Geez, just when you thought you had the bears all figured out, along come the two legged cretins...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/08/pot.eradication/index.html

So, when it's no longer safe to take a walk in the woods, where you supposed to go hiking? It certainly gives "Smokey the Bear" a whole new meaning...

Legalize it and cartels won't be able to profit from it. Problem solved.

The part I find interesting is that they found 10,000 plants. Anyone with a backyard vegetable garden can guess how much work would be involved in planting, caring for, and harvesting that many plants. If they can pull that off in a national forest, you can do anything in a national forest.

but wait, there's more: pot

if you go out in the woods today, you're in for a big surprise!

last week, my back yard.

The size is impressive, but other than that, this isn't news. State and national forests and parks are often used for grow operations and processing labs, at least the more remote parts.

It not just in the forest. Drug dealers turn vineyards into pot farms

I read years ago that it was popular for people to grow it along railroad tracks and under high tension towers. These areas are easily accessible being in and close to cities and not heavily patrolled.

Unfortunately that is not new news. There is an area in Northern CA that has been called the Emerald Triangle for years, thanks to the pot growers. CA law enforcement has their annual CAMP (Campaign Against Marijuana Planters) program, aimed specifically at the growers in the boonies. A friend of mine started the High Sierra Volunteer Trailcrew years ago, primarily to clear trails in the NF. Now they spend a huge amount of time clearing pot farms in the forests. (Goin' on their trips is a hoot, by the way, if anyone is interested). We once has a US Navy pilot report a huge area of marijuana growing in the center of a full section of field corn. The stuff is everywhere...

This has been going on for decades. I remember back in the 70s coming across a wild pot farm in the cascades on a late summer recon for hunting season. When we realized where we were, we beat feet outta there.

I also recall my uncle telling me about farmers growing it in the corn fields.

That wildweed flower, it grows anywhere!!!

I think it is far too late for legalization to make any difference where it is being grown illegally, whether on public or private land. Even if the feds changed the posession/use legalities, you can be darned sure it would still be heavily regulated. There's still a lotta folks making 'shine these days, despite the fact that booze is legal to drink, but not legal to make for distribution unless you are licensed.

That it's going on at this scale is news to me. I had no idea pot farming had become this organized. People may plant and then come back to tend and harvest, but leaving 24x7 guards with automatic weapons is news to me. (Take a look at some of the numbers in the article.)

I don't think even Harold and Kumar would want to come across this crop... (If you don't get the reference, ask your youngins...)

Ben,

I was glad you brought up the moonshine analogy because that is exactly the image that comes to my mind when I hear of folks growing their own "cash crop".

I agree if legalized, there would still be folks growing it where ever they could, but if it were legally available wouldn't that bring down the price hence the violence associated with defending one's crop plus the need to hide it in a national (inconvenient) forest?

I don't know the answer to that question but it's something that comes to mind.

It's probably too late for legalization at this point, for two reasons: First, there there is a huge bureaucracy grown around the "war on drugs," and bureacracies are always careful to avoid killing the goose that lays their golden eggs.

For example, there are now many police agencies who depend on "drug money" forfeitures and federal anti-drug money for the major share of their budgets and ALL of their extras and cool toys.

Second, the illegal drug industry is flush with cash, enough to buy politicians, prosecutors and judges, and they are the last people to want their profits destroyed by legalization. The drug producers and the anti-drug bureaucracy flourish in this symbiotic relationship, and both are committed to sustaining it perpetually.

Jeff

The problem with legalizing it is that they might legalize the use and possession of personal amounts, but the importing and growing would still be illegal. If you were to legalize the growing of it, then the importation would also follow. If they legalized the growing of a certain number of plants (say, setting a limit on the number of plants able to be grown legally), then there would still be those trying to grow large amounts because so few have the space, time, patience, etc to grow their own. Most all of us can grow a vegetable garden, but we still shop at the grocery store (in the vegetable section)

Legalizing things that seem "hard" for us to control is just taking an easy way out of any problems (i.e. amnesty for illegals). I can think of hundreds of things we could make legal just to make my personal life "easier", but wouldn;t be good for society in general.

ON EDIT: Also, Jeff McCann's reasons for not legalizing (or likelyhood of not legalizing) are, for the most part, valid, but really, we could legalize say bank robbery, or speeding, or rape or murder, or maybe bludgeoning (if done without "hate") and it would surely save alot of headaches on those responsible for investigating and prosecuting the crimes. It would also cut down on "bureaucracy" too, and that would be good. In the end, though, it all comes down to sweeping crumbs under the rug just because......it's easier than cleaning them up properly.

