked about how the process is unfair, which prompted one of the judges to ask again about a registry. The judge wanted to know if there is a list for groups likes his to turn to in order to find a doctor. Mr. Burnstein replied that there isn’t one available, but that some information does spread through word of mouth by the patients. He also points out to the judges that Health Canada’s possible flimsy excuse for not having a list is due to privacy laws. He goes on to say that the charter does apply to doc-tors and the MMAR program, at which point the prosecution says that the char-ter doesn’t cover such things as doctors signing for cannabis.

From there he discussed doctor partic-ipation and their reluctance as some 90 percent of patients say their doctors re-fuse to sign the paperwork. At this point he noted that many of them will sign a compassion centre’s forms—but not the government’s. This, he says, “remains the major factor and problem with the pro-gram,” as well as a lack of safe guards for patients when a doctor says no. By this he means that the MMAR offers no review for the patients and no form for the doc-tor to fill out stating why they have re-fused a medication the patient requested.

He touched on how cannabis is readily available on the black market where Justice Doherty responded with “pharmaceutical drugs are too.” At that point an unknown voice in this extra room said: “But mari-juana is not toxic like pharmaceuticals.”

M a t t M e r n a u g h a n d P a u l L e w i n h o p e f u l l y d e l i v e r b l o w t o c a n n a b i s l a w s

Patients Await Mernaugh Appeal Case

Paul Lewin and Matt Mernaugh surrounded by some of the people who helped with the case

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012 9So what is the remedy? One that all

parties could be partially happy with, as Justice Doherty appeared very con-cerned about this. One of the concerns he mentioned is that there are many people without medication and that sig-nificant people are not getting access to it. These people are then being forced to go to court. He also figures that other cases could come up before their answer is rendered.

One option that seemed to get a lot of attention was the doctor registry. While some people seemed to like it others wondered if it really is a benefit or a lia-bility. Their point being that if your doc-tor says no they are more than likely not going to access this list anyway. There was also talk about adding “medical necessity” to eliminate charges so that people don’t end up in court, but no one seemed to know how this would work.

In the U.S., the medical association has come out in favour of therapeutic cannabis, so where does ours stand on this program and are they offering any suggestions? It appears that the Cana-dian Medical Association (CMA) feels that the current Medical Marijuana Ac-cess Regulations are unfeasible and that doctors would feel more comfortable with the cannabis option should patients have consistent access to a safe product.

Here is the CMA list of concerns and suggestions that could best be addressed through an implementation process:

-Early ongoing and meaningful con-sultations with physicians by govern-ment.

-Registered Physicians—physicians would “opt in” and apply (to Health Canada) to gain authorization to par-ticipate in the process. In doing so, a registry would be created for providers to whom patients could be referred.

-Function as a Clinical Trial—Au-thorized physicians would provide ac-cess to marijuana in a fashion similar to a clinical trial, supported by treatment protocols and incorporating ongoing monitoring and surveillance of patients.

-Provider Education—Registered providers would be provided with spe-cific education prior to commencing registration and on an ongoing basis as more information is gathered by re-search and the program regarding the use of marijuana.

-Liability Protection—Registered providers would be provided liability protection by Health Canada.

-Known Access Points—Treatment centres or acceptable alternatives would be established and known to patients and providers.

-Central Supply—Marijuana would be supplied from a centrally regulated and controlled source.

-Post Market Surveillance—Mari-juana’s impact would be monitored on an ongoing basis.

-Privacy—The registry would be se-cure and maintained in keeping with privacy principles.

-Revocation—The Minister may re-voke a physician’s authority to prescribe marijuana if he/she breaches pre-spec-ified conditions of authorization. Fur-ther, the Minister can report physicians to regulatory bodies under explicit pre-determined conditions.Following the case, Paul wrote to say

that “my factum did not endorse the CMA position [...] on the second day of my submissions I was pressed by Justice Doherty how things could be different for a particular patient witness and I said a registry of marihuana-knowledgeable doctors would help that patient.”

Before the appeal Matt and Paul dis-cussed a few possible solutions to fix the MMAR program. Paul said that “we considered naturopaths. A flaw with na-turopaths is that they are only regulated in B.C. Despite that, we suggested na-turopaths at trial and in my appeal fac-tum.”

What about just requiring a diagnosis from a doctor? Paul said that he Matt thought of it but figured “this would ne-cessitate a pre-existing list of conditions for which marihuana is medicinal. The government would create that list and it would be too short.”

When Paul finished his letter he said: “There are progressive doctors out there who completely [understand] how good cannabis is. If these doctors were better paid and more respected by the govern-ment they could create a great registry. We need more cannabis-inclined doc-tors and we need them to be treated bet-ter by the government.”

After court was over for the day Matt headed outside to say that “the judge wants to get it right and doesn’t want

us back.” When he and Paul were asked when they expected a decision they said it could be a three to four month wait before they hear anything.

Paul told us that he was impressed with Matt’s dedication to this case, as he told everyone that Matt was in his office everyday for four months. When asked a money question Paul continued with “it became a labour of love” and that the money will come later. Everyone present had lots of favourable things to say about the judges, but talk is talk. It’s the law that will determine if their talk is correct or not.

As of this writing we are still waiting on the decision from this panel of three Judges. Until then there will be many unanswered questions like: will can-nabis be legal for everyone? will either

side take this case to the Supreme Court of Canada if they lose? or will the losing party end the run here? Will there be a remedy put into place to solve this problem—a problem one judge de-scribed as never ending and fully expect-ing to see more cases like this unless the medical marijuana program in Canada is fixed? Will the “fixed” program look like the one that Health Canada is try-ing to implement after losing the origi-nal case? Does the government know that it may lose thus all the more reason to change the existing program? Will there be easier access to this program for patients?

www.wearechangevictoria.com

“Be the change you want to see in the world”

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012 11

D e d i c a t e d a c t i v i s t J o h n C o o k c l o s e s H a l i f a x C B C o f CMedicine Man Steps Down

By Debbie Stultz-Giffin

Due to anticipated difficulties with the proposed MMAR scheduled to come into effect later that year I had my first opportunity to work with media in early 2001. All patients seeking exemptions would need, among other things, a spe-cialist to verify their need for cannabis. My neurologist, fully aware of my previ-ous severe reactions to pharmaceuticals, refused to sign paperwork. Many things resulted from that interview. The most noteworthy is connecting with John Cook. John quickly became someone that I would work shoulder-to-shoulder with and proudly call my friend.

John Cook, of Harrietsfield, NS, hus-band to Krista and stay-at-home dad of Hannah and Megan, was busy establish-ing Atlantic Canada’s first chapter of a national cannabis club. His compassion club was affiliated with Ted Smith’s Can-nabis Buyers’ Club of Canada.

John, a truly caring and compassion-ate gentleman, started the club to help patients, like himself, who failed to get appropriate relief from traditional pain killers. He has suffered from chronic pain syndrome for years due to two work related accidents causing neck and back pain as a result of a T9 vertebrae com-pressed fracture. The narcotics originally prescribed to deal with the pain left him feeling incapacitated.

In Feb. 2002, he officially announced the arrival of a Cannabis Buyers’ Club of Canada outlet in Halifax with 25 mem-bers. John was opening the only known Compassion Club east of Quebec that functioned in an ethical, open, and trans-parent manner. He informed the public, politicians, and police of his intentions through correspondence, press releases, meetings, and distributing his brochure to businesses and hospitals.

The sole director of the Halifax outlet pre-screened club members to ensure the legitimacy of their medical claim and to keep an eye out for undercover law enforcement. Doctor’s notes from the patient’s treating physician or veri-fication of medical conditions were required for club membership. Club members signed notes that they would not re-sell any medicine they purchased. All of the club’s medication providers were expected to provide cannabis to club members only. Although having a store front was John’s ultimate dream, he mostly has met patients in their homes or at prearranged locations.

John was keenly aware of what he was putting on the line when he began his compassion club, but the governmental red tape and bureaucracy standing between patients and the medicine—that gave them ultimate symptom management and quality of life—was his motivation.

On May 12, 2005, John Cook and Steve Chute, of Springhill, NS, both en-tered not guilty pleas to charges of pos-sessing marijuana and possession for the purpose of trafficking. Seventy-five hun-dred dollars worth of cannabis grown for John’s club by Chute, who was too ill to make the delivery personally, had been placed on the Acadian Lines Bus, in Springhill, destined for John in Halifax. The package of cannabis was discovered by the RCMP in Truro.

Ironically, it wasn’t until John applied to get the seized cannabis back that both gentlemen were officially charged. In

June of 2005, John stood in front of Judge John MacDougall in a Truro courtroom and launched an unsuccessful bid to have the medication returned to the club. It was deemed essential evidence in the upcoming trial against Cook and Chute despite the fact that neither was denying the existence of the package. In fact, John had signed documentation that disclosed the package’s contents.

In 2005, both John and Steve faced a maximum of five years incarceration. The trial was sched-uled to begin in early Sept. when Crown Attorney Cameron MacKinnon sud-denly announced that all charges had been stayed.

It was John’s in-tention to “prove that possession and cultivation laws (for medical users) weren’t even on the books anymore.” He was fully prepared to defend himself as he is a firm be-liever in the right to defend oneself in court as “they want you to pay through the nose for justice.”

On Sept. 28, 2009, John made these comments to Dan Arsenault, crime reporter, of The Chron-icle Herald in an article called “Weeding through the Government Red Tape”:

“The majority of the (cannabis buyers’) club members don’t have exemptions; maybe 10 of them do. I don’t know if we can do it legally. The police have com-mented if they have a complaint they will investigate. I assume they haven’t had a complaint. I’ve had a lot of dealings through the court helping other people with their charges, so I’ve got to know the Crown (attorneys) and a lot of the of-ficers. I don’t know if that has any bearing on it or not. I guess as long as I don’t step outside what we consider the boundaries. You have to show medical proof.”

In 2009, the Halifax Outlet of the Cannabis Buyers’ Club of Canada had 130 members ranging in age from 21 to 85. Cannabis was generally $8 a gram (lower if larger amounts were purchased) with three strains were available—a sa-tiva, an indica, and a mixture of both. John’s profit margin was extremely low and his intention was to cover the cost of his own medicine, the delivery costs to maintain the club, and any extra would go to assist patients who were facing charges in court.

John also found time to work with sev-eral activists as we established a provincial not-for-profit—Maritimers Unite for Medical Marijuana Society (MUMM).

Officially incorporated in Oct. of 2003, MUMM is a registered non-profit orga-nization, advocating and lobbying for the rights of medicinal cannabis patients, cultivators and distributors including compassion clubs and societies (particu-larly in Atlantic Canada) through legis-lative strategies, media campaigns, and non-violent direct action while endeav-ouring to educate others about the rela-tive safety of medical cannabis.

Since MUMM’s inception John has been Vice Chair and a speaker at most functions and rallies. He has been a cru-cial voice in all aspects of media, both defending the rights of medical cannabis patients and chastising the government for the abysmal job they have done to uphold patients’ rights. He has lobbied all levels of government, including the UN, for effective change and to end pro-hibition. John has written editorials and

countless letters to the editor. He has worked diligently with ill patients as they have fought to maintain housing, stay out of prison, and to have access to their legally recommended cannabis.

John’s passion to ensure that all patients have informed representation in court re-sulted in his assisting with anything from answering questions to sitting with them in court, and even in some cases to be their voice in court. John scoured disclosures and helped patients formulate affidavits—all on a voluntary basis—with the under-standing that the “accused” would assist with any of John’s out of pocket expenses. Countless patients, not only in Atlantic Canada but throughout the country, have John to thank for their freedom and/or for financial savings. MUMM promoted John’s efforts through the courts by creat-ing the Court Support Initiative in which John has been a guiding influence.

John served on the inaugural board of directors for Canadian Students for Sen-sible Drug Policy, and in the fall of 2011 was the Atlantic Canada representative for NORML Canada.

Sadly, this winter, John Cook has been forced to resign as Director of CBC of C’s Halifax outlet due to health concerns that have been on-going since Aug. of 2011.

John supplied exemption holder Sally Campbell, a social assistance recipient, with medicine while she battled for sev-eral years to recoup the expenses through Department of Community Services. Campbell finally won a decision in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, in 2010. Sally’s doctor deemed her medical can-nabis a necessity and Judge Moir ordered DCS to foot the bill. Sally has been pro-vided with minimal reimbursement for current expenses. Attempts to receive compensation for medicine supplied by John have been denied. This has left the family short financially to the tune of $50,000. John closing the club also means that he no longer has a ready sup-ply of medicine to cope with the chronic pain syndrome.

The provincial NDP should be ashamed. They promised MUMM del-egates, in 2007, that if they were gov-erning they would assist low income pa-tients with medication costs. Now, they have sealed the special needs program so that it will not include medical cannabis.

John has been a constant shining ex-ample of how to run an above board, open and transparent compassion club for nearly 10 years—and how to be an activist with real integrity. John’s dedica-tion to patients and the medical cannabis cause has been nothing short of exem-plarily.

Krista, John’s wife, when asked to com-ment on John’s years as a cannabis cru-sader said, “I am proud of John’s accom-plishments over the years. He has set the bar for what it is to be truly compassion-ate. John is such a good man to everyone regardless of how he feels. He is selfless. I love him dearly.”

If anyone would like to make a do-nation to this wonderful man who has given so much to so many, please email <chair@mumm.ca> for details.

jMedPot.netForums

Visit www.medpot.net/forums

“One of the best Cannabis and other drug news forums

in the world!”

Here Comes the Taxman CannabisBuyers’ClubtoIncorporate

It was not a surprise when Special Enforce-ment Officers from the Canada Revenue Agency showed up at the Cannabis Buyers’ Club of Canada in early May to announce that I was under investigation. After over 16 years of being very public about selling can-nabis products to sick people, and recently changing federal laws in Owen Smith’s trial, we have gained a lot of attention.

Anyone who read the court decision of Apr. 13, 2012 quickly saw why the CRA would come knocking. Here are the two paragraphs that they would be interested in: “[34] Mr Ted Smith estimates that the store gener-ates revenue of about $6,000 to $6,500 per day. He estimates that between 5% and 10% of that volume represents edible and other products, not dried marijuana, and says this proportion is closer to the 5% lower end. Mr Ted Smith aims for a profit margin of be-tween 20% and 25% [35] Neither the store nor the Club collects or remits HST, nor does the business pay income taxes.”

Apparently it was the police who informed the CRA about this decision. There is an in-teresting relationship between the police and the CRA. The CRA is not allowed to disclose information to the police but the police con-stantly give names and information to CRA agents in an attempt to squeeze money from people suspected of breaking the law.

Even if a person admits on their tax forms to being a thug for a living, the CRA would do nothing about their crimes. However, they could look at the thug’s list of clients to see how they make enough money to pay him to put people in the hospital. It does not matter to the CRA if the business is legal or not—they want their taxes.

Now before I go much further, I should

clarify a few things from the quotes. First, we aim to sell our products at the lowest price possible and add about 20-25 percent on top of what we pay for raw herb to cover expenses like wages, rent, utilities, supplies, etc. When the judge states that I try to make between 20-25 percent profit, it does not mean I am taking that much home.

For the past few years I have declared $24,000 in earnings to the CRA. It is a rough but fair estimate. Without any deduc-tions I have paid between $3,000 and $4,000 in taxes a year for a couple of years now. At the same time, I have encouraged those who work with me to also declare what they earn, or as close to it as they can figure out.

The apartment that the club ran out of for fivr years before getting a store was right across the street from the CRA, and I kept the apartment for a few years after moving down Johnson St. to a storefront. In fact, I was informed by the officer who told us to stop operating in the apartment that they had full-time surveillance at the CRA for a year before trying to get a warrant. So it really was no surprise when they finally walked through the door. In many ways, it was about time.

This development appears to be the perfect opportunity for me to help the club officially incorporate and allow a non-profit society to control its affairs. When I started the club 16 years ago, it was never my intention to own or control it forever. In fact, I said that when it became legitimate I would step back and focus on my work with Hempology 101. With the publishing of my textbook, now seems like a perfect time for me to step back a bit from the club and let it grow on its own.

The board of directors will consist of two members, two staff, and two growers, plus

three directors-at-large. The members, staff, and growers will choose their representa-tives and the three directors-at-large will be chosen by the six constituent representa-tives. However, for a few reasons the original board will be hand-picked by me, which is how most non-profits are launched.

Meetings are being held in Victoria to work towards incorporating, and the min-utes have been posted on our forums. So far two committees have formed, one focused on incorporating and the other on finances. We have drafted some by-laws and are prepar-ing for this transformation on many levels. In the future we hope to form other commit-tees including ones for membership issues, advocacy, policy and governance, research and development, alternative healthcare, and one focused on Health Canada.

Transferring power over to a non-profit society and paying taxes will have many ben-efits, but will not come without a cost. There is no doubt that the prices at the club must go up, at the very least to cover the taxes. It is hoped that the club can grow large enough that other costs can be paid for with increased sales. However, members with MMAR per-mits should be able to use the receipts we start producing as a deduction on their taxes. We will also make new membership cards with photo-id to help with security for both the members and the club. Hopefully high-tech cards will provide even more assistance to members without MMAR cards when they encounter police, especially when they can show them the club pays taxes on the receipts. While all old members of the club will be grandfathered into the new society, everyone will have to sign a new document to formally accept their membership into the society.

By Ted Smith

Here Comes the Taxman CannabisBuyers’ClubtoIncorporate

These are big steps towards getting the club a licence to operate, but it does not matter if we pay our taxes and make our books public to Health Canada. As far as they are con-cerned, compassion clubs are illegal and they are not part of any future plans. This absurd situation means that the club is almost liter-ally paying for both the defence and pros-ecution in Owen’s trial.

Though none of the compassion clubs have a licence or an Exemption #56 from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, there may be a way for the club to fight for it. First, the new society would have to put together a proposal for Health Canada that would include research, quality controls, and full financial transparency. Hopefully we can gain the support of multiple partners before submitting this proposal, including the Uni-versity of Victoria, City of Victoria, Capital Health Regional District, Chamber of Com-merce, and other non-profit societies.

If the federal government turns down our request for an Exemption #56, we can then take them to federal court. While this has not been tried with a medical cannabis club, it is basically how InSite was able to fight the Conservatives when they tried to shut down the safe injection facility in Vancou-ver. Taking a case like this to the Supreme Court of Canada is a complex and expensive endeavour, but it appears to be the only way to force the federal government’s hand, es-pecially given how hostile the Conservatives are towards so-called drug users.

Before we get that far though, we have to deal with Revenue Canada. Right now, the CRA is still in the early stages of their inves-tigation. Since I have not done any bookkeep-ing, we are starting from scratch. We have

made some preparations to put all of the sales into a computer program and start accurately keeping the books but there are no dates set for that yet. To help give the CRA an idea of the financial activities of the club, we have started to keep a basic ledger of expenses. This will help them estimate how much I should be currently paying and will help figure out how much I owe for back taxes.

One of the issues to be determined is whether HST applies. Another is whether we have to disclose the names of the grow-ers. Fortunately we hired, George Jones, a very experienced lawyer in Victoria. George will help to make sure we do not pay any more taxes than we have to. Hopefully we can withhold the names of our growers, as some may be reluctant to expose themselves without getting a license in return.

After the majority in the province voted to scrap the HST, it is clear that no one is hap-py with how it became applicable to almost everything. If it is determined that HST or GST should be applied to medical cannabis, then the prices will go up much more.

The growers are also expected to charge HST when they sell their product to the club and they will do their best not to raise prices to cover that. However, with the manda-tory minimum sentences in place, prices are creeping up on the general market, and other expenses like gas and hydro continue to rise. We have paid the same prices for herb for a long time now, but that may change, too.

The big tax bill that I will have no chance to avoid are the employee deductions. I had hoped to argue that the people who worked at the club had banded together in an unincor-porated cooperative and that everyone worked by contract. That, apparently, is not what the

law says. Even though the business is not reg-istered at all, the people who work at the club are my employees and I am responsible for collecting and paying employee deductions.

Another interesting part of the CRA in-vestigation will be their estimated fair mar-ket value of the club. I own nothing that does not belong to the club, I have no money stashed aside, no toys. The most expensive thing I own is the gold tooth in my head. In order to assess me, they have to determine what the club is worth. When I sell the club to the non-profit, the fair market value of the club will be very important because if I try to sell it for less I will get nailed for tax evasion.

There is no timeline for these events to hap-pen, as the CRA seems to work at their own pace and this is not an ordinary situation for them. Normally, when they come into a busi-ness that is not in compliance they seize bank accounts and cause a lot of headaches. In this case, they have actually been quite reasonable and have not interfered with our activities. It is our intention to fully cooperate with the authorities on this matter, but we are in no rush to increase the prices our members pay.

This situation is much better than I had expected. I knew for years I was avoiding the CRA and assumed I would end up in jail for it, much like the notorious Al Ca-pone. Needless to say, I was very happy to find out that while I was not in compliance, I had done nothing criminal and was not fac-ing any possible jail time. While I realize this was a great personal risk to take, I also real-ize how incredibly expensive this medicine is to most people. My conscience could not allow me to charge sick people more money than they are already forced to pay. And so the saga continues.

Issue Number 3314

By M. Allister Greene

Polarization in the American political system is as common as house flies in an election year—be it in personalities of candidates, party supporters, or positions on hot button issues. This year is not turning out any differently, nor will the scale change with the many challenges facing American freedoms today.