By the way, just to be clear, I didn't mean to start a "pot should be legalized" thread, and I'll keep my opinions on that matter to myself. (I prefer a nice glass of pinot noir.)

The point was that organized criminals with automatic weapons are in national parks in numbers never seen before. Sure, there have been moonshiners, meth labs, and God knows what else, but pot farms like this take up massive amounts of land. They are far easier to come across inadvertently than most of the undesirable human activities you'd want to avoid in the woods.

Another problem is that they sometimes do significant damage to environmentally sensitive areas. I've run accross a few pot fields on public lands, as well as a few 'shiners and not a few meth labs. Thankfully, no confrontations.

I know just how dangerous and unpredictable methheads can be, and their "labs" are incredible fire and toxic hazards. I don't imagine today's pot growers are harmless hippies anymore. Good ol' boy 'shiners don't look for trouble, but they aren't to be messed with, either.

So, from a survival point of view, what are the warning signs to look for when out in the woods, to avoid a confrontation?

Use trails where there weren't any before;
Hoses or irrigation piping where it doesn't belong;
Strange, out of place chemical odors;
Accumulations of debris like plastic jugs, coleman fuel containers, waste packaging from batteries, chemicals and cold remedies;
Generator noise and lights where they don't belong;
FWD truck traffic in and out at odd hours;
Tripwires, boobytraps homemade alarms or noisemakers.

Any other ideas for what to watch for?

Jeff

I once read an article in a magazine about pot growers been seen carting an M-60 into the woods. Then when authorities went in to cut down a large farm, they found plants booby trapped with det-cord running up the stalk, with a detonator rigged to blow the stuff if the stalk was bent in order to chop it off near the ground. I have handled an AR-10 with night scope that was found in a pot field in central CA. It is indeed a war out there...

It's never too late to do the right thing.

Typically pro gun rights people think they shouldn't ban guns and knives 'because bans don't work'.
But drugs should be made illegal and then there will be less around!
Anti gun rights people believe the opposite. :-)
The Sock

Sock, if you are trying to say something, come out and say it. You've started to a few times, you might as well get it off your chest.

I'm pretty sure the English model of "ban everything, and have prior restraint" isn't working any better.

sorry you've lost me ironraven; what is it you want me to say?
The Sock

You've made a lot of comments that could be easily taken as jabs at American gun owners, that's all. If I'm seeing something that isn't there, I apologize. It's just that when ever one of Her Majesty's subjects talks about gun ownership in what seems to be a negative light, my experience is that they usually have something more to say on the subject.

That is the opposite of what I'm saying. Gun bans don't work. We banned them in the UK and our shootings have soared.
I've said this several times.
Same for knife bans.
And the same media that led a vicious hate campaign against gun owners, say we should legalise drugs because 'bans don't work'. How anyone believes banning something as cheap and portable as guns could work is beyond me.
BUT I can't have it both ways: I'd love to see no drugs in the world but have to admit they won't dissapear by banning them.
The Sock

Interesting postulate, but as I recall drugs, alchohol, and other forms of chemical imbibement were never cited as a fundamental right of being a US citizen. In fact, at one point, alchohol was specifically prohibited.

Nonetheless, I would say what is being done in our forests has less to do with the legalities of drug use, and more to do with corrupting the fiber of our society. The question isn't whether growing or using marijuana is okay, but that evil people are abusing and destroying a natural resource without any remuneration or accountability, while at the same time depriving the rest of us of the use and enjoyment of our public property. Whether any of us would legalize drug use or the growing/manufacturing of it is irrelevent to the real issue, which is one group of people wantonly trampling on the rights of others without consequence for purely economic reasons.

That, my friends, is what is most unacceptable about this situation. That is what we should be fighting against with all our effort.

I agree. As I always say 'I've never tried drugs because I don't like the taste; they taste of blood'. You are funding violent criminals by buying drugs. If you don't believe that tell your freindly neighbourhood pusher you are going to the cops with his name tomorrow. And good luck getting through the night...

I'm just pointing out that a lot of things can happen because of a ban. The banned item dissapearing isn't one of them.

And maybe alchohol isn't a fundamental right of being a US citizen - BUT IT SHOULD BE!
sorry my irish parentage showed for a moment there.. :-)
The Sock

Jeff, yours was a great post! Namely, things that should trigger a warning reflex if you come upon them in the woods, like hearing a generator where none should be heard.