The polarized and determining factors in this election year have formed in a wide scope of personal rights many Americans want or have, such as female reproduc-tive rights, gay marriage, rights of work-ers vs. corporations, and of course drug law reform. Although this year, cannabis is taking a front line to being a dividing factor between parties and candidates, as legalization of cannabis is on one ballot currently, and there are cannabis related initiatives in many states during the 2012 presidential election.

This year’s Presidential candidates cur-rently come down to Barack Obama, the current Democratic President; Mitt Romney the Republican (of nightmares); and Ron Paul, who is the Libertarian candidate who has been attempting to get the Republican Party nomination.

Their personalities, campaign styles, and positions on many topics such as cannabis law reform are the things mag-nets are made of. Though opposites are supposed to attract, and in fact the op-posite positions do attract followers, these polar points instead are more likely to slam headlines at each other than to connect for any agreeable social changes. By the end, though, one of these points of opposition has to attract voters to one pole and win with massive numbers.

Many states are trying to get or have initiatives and law reform on the ballot dealing with cannabis, which will more than likely pull out the younger voters. The question is: which way will they vote? This is turning out to be a high pri-ority in the elections this year, keeping in mind that young voters were highly ac-credited for Obama’s victory in 2004.

Of the biggest targets for cannabis law reform this year, Colorado’s Amendment 64, as the Denver Post reported back in the end of Feb., would make it legal for adults to possess up to an ounce of mari-juana or six plants for cultivating for rec-reational use. The state has allowed med-ical marijuana since 2000 and has had many battles on its medical side of law reform, including a driving while high bill that did not pass this year that would

have made a .5-nanogram/ml the blood limit, driving high the arrest level. Pro-legalization groups have raised $2 million to campaign for the amendment and are working around the clock, even against the stereotype stoner image, to get on the ballot and now to get the vote out.

In Michigan, after the two-year long battle, voters in Detroit might be asked to legalize adult possession and use of up to one ounce of cannabis during their Aug. 7 primary election. If they don’t col-lect enough signatures to have the vote in Aug., then by the Nov. 2 general election they will have enough signatures to put it to the vote. This comes after the Michi-gan Supreme Court ruled that the voters had a right to vote for a city law that goes against the State.

Other states are having similar mea-sures, although more so in their respective state’s congress, but in Oregon, Montana, Washington, Nebraska, Ohio, Missouri, and a few others, are all working on mea-sures of law reform in their states to vote on legalization or decriminalization. If they make it to the ballot many people will be out to vote, either because it is a presidential election or because of can-nabis law reform; either way liberal vot-ers, and some conservative voters, will be voting yes. Many of these states are states with large democratic support and Obama already has leads in many of these states as reported in many different polls.

Obama’s stance on cannabis has been up for a lot of debate in the past four years, having seemed more positive be-fore his election, and after much com-promise, his stance has become more of a cracked glass view of cannabis than what was expected. Though Obama stated, “I don’t think that should be a top priority of us, raiding people who are using [...] medical marijuana. With all the things we’ve got to worry about, and our Justice Department should be doing, that prob-ably shouldn’t be a high priority.” ( June 2, 2007, town hall meeting in Laconia, New Hampshire.)

He continued on to say at a future event that: “My attitude is if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the way to relieve pain and suffering is medical marijuana then that’s something I’m open to because there’s no difference between that and morphine when it comes to just giving people relief from pain. But I want to do it under strict guidelines. I want it prescribed in the same way that other painkillers or palliative drugs are prescribed.” (Nov. 24, 2007 town hall meeting in Iowa.)

He was also famously quoted from an interview: “I would not punish doctors if it’s prescribed in a way that is appro-priate. That may require some changes in federal law. I will tell you, you know I want to be honest with you whether or not I want to use a whole lot of politi-cal capital on that issue. [small chuckle] When we are trying to get health care faster and the war in Iraq [...] The likeli-hood of that being high on my list is not likely.” (http://youtu.be/LvUziSfMwAw MPPStaff. Apr. 21, 2001)

After President Obama’s election, At-torney General Eric Holder was answer-ing questions in a Feb. 2009 press release after being asked about raids that were already continuing weeks after Obama took office: “What the president said during the campaign, you’ll be surprised to know, will be consistent with what we’ll be doing here in law enforcement [...] What he said during the campaign is now American policy.”

Even with Obama stating all of this, and a vow for a public policy change, his leaving Michele Leonhart, a Bush hold-over, in charge of the DEA has kept the attack on medical cannabis dispensaries and patients since his election – it is just not bragged about as it was with Bush. Obama has not only step back on his cannabis stance he also has lost the map to the discussion on the issue, although now having stated more than once that drug law reform needs to be talked about since taking office.

Obama recently came out in support of gay marriage after his daughters made him think about it because they ques-tioned why their friend’s parents of same sex relationships could not be married. This change in full out support of gay marriage has picked up his numbers in many polls; many feel a similar move in cannabis reform would make him a clear winner next November. Though his flip flop on the issue in the past brings the question to many people’s lips: Why? This may come from, like many parents of kids that are younger, a fear of the children getting their hands on it. Also, Obama (who admits to use as a teenag-er) associates cannabis with escape and goofing off, not the ability it has in medi-tative and logical perspective change; he acknowledges its medical use, but does not stand behind it as a civil right so much as a choice.

Now the Republican Party’s lead can-didate Mitt Romney, a Mormon who denies ever trying any illegal drugs, and admits to having one sip off a beer and a few puffs of a cigarette—although many people seem to associate him with the type of guy who would have a $400 very dry martini in his hand—seems to be so staunch it polarizes him from nor-mal Americans that he is to represent if elected, as well as most world leaders.

Romney is almost as rigid as brick weed; he is all about money and approval of conservatives in America; he is down right rude about questions dealing with cannabis, and absolutely against medical cannabis. This should not surprise many since he has stock and campaign contri-butions coming from many pharmaceu-tical companies. Ironically the pro-life candidate Romney is taking money for his campaign from the makers of Plan B an abortion pill, and even attended a fundraiser held by one of the Executives of the company.

During one interview with Shaun Boyd, a Denver CBS affiliate reporter, Romney gave very irritated cut and paste responses to questions about medical cannabis use laws and legalization be-ing voted on in her state. He has already rudely responding on gay marriage and almost demanded that she ask “more se-rious” questions. He took that moment and plugged oil companies of friends, backers of his campaign, and bashed renewable energy. At the end, Romney questioned why the “childish questions” of gay marriage and cannabis, asking “aren’t they only State issues,” of which the reporter had to school him that they are both state and federal issues in the election and will be issues the president has to deal with.

Romney can be seen on video at a ral-ly when asked by an unnamed man in a wheelchair, weighing less than 80 pounds with muscular dystrophy, if he and his doctors, who think cannabis is the only treatment for him, should be treated like criminals. Romney told him to take a syn-thetic, the man responses that it makes him extremely sick, and asks if he and his doctor should be arrested. At this point instead of answer, Romney ended up stat-ing, “I don’t support medical marijuana. Bye.” He walked away chuckling a bit and refusing to answer as reporters ask him to answer, and instead Romney keeps walk-ing away trying to get another question, but people wanted an answer. Would he have this less than 80 pound man arrested?

Ron Paul, who is running as a Liber-tarian candidate has also been trying to get the unlikely nomination of the Re-publican Party, but has still been attend-ing their debates. He is the only candi-date, with a decent amount of support, who is currently pro-cannabis legaliza-tion as well as in favor of most illegal drugs being decriminalized. Paul had his start in the Republican Party and was a major supporter of almost all of Ronald Reagan’s moves as president—acts that negatively gave corporations and banks free reign to control the wealth in the U.S. and harshly punish drug users.

Paul sticks mostly to the Constitution which can be a good thing, but more often than not it made him the No man in Con-gress; if he felt there was no precedence in the Constitution, denying anything but his own reading, he would just vote no. Many feel the only good thing he might do is push legalization because he tends to do what he says when he is in office.

Everything is coming into play for this year’s elections. This is a great thing for cannabis supporters, given these polar opposites will attract voters that will help change this nation. Cannabis voters have to be making informed choices, having to show that cannabis is important but not the only thing to fight for in our country. If Obama picks up medical cannabis or legalization he will have a sure fire victory among voters across the states. But he has to start it soon, if not now. Romney is just a no, he cares about money from big busi-ness fueling his pockets – he might want to put people back to work, but as close to slaves as possible. Paul looks good on some papers, but once they get to burn-ing, his buzz has a lot of potential nega-tive impact if taken too far. Who will win the cannabis vote? Will it lead to a land-slide of relaxation for the positive canna-bis community? Only the vote can tell.

U.S. Presidential Candidates on PotObama, Romney, or Paul—who deserves the cannabis vote?

Issue Number 3316Concentrating on Cannabinoids

E x p l o r i n g m e t h o d s o f c a n n a b i s r e s i n e x t r a c t i o nBy Owen Smith

In my spring article I chronicled the con-stitutional challenge for cannabis extrac-tion that I helped bring before the BC Supreme Court earlier this year. The result of the case was the immediate freedom of people authorized under the MMAR to extract cannabis resins from the plant medicines that are better suited for their conditions than smoking dry herb. While this ruling doesn’t extend to their caregiv-ers, it does apply to the 14001 or more patients in B.C. with licences. This order from the judge cannot be appealed until my charges are seen through by a jury in Feb. of 2013. The government has been given 12 months to respond by changing the MMAR program, however, prior re-sponses to court orders have been woefully inadequate. With the tough (and blind) on drug crime agenda of the conservative ma-jority government, it’s hard to expect any better. In the meantime it seems appropri-ate to help patients utilize this new open-ing in the law by describing some cannabis extracts and how they are made.

The judge’s decision instantly made available all substances listed under sched-ule 2 of the CDSA2 (fig. 1) which includes naturally produced cannabis resin, THC, CBD, CBN as well as synthetically pro-duced Nabilone, Pyrahexyl, and DMHP. While I will briefly cover the synthetics, I will focus mostly on the natural prod-ucts as they are effective, safe, and acces-sible. The methods used to extract natural products are simple when compared to synthetics, yet require some special atten-tion to produce consistent, clean, and po-tent medicine. A more concentrated form of cannabis resin requires the patient to consume less to obtain the desired effects. While concentrates make it easier to in-crease dosage for serious conditions, this may make it easier to consume more than one desires, though any undesired effects will be short lived and not life threatening.

DMHP (Dimethylheptylpyran) is a synthetic analogue of THC, which was invented in 1949 during attempts to elu-cidate the structure of Δ9-THC3, the most common component of cannabis. It is a pale yellow viscous oil which has a higher lipophilicity (ability to dissolve in fats, oils) than that of THC itself. A study performed on cats showed DMHP pro-duces similar analgesic and anticonvulsant effects to THC, only stronger and with weaker psychological effects.4 DMHP is metabolised in a similar manner to THC, producing the active metabolite 11-hy-droxy-DMHP in the liver, however it was found to have a longer duration of action.

DMHP was investigated by the U.S. military chemical weapons program in the Edgewood Arsenal experiments as a possible non-lethal incapacitating agent.5 Research was discontinued when high doses were found to cause hypotension and the drug became overshadowed by other incapacitating agents such as BZ.6 While there is little likelihood that some-one would attempt to make DMHP for their own medical purposes, it is a curious turn that this substance may now become an instrument of peace rather than war.

The next synthetic on the list, Pyrahexyl, a THC homologue (similar in structure) first made available to clinical researchers in the 1940s, was reported as successful in easing the withdrawal symptoms of 57 out of 70 alcoholics.7 Pyrahexyl was made ille-gal under UN convention in 1982 despite

never having had any recorded instances of abuse or illicit sale.

The synthetic THC compound Nabi-lone/Cesamet has been available in Can-ada for decades by doctors prescription. Unfortunately, this THC analogue has proven only moderately effective due to the lack of complimentary cannabinoids such as CBD. The psychoactive effects of cannabis are concentrated in THC, and without the natural buffer of CBD com-peting for your CB1 receptors, the Cesa-met website warns that the “Mental side effects could last for 2 or 3 days.”8 This pharmaceutical flaw leaves room for im-provements that are being filled by plant derived products with a more complete range of cannabinoid compounds.

Recently in California, C-3 Patients Association have released “a patent pend-ing advancement in standardizing and administering natural cannabinoids in a pill.” On their website, C-3 refer to Idrasil as “Nature’s ‘Tree of Life’,” in reference to the central world tree of Norse mythology Yggdrasil. Although it is only available to

California citizens, C-3 states that Idrasil “will diminish their pain, aid their sleep and enhance their quality of life as a holis-tic alternative to addictive opiates and life threatening narcotics.”9

Idrasil is an all-natural cannabis plant extract containing the full spectrum of naturally occurring cannabinoids (phyto-cannabinoids), with a 1:1:1 ratio of CBD, CBN and THC.10 Idrasil is a tablet con-taining 25 mg of cannabis extract, offer-ing a “consistent, standardized, aseptically processed, bacteria free, non addictive al-ternative to smoking cannabis.”11

For the many Canadians in need of can-nabis medicine who seek to relieve their suffering with an extract, compassion clubs/cannabis dispensaries have diligent-ly pioneered these essential alternatives. However, as previously mentioned, since the judge’s ruling on Apr. 13, 2012, per-sons authorized under the MMAR may now legally produce their own. Extraction techniques allow for the utilization of pre-

viously wasted materials like leaf and stalk, increasing the overall medicinal yield of the plant.

There are two ancient approaches to extracting the resins from the plant body: sifting and rubbing. Dry sifting for “kief ” or “pollen” is an ancient technique involv-ing the use of a screen or sieve upon which the raw material is worked or threshed to shake loose the trichome heads. While agitating your plant material over a screen with holes of a certain size, (typically in the range of 25-200 microns) the trichome heads and the medicinal resins they en-capsulate fall through, while much of the plant material remains on top. Drier plant material will tend to make greener hash since more of the plant will powderize and fall through with the trichomes. Using fresh material reduces the greening effect and freezing will make the resin brittle and easier to separate.

The sifting process may be repeated to obtain multiple grades of purity. After sep-arating much of the resin from the plant material through a wider screen (100-

200 micron), then use a smaller width mesh until the required level of purity is obtained. The purest dry sift has a consis-tency much like taffy: it can be opaque or translucent and should be very sticky and malleable with a noticeable snap when cold. When exposed to heat, it will begin to bubble and release its vapours. Modern takes on the dry sift method involve more advanced ways to agitate the material (e.g. vibratory sieves, ultrasonics, and precise matching of resin head size to sieve hole size) as well as the use of dry ice. Modern innovation has also provided a variety of small devices that have mastered this task, available for a few hundred dollars.12

Another ancient take on the sieving method is to introduce water and/or ice to the process. This is the idea behind mod-ern “bubble bags” and water extraction. The water serves to carry the resin heads downwards in a cascade through meshes of various sizes as the bags are drained. This idea can be traced back to ancient

China and Afghanistan where water washes were performed once the resin had been roughly separated from the ripe plant material in order to purify it further. The drawbacks to water aided sifting are that some of the terpenes (aromatic oils) pro-duced by the trichome are water soluble and will be washed away, as well as the fact that once you get your resin wet, it must be dried properly or risk moulding.

While keeping the maximum amount of surface area exposed is helpful for dry-ing, it can cause your resin glands to de-generate. The THC in the resin will begin transforming into CBN while exposed to air, heat, or sunlight, offering fewer medi-cal properties. The more it is exposed, the faster it will degrade. In ancient times it was common practice to press the dried resin with the aid of pressure and mild heat to create an impermeable skin around the ball of hash. To preserve sifted hash in an unpressed powder form, it should be kept in a hermetically sealed container stored in a cool, dark, and dry place.

Probably the oldest extraction method is hand-rubbed friction extraction, involving the manual removal of the resin from liv-ing cannabis plants. It is quite likely that this method predates the use of screens, since one of the first things one realizes when approaching this beautiful plant is just how sticky it is. To harvest in this manner people need simply approach a plant in late flower and rub their hands (or other parts) over the floral clusters. This friction bursts the trichomes, releas-ing the encapsulated resin, which will stick to skin or gloves. The process is repeated until you have sufficient resin caked up that can then be worked and pressed into shapes. Scissor and finger hash is an in-cidental form of this type of concentrate that occurs during the trimming stage of harvest. This form of hash is often a black malleable tar, that offers a notable aroma and potency perhaps owing to the lack of degradation of the resin.

Potency, flavor, aroma, and color of the extract vary widely depending on the time of hand rubbing relative to the lifespan of the plant. A skilled hand-rubbing hash maker can draw the resins from a living plant without damaging it several times throughout the growing season. Tradition-ally, this method comes from areas where there is a large amount of the plant being cultivated. This is the main method of res-in collection in Nepal, where the cannabis plant has long been revered. Interestingly, this gentle practice fits the concept of re-specting sentient beings that is inherent in the practice of Tibetan Buddhism. There is also evidence of this simple method in Malawi, Africa, and other tropical regions.

Modern technology and scientific un-derstanding has allowed cannabis con-noisseurs to put to use various solvents that melt the medicinal magic off the plant. Solvents are generally divided into two basic categories, non-polar (ex. bu-tane, propane, ether, olive oil) and polar (ex. ethanol, isopropanol, acetone). In sim-ple terms, a non-polar solvent is what you want to use to pull the oils off the plant. This is what is widely used to extract oils in the food and health industry. Polar sol-vents, on the other hand, will extract some of the carbon-based molecules, water, and other ionic compounds from the plant, re-sulting in a wider spectrum of extractives from the material (including chlorophyll, cellulose, and waxes). Non-polar solvents also dissolve wax well, which composes the

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012 17

By Jesse Stamm

For this article of the Cannabis Digest, I have chosen to discuss the involvement of the Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) as it relates to persons who use medical marijuana.

The MCFD is the government agency responsible for child protection laws, and the mission of the MCFD is to intervene when there are reports that children are in need of protection. Many of these re-ports come from police involvement, but can come from anyone in the community. MCFD involvement can be as simple as a visit to your home and a polite conver-sation, but can often range all the way to your children being removed from your home and placed in foster care. The level of intervention by MCFD is based on the perception of the level of protection that a child needs. If someone is charged with “possession for the purposes of traffick-ing” and there are children in the home where the charge is laid, it is almost cer-tain that the MCFD will become im-mediately involved. Likewise, if someone is charged with driving while under the influence of marijuana and there are chil-dren in the vehicle, the MCFD’s involve-ment will almost certainly be immediate. Therefore, all of the usual cautions about not diverting medical marijuana to rec-reational users or not driving after con-suming medical marijuana are even more important for persons with children.

Growing marijunana, whether for me-dicinal purposes or otherwise, can also

attract the attention of the MCFD. The basic concerns around child safety in-clude increased risk of fires or mold from improperly set up grow-ops, but the risk of grow rips also place children “in need of protection.” If you are the holder of a PPL or a DPL,many of the MCFD’s concerns about these issues can be allevi-ated by having the grow outside of your primary residence. Of course, having the electrical, plumbing, and ventilations systems constructed according to proper building and fire codes reduce the basic risk, but the risk of a grow rip cannot be reduced other than by having the garden in a separate building.

Using medical marijuana, even if pre-scribed by a doctor, can be viewed as placing children “in need of protection.” It is important to keep medical mari-juana in a secure location where children cannot access it; keeping the location se-cret from your children also reduces the risk of third parties attempting to access your medication. When medicating, it is advisable to do so where your children are not present, even if you are ingesting your medicine orally instead of through smoke or vaporization. If you treat medi-cal marijuana as if it were as dangerous as a narcotic, and always take equivalent safety precautions, you should be able to minimize the disruption to your fam-ily even if the MCFD shows up at your door.

If you do end up with MCFD involve-ment, regardless of the reason, it is im-portant to be civil and polite with social

workers. Their job exists to protect chil-dren, and angry or impulsive reactions do not instill social workers with confi-dence. I also recommend retaining legal counsel as soon as possible if there is an

intervention by the MCFD, primarily to ensure that there is a clear record of the MCFD’s concerns and what you have done to address them.

Justice Matters: MMJ and the MinistryG e t y o u r l e g a l q u e s t i o n s a n s w e r e d b y a p r o f e s s i o n a l

“FREE LAW CLINICS” every WednesdayAccepting legal aid & offering free legal clinicsLicensed to practice in Ontario & British Columbia

casing of the trichome that surrounds the resin. Care must be taken when choosing a solvent. For butane extraction, at least 3x filtered Butane (with no additives/mer-captans) is needed.

The idea behind solvent extraction is to create a inter-molecular bond with the resins in the plant. This can be achieved by washing the raw material with the sol-vent, filtering it, discarding the plant bulk, and then evaporating/purging (via heat and/or pressure differential) the solvent to leave behind a film in your receptacle (called a concrete resin) which can then be collected. This works because the sol-vents are much more volatile and evapo-rate faster than the resin. An important note for safety: gases from the evaporat-ing solvents are highly flammable and can result in lethal explosions. Always work outside and far away from any sources of ignition/spark. Maintain good airflow at all times and do not inhale the evaporat-ing solvents.