However, if I ran away from garbage, I'd never get anywhere...

As ironraven inferred, this statement comes from nowhere and doesn;t express an opinion (unless it's meant to mask yours). It's also untrue in my experience. People who are "pro gun(?)" don;t fight a ban because "bans don;t work". THe fact that they don;t work is known and relatively well documented, and is a side issue. THey don;t want guns banned because our Constitution doesn;t give any governmental law-making entity any right to ban them or otherwise make them illegal. It's stupendously simple...

As I said before, murder, robbery, rape, etc., if they were made legal (and don;t forget hate-free bludgeoning), would make alot of people's lives "easier".....not their consciences, mind you, just their "lives". Of course, it would make alot more people's lives a tad more difficult, now wouldn;t it? Sometimes laws and rules become difficult to enforce, and people without conviction would like to see laws repealed, simply because they can't handle controversy, hard work, and dedication.

Drugs haven't disappeared because they're banned, but neither have murder or bank robbery.

Ah, ok. *mumbles around foot* Sorry about misunderstanding you.

And I agree, limited legalization with extensive taxation of certain non-alcoholic mind altering substances might have to be explored.

Its my understanding that cocaine, marijuana, and machine guns were all legal in the US pre-1930's or so and the crime rate and prison numbers were far lower than today. Very different societal conditions, sure. But doesn't that say something about the emphasis placed on personal responsibility?

Personal responsibility goes a long way and is sadly missing today. Imagine though, (repeating myself again), that murder, rape, and robbery were legal. Would personal responsibility satisfy us? I don;t think so.

We can always take the easy way out. After all.....it's easy.

Maybe legalizing/regulating/taxing prostitution will be next???

I don't see why it shouldn't be. You can't get much more of a "nanny state" than telling consenting adults what they can and can't do with their own bodies.

Isn't it already in some parts of Nevada???

"...I don't see why it shouldn't be..."

Me either. Seems to work just fine in Nevada...

Yup, 'cept in Clark County, where Vegas is, and Wasoe Co, Reno area...

Geez, you guys hijacked the thread!

We've now covered legalizing pot, automatic weapons, and prostitutes. I shudder to think what's next...

The best party… ever!

if you discover cartel growing weed on your property, is it legal to shoot them?

Without more, no.

Jeff

That's why I own a drop gun.

That's also why I know of a couple of long abandoned cisterns within driving distance.

Drop gun?

These macho threads that veer wildly toward illegal vigilante topics are not what I like to see on this or any other forum. Nobody that engages in a lot of Rambo-macho, party-it-up banter is anyone with whom I would choose to spend much time in the real world.

I salute courage and experience, but somehow those who hae been there and done that rarely boast about it. And those who are always boasting, in my experience, well ....

[Geez, I am a bit cranky this morning!]

A drop gun is a spare weapon that you carry with you that can be "dropped" beside the body of the person you just shot. When the police come, it appears to have been a justifiable homocide (self defense).

Police officers have (fairly or unfairly, I don't know) been accused of using this tactic. Shoot a man who doesn't have a gun, and you can have disciplinary actions, civil lawsuits, criminal court proceedings, and even riots. Not fun. If an officer thinks someone has a gun, shoots him, and kills him but then finds no weapon, the incident investigation goes rather more smoothly if one merely "drops" a gun near the dead man's hand.

strictly in jest, my friend.

When we begin to stray into the political realm so much, I have to wax a bit comical, otherwise, I might post something that'd get me kicked off the forum.

What if's like finding someone growing weed on my land would cause me to call the police and let them know what's going on. Maybe there's a chance they think I am in on it, but if I knew about it and didn't make the call, how much the worse for me then?

Anyways, I am not so macho that I can't admit to running like a scared little girl for the bunker a time or two. The "S" on my chest got torn off a long time ago.

That, to me, cuts to the core of what this is all about.

I was just backpacking the High Sierra Trail in Sequoia National park the past five days, and this situation was high on our conversation list. Such a beautiful and largely unspoiled area - truly a national treasure - and such a shame to have it chipped away from us by criminals who think nothing of trashing the landscape and harming anyone who gets in their way.

One of the other backpackers knows a Forest Service manager in the area, and claimed his friend said that he personally believes 90% of the drainages in that area are planted. Don't know if it's true, but alarming if so.