The details and variety of solvent ex-tractions are too vast to unveil in this ar-ticle, and for many patients the process may be beyond the limits of their physi-cal condition and living environment. The Vancouver Dispensary Society offers a unique (creamy, fluffy looking) form of solvent extract called “Budder.” Dr. Paul Hornby ran tests on Budder that peaked in the 99 percent cannabinoid range with no “toxins, solvents, molds, diseases, heavy metals and other contaminants.”13 The technique for making Budder is kept se-cret and its price (90/gram) makes it inac-cessible to some. As well, due to its fluffy texture, more of the cannabinoids are exposed to oxidation making it degrade faster than a solid form extract.

The absence of contaminants in Budder is probably because BudderKing will “only make Budder from kif, hash, or high-crys-

tal organic buds.”14 During my trial in Feb., expert witness Dr. Pate informed the court that cannabis trichome heads, while containing all the cannabinoids available, are free of all contaminants (except the wax shell), which remain stored within the plants cells. By separating the resin com-pounds, prior to infusion into a product, the potential for compounds other than cannabinoids is greatly reduced, making doses more precise and consistent.

This particular detail is not included in most of the processing information available today. Rick Simpson Oil uses the whole plant15 as well as Herb the Herbalist in his Solvent Free Oil.16 Dr. Courtney of Cannabis International, while realizing an exciting new direction in cannabis therapy in his raw cannabis juicing video,17 faces this problem also. For these pioneering cannasseurs, it’s even more important that their plants are skill-fully grown in prime conditions, and even laboratory tested to ensure purity. Unfor-tunately, testing facilities are yet to emerge in Canada due to the dubious legal status of medical cannabis.

For most people, access to cannabis in any form to relieve their suffering is suf-ficient, with the risk of contamination a secondary concern. However, the medical cannabis community includes many vul-nerable individuals whose health may suf-fer from the slightest contamination. This heightened degree of attention may seem extraneous considering the constant threat of criminal charges and the overwhelming demand for cannabis medicines, however, it’s undoubtedly the direction for medical cannabis to move until we, like some an-cient cannabis cultures, make this purity the norm.

While patients and dispensaries seek these sensible goals, an unhelpful Health Canada program continues to ignore/vilify

extractions, ostensibly tying their autho-rized users to the fictitious limits of dried cannabis and the potential hazards (heavy metals, moulds, fertilizer) of consuming the plant raw. In their recent “Proposed Improvements to the MMAR,” Health Canada reports that cannabis dispensa-ries and program participants are the only parties interested in “other forms of prod-ucts, most notably edibles and extracts.”18 

While Health Canada struggles to maintain the rigid terms of the govern-ment’s program, individuals with life threatening conditions are immediately in need of the improvements in quality and safety offered by the simple methods outlined above. Following on the heels of states like Colorado and California, major advancements continue to break open the potential of the medical cannabis move-ment. In the not so distant future, when licensed, taxed, and regulated dispensa-ries perform their service unhindered and fully equipped, there will likely be a revo-lution in medical cannabis products that will carry patients safely beyond the cur-rent shortfalls of our prohibited industry.

1. Marihuana for Medical Purposes - Statis-tics ( January 8, 2010). Health Canada Website, http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/marihuana/stat/_2010/jan-eng.php2 CDSA Schedule

2. Department of Justice Website http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-38.8/page-24.html#h-27

3. Adams R, Harfenist M, Loewe S. New Analogs of Tetrahydrocannabinol. XIX. Jour-nal of the American Chemical Society. 1949; 71(5):1624-1628.

4. Wilkison, DM; Pontzer, N; Hosko, MJ (1982). “Slowing of cortical somatosensory evoked activity by delta 9-tetrahydrocannabi-nol and dimethylheptylpyran in alpha-chlora-lose-anesthetized cats”. Neuropharmacology 21 (7): 705–9 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6289158

5. Possible Long-Term Health Effects of Short-Term Exposure To Chemical Agents,

Volume 2: Cholinesterase Reac-tivators, Psychochemicals and Irri-tants and Vesicants (1984) Commission on Life Sciences. The National Academies Press. pp79-99.

6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-Quinu-clidinyl_benzilate

7. Thompson, L. J. and Proctor, R. C.: “The Use of Pyrahexyl in the Treatment of Alcoholic and Drug Withdrawal Conditions,” North Car-olina Medical Journal, 14 (October, 1953).

8. Cesamet Important Risk Information http://www.cesamet.com/patient-home.asp

9. C3 Patients Association, Our Mission. http://c3patientsassociation.com/?page=mission

10. European Medical Marijuana prod-uct Sativex is challenged by North Amer-ica’s New Cannabis Pill Idrasil, Says Doo-bons http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2012/05/19/prweb9525356.DTL#ixzz1viWuk9It

11. http://www.doobons.com/Idrasil-info12. www.greenharvest.ca/catalog13. Pete Brady. Beautiful budder. January 19,

2005 http://cannabisculture.com/articles/3589.html

14. Ibid.15. http://phoenixtears.ca/make-the-medi-

cine/16. http://www.cannabisculture.com/con-

tent/2012/06/12/Marijuana-Phytotherapy-How-Make-Cannabis-Whole-Plant-Resin

17. LEAF [The Health Benefits of Juic-ing Raw Cannabis] www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa0nLdVJiIg

18. Medical Marihuana Regulatory Reform 2011 Consultations Results. Dried Marihuana only http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/consul-tation/marihuana/_2011/program/consult_re-form-eng.php

j

Issue Number 33

By Kyla Williams

Cannabis and I did not cross paths, in any real way, until I was in my mid-twen-ties. Like a child who had just discovered the truth about Santa Clause, I had to compare notes with my peers despite the taboo. As a former Bible College student and active church member most of my peers were now serving missions, leading churches, and working in various other positions of service. I rushed rambunc-tiously forward to share my new-found knowledge about cannabis, its benefits, and the lies that we were told about it. Naively, I assumed that my peers, often life friends who had stuck by me through thick and thin, would be as fas-cinated with my journey down that rabbit hole as I was. It was a quest for truth—something we often spoke and sang pas-sionately about from the pulpits and pews.

I was not wholly prepared for what happened next. Choos-ing first to speak to those I was closest to, I encountered a surprising amount of aggres-sion on the subject. The wall of resistance was instantly in place. People I had been friends with since childhood distanced themselves from me while my best friends, outright laid the ultimatum that I be quiet about cannabis, or they could no lon-ger be my friend.

It was a crushing crisis of faith. I saw firsthand the bless-ing that cannabis was for my family. Seeing my children’s father return to us through the haze of pharmaceutical pain and antidepressant prescrip-tions because of cannabis. I could not believe that a good God would endorse such ig-norance and blind faith in law-makers. I sought answers. Why would God create such a wonderful blessing yet people I considered to be highly moral and godly people be so clearly hostile to the mere thought that cannabis was not the evil that we were all led to believe it was.

I emailed my pastor, a man who had guided my spiritual birth and growth for most of my life. For months we ex-changed emails. These emails, eventually led my pastor to preach one Sunday on the subject of Marijuana, and how the churches needed to embrace medical us-ers. I was surprised to hear that the con-gregation, in a small southern Albertan community, responded well to what he had to say. In fact, I was told, the con-gregation was supportive of the message, and the pastor was thanked for his words by many who heard them.

Another church leader, Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition and host of the 700 club and other Christian programming, first spoke out about drug law in Dec. of 2010. His comments pre-ceded a story about drug law reformers running a prison outreach program.

“We’re locking up people that have taken a couple puffs of marijuana and next thing you know they’ve got 10 years with mandatory sentences,” Robertson said. “These judges just throw up their hands and say nothing we can do with

these mandatory sentences. We’ve got to take a look at what we’re considering crimes and that’s one of ‘em.”

Following his comments, a spokesman for the Christian Broadcast Network (CBN) contacted varies news sources that reported the story softening what the founder of the Christian Coalition had said. The spokesman told Raw Story that he “did not call for the decriminal-ization of marijuana.”

“He was advocating that our govern-ment revisit the severity of the existing laws because mandatory drug sentences

do harm too many young people who go to prison and come out as hardened criminals,” CBN spokesman Chris Ro-slan wrote.

Robertson didn’t stop there. Again this past Mar. Robertson was speaking out. This time there was no mistaking what he was calling for. In an interview with the New York Times Robertson reaf-firmed his position clearly. “I really be-lieve we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol, I’ve never used marijuana and I don’t intend to, but it’s just one of those things that I think: this war on drugs just hasn’t succeeded.”

Mr. Robertson’s remarks were hailed by pro-legalization groups, who called them a potentially important endorsement in their efforts to roll back marijuana penal-ties and prohibitions, which residents of Colorado and Washington will vote on this fall.

Here in Canada, we have also received the support from religious organizations. An organization that represents 11 of the largest Christian denominations in Canada hit the headlines in 2011 when it told the federal Conservative govern-ment they don’t want to pay for its pris-on-building agenda.

The Church Council on Justice and Corrections wrote a strongly worded let-ter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper criticizing legislation that the group ex-

pects to dramatically increase the num-ber of convicts and cost a fortune.

The Church Council on Justice and Corrections is a 39-year-old organiza-tion, which consists of representatives of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Anglican Church of Can-ada, the United Church of Canada, the Salvation Army, the Christian Reformed Churches, and the Mennonite Central Committee.

Although they are not calling for le-galization as Pat Robertson did, recog-nizing the harm of mandatory sentences

certainly is a first step, indicating that the churches in Canada are waking up to the harms of prohibition.

In my quest to find local churches call-ing for legalization, I came across a re-tired Unitarian Minister J.Mcree (Mac) Elrod who, with the help of his son Matt, had brought this question to the Unitar-ian congregations in Canada. In 2002, they presented a social responsibility resolution and the members of the con-gregations across Canada, who studied it for a year before the church adopted the measure, in 2003.

As part of the study, they held a panel discussion in Victoria with experts speak-ing on the issue, including Libby Davies, Dr. David Hadorn, and Barry Bayerstein, PhD. The discussion was recorded, and a tape sent to all the Unitarian congregations across Canada to watch, and learn from.

The resolution they adopted recog-nized that addiction was not a criminal issue, rather a health issue, and that the current laws were counter productive to healing, and helping these individu-als with their addictions. The resolution supported harm reduction measures for all drugs.

With all of these presumably religious individuals and organizations coming forward, in one way or another, to sup-port the message that jailing individuals for their use of Cannabis is wrong, I had

to reflect back on my own experiences when I first “came out” to my religious peers regarding cannabis use.

Certainly it is no longer a lost cause to try and enlighten religious individuals to this social justice issue, but how is the best way to approach these types of people.

As with anyone, having respect for their beliefs is essential if you are hop-ing to bring them onside. Mocking their belief in God, or other aspects of their faith, obviously will do little to gain their respect, or their attention. It is important to give such individuals the space and

support they need to change their mind. In my own case, as a rogue truth finder, there was little support for my own change in perspective, other than my partner, and eventually my Pastor.

My mind didn’t change over night. In fact, it was a succes-sion of small truths and time that finally led to the complete reversal of my ideology around cannabis. It is important to not try to jam the whole truth into one conversation as I did with my friends early on. Start with small, basic facts that are indis-putable.

Small simple truths, like for example, that marijuana/canna-bis was actually a plant played a huge role in my “conversion.” Plants were given to us by God, for our use. It is sound scriptural deduction then, that God also gave the people cannabis. How-ever, I do not recommend try-ing to argue a religious person into reason, by using scripture. That is their domain. Better to simply suggest that cannabis is also a creation of God and let them search out the scripture to prove you wrong.

It should be a lot easier to reach the religious in today’s

climate, than it was 10 years ago when I first began approaching my friends, family, and peers on this issue. With the cracks finally appearing within the church communities, it also gives us bril-liant examples to point to when discuss-ing the issue with them.

This, above all else, is an issue of com-passion, and it should be framed as such. It is no more just to throw someone in jail for using cannabis, than it would be for using tobacco. If we truly believe that people are addicted to drugs, jail is no more appropriate place for such individ-uals than those with diabetes or cancer, as it is an illness. Further, cannabis helps with all kinds of health issues, especial-ly pain and for those who are receiving treatments for cancer. It is not compas-sionate to restrict and prevent people from using natural medicines, especially in light of the side effects of pharmaceu-tical drugs. People of faith understand compassion, and also deserve that same compassion when you are approaching them on these issues. They have, after all, like everyone else, been lied to.

18

Sacrament or Demon WeedC h u r c h e s s t r u g g l e t o a c c e p t c a n n a b i s w h i l e s o m e c a l l t o e n d d r u g w a r

j

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012

Issue Number 3320

By M. Allister Greene

The fight for religious freedoms in the U.S. is one that is best represented by the struggles, court battles, and individuals that have tried to live in many different levels of a traditional Native American life. The difficulty is after hundreds of years of persecution, Native American religion has almost been lost due to the destructive acts of modernization and Christianization, that taught a disre-spect and hate towards Native life. The concepts of Native American spiritual-ity and how the people practice differs greatly from those in Judeo-Christian backgrounds—and because of this there are many boundaries. Some of the most conflicting issues come from the prac-tice, terminology, and the role of the individual and role of tribe, but the is-sues that tends to be constantly causing disputes are the concepts of spirituality vs. religion.

One of the issues dealing with ter-minology of the Native American tra-ditional world view is what is lost in translation. Even in my last article I found an issue after final edits; basically two words that were edited actually had significance to me as a writer, as I was working on certain concepts to be un-derstood. The first word is vision. This word is often used when discussing Na-tive American spiritual practices, sim-ply because no other word fits as broad-ly to the concept of world view, spiritual visions, and how we see beyond, into what some would call seeing spirits or beyond the physical. Vision has become a concept of reality and not just sight; it was often used to label Native Ameri-cans as mentally unstable, superstitious, savage, as well as when connected to rituals where sacred sacraments were used, as drug abuse.

Another important term that was lost in my last article is a term used a lot in anthropology, both related to Ameri-can indigenous groups and indigenous groups worldwide, as well as in Native Americans’ own writings about spiri-tuality ranging from academic papers to poetry. Liminal and the concept of liminality deals with thresholds of real-ity; it also, for Native Americans, has the dual meaning of living in this world and our actions fully related to the spiritual side of self and reality. It has in recent years become the descriptive term of traditional life and modern life in one. Liminality comes into play, often in the concept of ritual, in relation to sacred space and sacred time, which is in es-sence where the magic happens.

The twin concepts of sacred space and sacred time relate heavily to Na-tive American religious practices and rights, as many tribes do not have ac-cess to sacred grounds because reloca-tion acts pushed them off their land. Access to these lands, even if preserved as national forest in the United States, is not always granted for the practice of religion for Native Americans. Liminal also relates to states of being and con-sciousness, which can be achieved many ways such as meditation, fasting, using sacred sacraments. For some, just wak-ing to a liminal state of consciousness, even when already awake, or for others who can in a sense activate/concentrate to expand their vision into a liminal view as a personal ability or gift to use.

The Pluralism Project at Harvard Uni-versity, which studies the ideal of cultural pluralism, is discussed on their website as not just diversity but the “energetic en-gagement with diversity,” which relates beyond tolerance into actively seeking to understand both the world view beyond just knowing about the difference, but “holding our deepest differences, even our religious differences, not in isolation, but in relationship to one another.” All of these concepts of pluralism deal with being dedicated to dialogue, beyond language but understanding beyond just acceptance of existence. The head of the project, Diana L. Eck, who is the author of most of the website, has cre-ated a report entitled “Native American Religious and Cultural Freedom: an In-troductory Essay” that covers many dif-ferent aspects of Native American spiri-tuality and the boundaries between our religious rights and freedoms. (http://pluralism.org/reports/view/176)

In the report, one major concept that is explored is the issue of religion vs. spirituality; this has been a cultural boundary of almost all tribes of North and South America. Once again trans-lation and language come into play in the fact that “in all their diversity, people from different Native nations hasten to point out that their respective languages include no word for ‘religion,’ and main-tain an emphatic distinction between ways of life in which economy, politics, medicine, art, agriculture, etc., are ideally integrated into a spiritually-informed whole. As Native communities try to continue their traditions in the context of a modern American society that con-ceives of these as discrete segments of human thought and activity, it has not been easy for Native communities to ac-complish this kind of integration.” This issue brings up structure of religions based in ritual and active participation in balancing life existence with spirituality, often related to the earth and location, which is favored by indigenous tribes. The comparison of dogma and translation as found in Judeo-Christian practice of re-ligion has left many Native Americans to view the relationship to be a structured on unforgiving resentment towards tribal traditions and religious rights.

Structure comes into play with the use of mind-altering substances and rights of sacred sacraments. After many court battles and the many years of work of many activists for full freedom of re-ligion, some victories have been won bringing freedom a little bit closer. Pey-ote is considered medicine and a way to enter into liminal states of being, as well as tool into the sacred space and sacred time. It is a powerful entheogen and hal-lucinogenic substance with thousands of years of use by tribes and shaman. Tradi-tionally growing in Mexico and into the United States, but in smaller amounts between Arizona and Texas and north up into Utah, it made its way through the long trade routes that covered most of the North and South America.

In the 1870s, as a way to legally prac-tice peyote traditions because the cactus started to spread again to a wider range for those on the reservations, a religion started to form. The goal was to present a Christian like structure for legal protec-tion but also to still allow the individual’s vision and interpretation to be valid. Af-ter many years, as written in an entry on

the Oklahoma Historical Society’s web-site, on “October 10, 1918, an intertribal coalition of Peyotists achieved legal definition for their religion through the incorporation of the Native American Church of Oklahoma. The individual most closely associated with the early history of Peyotism is Quanah Parker (Comanche). Other Oklahomans figur-ing prominently in the development and diffusion of the religion include Chivato (Lipan), Jim Aton (Kiowa), John Wilson (Caddo-Delaware), and Jonathan Ko-shiway (Oto). Numerous others, most of whom received no formal recognition, played important roles in the introduc-tion and adoption of the Native American Church throughout the Western Hemi-sphere.” (http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/N/NA015.html)

Now the committed structure of the church could be recognized and legally protected, but many other battles of who that protected, and what, if any, older traditional was to be tested now. Since many were left out of legal protection for their use of peyote because of the level of recognitions of tribes by the U.S., or be-cause their historic use of peyote being practiced was not the Native American Church’s practices. These battles end up also taking place over usage of other en-theogen related to traditional practices such as cannabis, mushrooms, ayahuas-ca, and others. This makes the structure of the Native American Church work both for and against freedom of religion for Native American and non-natives throughout the U.S.

Between 1887 and 1934, the U.S. Government practiced acts of assimila-tion in hopes of turning Native Ameri-cans into the working force in the background of the country being built. During this time the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is an organization that has gone through many changes since it was created. Originally called the Office of Indiana Affairs, and became the BIA af-ter becoming a division of War Depart-ment in 1824. The BIA has always been connected to controlling Native Ameri-can life in one way or another.

During the 1920s, until the 1930s, the BIA in charge of assimilation was al-lowed to use force to break up religious practices such as prayers, fasting, and dances. During this time native groups who did not commit to hiding their re-ligions into the “underground” risked arrest, beatings, and death. Although during this time, in 1924, the Indian Citizenship Act was passed, declaring that American Indians are citizens of the U.S. This has a dual effect giving some Native Americans some rights, but still withholding rights for many oth-ers. During the same year, the Pueblos from New Mexico were making appeals for First Amendment protection from policies suppressing ceremonial dances but were denied.

Between 1933 and 1945, John Col-lier took over as the commissioner of Indian Affairs, though only a position with limited ability to change law on its own, Collier fought for Native Ameri-can rights, and the rights of the tribes to be reinstated. Collier was adamant that “liberty of conscience in America was never meant to be liberty only for those who professed Christianity,” he fought for Native Americans to be allowed self-sufficiency, having the government give

aid, not control. Collier pushed for Native American culture to be retained by those who chose to, and instead of assimilation to work towards cultural pluralism.

Collier faced much scrutiny in his time working actively for the rights of Native Americans and being a non-Native, and was placed under surveillance after the “Red Scare” for his “communistic” phi-losophies and fought against many at-tacks of his character during his time as commissioner. In the end he was able to pass what was often referred to the “In-dian New Deal,” but officially passed, in 1934, the Indian Reorganization Act and continued to add to it and the rights of Native Americans. By the end, it “offi-cially reaffirms legality and importance of Native communities’ religious, cul-tural, and linguistic traditions.” Pushing all for these freedoms to be protected by law officially overturning most assimila-tion practices until he left the office 12 years later “to serving as director of the National Indian Institute, as a profes-sor of sociology at the College of the City of New York,” and worked in Na-tive American activism until his death on May 8, 1968. (http://www.bookrags.com/biography/john-collier)

The next major Native American vic-tory came in 1965 when Native Ameri-cans become the last group to gain the protected right to vote in the U.S. Dur-ing this time the BIA became more Native American administered, though still reporting to non-Native who made the laws. The BIA as took over educa-tion more and law enforcement on non-sovereign reservation, still remained a controversial organization. Through the education of the tribes came the knowl-edge of the legal right to voting. This also comes after years of court battles, much to the credit of many Native Americans who, when returning from WWII, felt it to be a guaranteed right of citizens that need to be protected since many were denied after returning to fight for their country. The 1965 Voting Right Act passed giving the right to vote to all American citizens not previously cov-ered and disbanded laws that kept mi-norities from voting all over the country.

This began many Native Americans and non-Natives fighting for rights and freedoms that were rightfully theirs and they kept the fight up to pass the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, in 1978, which specifies that the “Na-tive American Church, and other na-tive American religious practices as fit-ting within religious freedom.” It starts the return of access to many sacred sites and rights of many rituals and ceremo-nies to be allowed to be open practice on the reservations. (http://www.senaahq.bravehost.com/AIRFA/AIRFA1978-and-Amendments.htm)

This protects, in some ways, the use of peyote and cannabis on the reservations, but is not fully defined in the passage of the law, and the issues of who can use is continued to be battled in the 1990s. Peyote practices are deemed legal if de-termined by court after proving not only that someone has enough tribal blood from the tribe they “claim” to be from, but also a tribe approved to be considered recognized, and a member of the Native American Church, or from a traditional practice that uses peyote. But, cannabis at the same time faces scrutiny because no Church based on a religion has been

Native American Rights to SacramentT h e l o n g b a t t l e t o r e l i g i o u s f r e e d o m

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012

INFO@MALAHATPLUMBING.COM

phone: 250.580.5810

1315 Balmoral road

VICTorIa BC V8r 1l6

www.malahatplumbing.com

licensed, insured + bonded

MALAHAT BUSINESS CARDS.indd 1 11-02-16 8:23 PM

“Big and small we do them all”

Serving Victoria to the Cowichan Valley

Air conditioners/heat pumps, plumbing, and gas.

INFO@MALAHATPLUMBING.COM

phone: 250.580.5810

w w w . m a l a h a t p l u m b i n g . c o m

21formed and approved by congress or the Supreme Court. Often citing the lack of Native American written documentation compared to items that pre-date Asian usage in anthropological studies of count-less archeological digs over the North and South Americas of pipes, containers, seed pots, and oral traditions and art-work depicting the use and mythologies associated with cannabis. (Hultkrantz, Ake. Native Religions of North America. HarperCollins, 1988.)

In 1993, the Religious Freedom Restora-tion Act, is passed and justifies more reli-gious rights, including the right of sov-ereignty on reservation to protect most religious practice as stated as “set by tradi-tion approved by the tribe” to practice the use of entheogens such as peyote, and not defined against the use of cannabis on the reservations. This is later pushed through with the add-in that other reservation may use this if practicing sacred grounds rights, though still within limited capac-ity to be set on case by case basis. (http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/RFRA1993.html)

The fight is still going on to this day, as indigenous people from many tribes of

both North and South America, and non-indigenous people, work toward the cul-tural pluralism that is needed in order to be truly respected and understood for the diversity and unique world view that Na-tive Americans add to the culture of the world. Many battles remain, and though we can not every fully return to the be-fore time, we have the ability to cross the liminal spaces and impact the everlasting memory of time, as sacred as it is, through proactive practice of life and spirit as we share our vision of a better future for all. Through our battles we may be able to create freedoms that all can enjoy, as we have passed laws that set precedence for groups such as Rastafarians with their use of cannabis in the U.S. to use in their own court cases and helped win. The connec-tion of sacred sacraments is a blessing be-tween both worlds of reality and tradition that is held by boundaries and laws and the world of spirituality and the modern-ization of life for Native Americans as it all transitions everything.

$10 shipping within Ontario

$15 outside Ontario

Please add 13% sales tax

Please check Please check website for details and Specials

All Seeds Are In Original Breeder’s Packs

Blue KushBubba OG KushKings KushOG KushPurple KushPurple Kings KushPurple OG KushPurple OG Kush

Kush Kush

AppalachianMix PackSensi Star x BlueberrySensi Star x Lemon Skunk

Green Seeds

Special (local breeders only)25 seeds for $100 (u can mix pks)

5 seeds for $35/10 seeds for $65LOCAL BREEDERS

Coming SoonNIRVANA (10 sds)

Coming SoonTHE CALI CONNECTION (10 sds)

A-Train $110Bubblegum $135Burmese Kush $113Chocolate Chunk $83Cold Creek Kush $125Da Purps $100DarkstarDarkstar $125Heavy Duty Fruitty $107Lambo $130Mendocina Madness $65MK-Ultra $143Skunkage $55SkunkXXX $35The HogThe Hog $146Wreckage $100

TH SEEDS (10 sds)3rd Dimension $46Ace of Spades $46Agent Orange $46Dairy Queen $46Deep Purple $46Jack The Ripper $46Jilly BeanJilly Bean $46Plush Berry $46Qrazy Train $46Querkle $46Space Bomb $46The Flav $46Vortex $46

TGA SUBCOOL (5 sds)AK-47 $130Bubblegum $115Chronic $115Double Dutch $115Kali Mist $130Motavation $115WWarlock $85White Russian $115

SERIOUS (11 sds)BC Blueberry $80BC Cheese $80BC God Bud $95BC Kush $65BC Mango $80BC Pinewarp $80BC SweetBC Sweet Tooth $80Purple Buddha $65Sweet God $80Texada Timewarp $80The Big $80The Black $80The Purps $95

BC BUD DEPOT (12 sds)REGULAR SEEDS

Coming SoonNIRVANA (5 sds)

Coming SoonMEDICAL (5 sds)

Coming SoonTHE CALI CONNECTION (5 sds)

A-Train $65BUKU (Burmese Kush)$65Mkage $75MK-Ultra $100

TH SEEDS (5 sds)

Green Love Potion $50Sweet Black Angel $56

SAMSARA (5 sds)

Blue Mistic $45Critical $52Fruit Spirit $52Ice $52Northern Light $52Northern Lights ( auto) $55Power FlowerPower Flower $52Royal AK (auto) $55Royal Bluematic (auto) $55Royal Cheese $52Royal Moby $79Shining Silver Haze $52Skunk #1 $45Special Kush #1 Special Kush #1 $25Special Queen #1 $26White Widow $45

ROYAL QUEEN (5 sds)

BC God Bud $95The Purps $95

BC BUD DEPOT (6 sds)

AK-47 $130Chronic $115Double Dutch $115Kali Mist $130Warlock $85White Russian $115White Russian (auto)White Russian (auto) $80

SERIOUS (6 sds)Cannatonic $85RESIN (5 sds)

Acid $75Delahaze $75Ice Cream $75Jacky White $75Nebula $75Opium $75Pandora (auto) Pandora (auto) $60Sensi Star $90Spoetnik #1 $60Vertigo (auto) $60Whiteberry $75

PARADISE (5 sds)

Afghan Kush Ryder (auto) $80Afghan Kush $70Afghan Kush x Black Domina $70Afghan Kush x Skunk $70Afghan Kush x White Widow $70Mazar Kush $70Mazar Kush x GreatMazar Kush x Great White Shark$70Mazar Kush x White Rhino $70Northern Lights x Big Bud $84Northern Lights x Skunk $70Pakistan Ryder (auto) $80Star 47 $70Sugar Mango Ryder (auto) $80Sweet CoSweet Coffee Ryder (auto) $80

WORLD OF SEEDS (7 sds)

Chronic ryder (auto) $65Diesel Ryder (auto) $65Easy Ryder (auto) $65Lowryder #2 (auto) $65

JOINT DOCTOR (11 sds)

Afrodite $44Afrodite (auto) $44BCN Diesel $44BCN Diesel (auto) $44 Big Band $44Big Band (auto) $44CitrusCitrus $44Dr. Jekill $44Flash (auto) $44Gnomo (auto) $44Kannabia Special $44Kannabia Special(auto)$44La Blanca $44La Blanca (auto)La Blanca (auto) $44La Reina De Africa $44Mataro Blue $44Mataro Blue (auto) $44Original Berry $44Smile $44Smile (auto) $44

KANNABIA (5 sds)AMS $35Arjans Strawberry Haze $62Auto-Bomb (auto) $48Big Bang $30Big Bang (auto) $48Bubba Kush $52Cheese Cheese $42ChemDog $60Dam Sour $52Diamond Girl $38El Nino $55Exodus Cheese $35Great White Shark $55Green-o-matic (auto) Green-o-matic (auto) $48Hawaiian Snow $62Himalayan Gold $48Jack Herer $48Kalashnikova $35Kalashnikova (auto) $60Kings Kush $48K-K-Train $52Ladyburn 1974 $38Lemon Skunk $38Moby Dick $48Neville’s Haze $62Northern Lights (auto) $50Pure Kush $42Super BudSuper Bud $35Super Critical $48Super Critical (auto) $60Super Lemon Haze $68Super Silver Haze $62Sweet Mango (auto) $60The Church $35The DoctorThe Doctor $30Trainwreck $68White Rhino $55White Widow $55

GREENHOUSE (5 sds)

Blue Hell $NAChannel + $NADevil Fruit $NA1024 $NAHammerhead $NAY Griega $NA

Coming SoonMEDICAL SEEDS

High Level $30/$50Jamaican Dream $40/$70Papa’s Candy $40/$70Pink Plant $45/$80TNT Kush $45/$80

EVA SEEDS (3/6 sds)

Blueberry $90Blueberry (auto) 3seeds $60Brainstorm $60Cali Orange $80Durban Poison $90Euforia $80Freddys BestFreddys Best $85Frisian Dew $65Master Kush $70Mazar $85Mazar (auto) 3 seeds $60Night Queen $80Passion #1 $65Power PlantPower Plant $75Purple #1 $65Strawberry Cough $100The Ultimate $90Think Different (a)3 sds $60Twilight $60White Widow $95

DUTCH PASSION (5 sds)

Cannadential $75Cataract Kush $90Chocolope $90Chocolope Kush $110Confidential Cheese $75Exodus Kush $105Holy Grail KushHoly Grail Kush $105Kandy Kush $90Kosher Kush $120Kushberry $75LA Confidential $90Lemon Skunk $60Martian Kush $105Martian Mean GreenMartian Mean Green $105OG #18 $105OG Kush $120Purple Wreck $75RKS $60ReCon $83Rocklock $60SharksbreathSharksbreath $60Silver Bubble $60Silver Kush $90Skywalker Kush $110Sour Cream $60Sour Diesel $105Sour Kush $110Stacked Kush Stacked Kush $90Sweet Haze $60

DNA GENETICS (6 sds)

Black Russian $65Carmelo $60Critical Sensi Star $65Fruity Chronic Juice $60IL Diavolo (auto) $65La Bella Afrodita (auto) $60La Diva (auto) La Diva (auto) $65La Fruitta de Venus (a) $65Marmalate $60Northern Light Blue $60Sugar Black Rose $60

DELICIOUS (5 sds)

Blue Fruit $45Blue Hash $55Blue Widow $50California Hashplant $61Cheese $44Cloud #9 $38Critical +Critical + $56Critical + (auto) $51Critical Jack $46Diesel $40Fruit (auto) $38Haze (auto) $50Industrial Plant $61Moby DickMoby Dick $68Moby Dick #2 $59Moby Hash $61Original Amnesia NAPower Kush $44Roadrunner #2 (auto) $45Royale Haze $49Santa SativaSanta Sativa $47Shark Attack $41Super Critical Haze $55Super Silver $61Sweet Deep Grapefruit $40White Siberian $41White Widow $64

DINAFEM (5 sds)

8 Ball Kush $44Acapulco Gold $51Blue Cheese $51Critical Kush $81G13 Haze $59Liberty Haze $65Little Cheese (auto)Little Cheese (auto) $39LSD $56Pineapple Chunk $51Pineapple Express (auto) $41Red Cherry Berry $42Red Dragon $56Sweet Tooth $57SweetSweet Tooth (auto) $55Tangerine Dream $59Vanilla Kush $63Violator Kush $57

BARNEYS FARM (5 sds)*10% discount for all MMAR card holders*FEMINIZED SEEDS(Mailing Address-Mail Orders)Markham, On L3R 6E01661 Denison St, PO Box 76547

(Retail Store)Scarborough, On 4675 Steeles Avenue East, Unit 2C16Ph: 647-859-8863

STORE HRSTues -Fri 12-6Sat-Sun 11-5 www.gtaseedbank.ca

GTA Seed Bank

YOUR AD HERE

Contact: hempo101@gmail.com

Issue Number 33Crossword Answers: Across 1 Chris Farley 3 Jack Black 6 Peter Fonda 7 Woody Harrelson 8 Kristen Dunst 11 Seth Rogen 12 Zach Galifianakis 13 Justin Timberlake

15 Drew Barrymore 17 Morgan Freeman 21 Matthew McConaughey 22 Dawn Wells 24 Oliver Stone 25 Charlize Theron 26 Cheech Marin 27 Joe Rogan, Down 2 Harrison Ford4 Arnold Schwarzenegger 5 Whoopi Goldberg 9 Frances McDormand 10 Dave Chapelle 14 Barbra Streisand 16 James Franco 18 Bill Murray 19 Cameron Diaz 20 Brad Pitt 23 Bruce Lee22

HEMPOLOGY 101 CROSSWORDBy Dieter MacPherson

Check out Georgia’s website to see some of

her other comics, read her blog, and help her spread the good word by picking up a copy of her book of

the Happy Hippie comics.

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012 23

CANNABIS CLUBS ACROSS CANADA AND THE U.S.ACannabis dispensaries in Canada, due to a lack of regulation, all operate under unique and individual mandates. As such, the membership requirements ofeach dispensary differ. We recommend travelling with a copy of your original proof of condition (doctor’s note) which the CBC of C staff will be happy to provide. It is also recommended to research the dispensaries in the region you will be visiting and try to establish contact, if possible, before yourvisit. Please be discreet and polite when contacting another dispensary; you are representing the CBC of C too!

Keep in mind: Some dispensaries have problems with supply and accessibility. The CBC of C cannot guarantee that another dispensary will have supply or accept your card as proof of condition. Please help grow this network and support your local clubs by encouraging quality gardeners to direct their product to local dispensaries, or by growing yourself.

British Columbia

CANNABIS BUYERS’ CLUB OF CANADA (CBCC), VICTORIA

826 Johnson St. Tel: 250-381-4220Email: hempo101@gmail.com

www.cbc-canada.ca

NORTH ISLAND COMPASSION CLUB Tel:250-871-5207

ORGANIC MATTERS CENTRE#7 140 Wallace St., Nanaimo

250-754-8420

THE VANCOUVER ISLAND COMPASSION SOCIETY

853 Cormorant St., Victoria Tel:250-381-8427 Fax: 250-381-8423

BC COMPASSION CLUB SOCIETY2995 Commercial Drive, Vancouver

Tel:604-875-0448 Fax: 604-875-6083Email: info@thecompassionclub.orgwebsite: www.thecompassionclub.org

GREEN CROSS SOCIETY OF B.C. 2127 Kingsway, Vancouver

Tel: 778-785-0370 Fax:778-785-0477 www.greencrossofbc.org

VANCOUVER MEDICINAL CANNABIS DISPENSARY880 East Hastings St.

Tel: 604-255-1844 Fax: 604-255-1845West End location: 1182 Thurlow St.

Email: c.dispensary@gmail.comwww.cannabisdispensary.ca

Karuna Medicinals4510 Victoria Dr., Vancouver

Tel: 778-588-1888www.karunamedicinals.com

The Healing Tree 529 East Hastings St., Vancouver

Tel: 604-569-1091http://delta9medical.ca/

T.A.G.G.S11696 - 224th St., Maple Ridge, BC v2x 6a2

Tel: 604-477-0557 Fax:604-477-0575 Email: taggs420@live.com

BE KIND OKANAGAN GROWERS AND COMPASSION CLUB.

288 Hwy. #33 West Rutland, BC (Kelowna)Tel: 778-753-5959 Fax: 778-753-5755

Email: bekindok@hotmail.comwww.okanagancompassionclub.com

NELSON COMPASSION CLUB#203-602 Josephine St. Nelsom, BC

Tel: 250-354-4206Email: nelsoncompassion@yahoo.ca

LIFELINE MEDICINAL CANNABIS DISPENSARYGrand Forks, B.C.

Email: intake@life-line.caFax: 1-866-542-6427

www.life-line.ca

WESTCOAST MEDICANN556 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC.

Tel: 604-558-2266www.westcoastmedicann.com

Alberta

M.A.C.R.O.S.4121-118 Avenue NW, Edmonton, Alberta

Tel: 780-457-6824Website: www.macros.ca

Ontario

C.A.L.M.Toronto, Ontario

Tel: 416-367-3459 Fax: 416-367-4679 Email: info@cannabisclub.ca

Website: www.cannabisclub.ca

TORONTO COMPASSION CENTRETel: 416-668-6337 Fax: 416-461-7116

Email: postmaster@torontocompassioncentre.orgwww.torontocompassioncentre.org

MedCannAccessTel: 416-253-1021 Fax: 416-253-1428

Email: info@medcannaccess.orgwww.medcannaccess.org

RAINBOW MEDICAL CANNABIS CANADAToronto, Ontario

Tel: 416-927-8639www.rainbowmedicinalcannabis.ca

MEDICAL COMPASSION CLINIC66 Wellesley St E 2nd Fl, Toronto Ontario

Tel: 647-291-0420www.medicalcompassionclinic.com

MEDICAL CANNABIS CLUB OF GUELPHTel: 519-341-0700 Fax:226-777-0150Email: info@medicalcannabisclub.ca

Website: www.medicalcannabisclub.ca

Kingston Compassion Club Society#409 800 Princess St Kingston Ontario K7L 1G3

Tel: 613-547-2459 Fax: 613-280-1341Website: www.kingstoncompassion.org

Québec

MONTREAL COMPASSION CLUBTel: 514-523-9961 Fax: 514-523-0637Email: centrecompassion@gmail.com

www.clubcompassion.net

LE CENTRE COMPASSION DE QUEBECTel: 418-522-8766 Fax: 418-522-0289Email: centrecompassion@gmail.com

www.compassionquebec.org

Maritimes

CANNABIS BUYERS’ CLUB HALIFAX CHAPTERTel: 902-497-3941

Outside Canada

GREEN CROSS PATIENT CO-OP OF SEATTLETel: 206-766-8155 fax: 206-763-9855

Email: info@compassion.ws www. Seattlegreencross.org

**To add your club to this list, please contact: <editor@hempology.ca>

C B C O F C M E M B E R S H I P H A S I T S P R I V I L E G E SWe would like to thank the following companies for offering a discount to the CBC of C members. Show your

membership card for discount, and please respect these companies’ goodwill by not purchasing for friends.

VictoriaTrippy’s Emporium

10% off645 Johnson Street

250-481-8747

Flavour Clothing 15% off

581 Johnson Street 250-380-3528

Sh:ft 10% off

547 Johnson Street250-383-7441

Sacred Herb 10% off

106-561 Johnson Street250-384-0659

Dark Horse Books 10% off used books623 Johnson Street

250-386-8736

Devilish Damsels Clothing 10% off

105-561 Johnson Street250-590-5696

Illusionz10% off

1319 Douglas Street250-383-4490

Baggins Shoes 10% off107-561 Johnson Street

250-388-7022

Old Nick’s Emporium10% off

639 Johnson Street250-382-6423

Sam’s Sideshow Boutique10% off

559 Johnson Street250-590-3494

Get Hooked Adventures(Sportfishing) 10% off

250-474-2447info@gethookedadventures.ca

Indoor Jungle 10% off

2624 Quadra Street250-388-5611

Fair Gardening & Maintenance10% off

250-589-0727renascenceman@shaw.ca

Man with a Van 10%off

Jeff Sackman250-813-2099

Mr. Fertilizer 15% off

9 Burnside Road West250-381-4644

Hemp & Company 10% off clothes

1102 Government Street250-383-4367

422 Craigflower Road 250-412-0880

2348 Beacon Ave.778-426-3088

Victoria Seed Bank10% off

532.5 Fisgard St. (Dragon’s Alley)

250-380-1385

ElsewhereCannabis Culture Headquarters

10% off307 West Hastings Street

Vancouver, B.C.604-682-1172

www.cannabisculture.com

BCMP Vapour Lounge10% off

307 West Hastings Street604-632-1750

Love Revolution10-15% off

937 Commercial Dr., Vancouver, B.C.604-568-6578

Vancouver Seed Bank 10% off

872 E. Hastings Street Vancouver, B.C. 778-329-1930

Puff DowntownVancouver10% off

#14- 712 Robson St., Vancouver604-684-PUFF

Puff Uptown Vancouver10% off

3255 Main Street Vancouver, B.C. 604-708-9804

Puff Westside Vancouver10%off

1838 W. 4th Ave Vancouver B.C. 604-739-0022

Cottonmouth Smoke Shop10% off

1120 Davie St., Vancouver604-331-1602

Who Knew? Dealers15% off

Hwy. 3, 10 km East of Salmo250-357-0008

The Smoke Zone12% off

50 Victoria Crescent, Nanaimo, B.C.250-714-1136Rasta Troll

20% off56 Victoria Cres. Nanaimo

250-740-0013

Ahead Of The Tymes10% off most items

127 5th Street, Courtenay, B.C.250-898-8489

Ahead Of The Tymes10% off

245 Kenneth St., Duncan, B.C.250-746-8963

Herb n’ Wear10% off

201-307 5th Street250-338-0111

West Coast Hemp10 % off

3473 3rd Ave, Port Alberni, B.C.

250-724-6060www.westcoasthemp.ca

The Lemonade Stand15% off

268 Tranquille Rd., Kamloops, B.C.250-554-1501

www.lemonadestand420.com

Hempyz Gifts and Novelties10% off most items

#101 20505 Fraser Hwy.(604) 539-5227

#106 19925 Willowbrook Dr.(604) 530-0177Langley, B.C.

GTA Seed Bank10% off

4675 Steeles Avenue East Unit 2A21

Scarborough, Ontario416-609-9559

www.gtaseedbank.ca

Cannabis Digest • Summer 2012 25