What's classified as "Flowering" in the new bill.

It says no more than 6 "Flowering" plants.

Does this simply mean once a plant shows its sex, its considered flowering?

Or is it classified at a different stage?

IIRC correctly, the law reads includes the terms "harvestable" and "female" in it's definition which does more to muddy the waters than anything else in my opinion. When is a plant harvestable? If the law specified that leaves did not count towards your total it would be logical to assume that the term "harvestable" would have meaning akin to "mature". But, since the law does include dried leaves as counting towards your total i am assuming that a DA would interpret that to mean any plant is harvestable, so therefore any plant with female flowers (meaning i would count an intersex plant - a hermaphrodite) counts toward the total. I don't trust the DA or the judge to be knowledgable and sympathetic to the nuances of the cannabis gender spectrum or growth cycle.

There's not more than a week or two of wiggle room, imo. My plants clearly have flowers at 3 weeks. Harvestable is subjective, but I believe an argument can be made that a plant showing flowers is mature enough to be harvestable. I just don't try to play that game. I am allowed x plants and that's how many I have flowering at one time. I have a second room in the opposite phase, plus babies started for one grow ahead. That is quite sufficient for me, and well within the law as well. For anyone who has the room, this methodology should scale to any number.

I always went by the # of plants in 12/12 cycle...hence mature (no longer growing, but budding )....disregard harvestible , thats subjective.

The best possible outcome would be a person or persons who have been growing for a while have input on these new laws. Unfortunately, it seems in most cases we don't. We know that a plant isn't harvestable until 8+ weeks into flower, BUT a stupid legislator thinks that the plants can be harvested at 3-4 weeks into flower, because well, they just don't know. I think if we keep leaving the new laws up to people who know nothing we're gonna be screwed.

its been said by BG and tet but im gonna say the same thing, as soon as i have gone 12/12 its a flowering plant. I would think it would be pretty bad risk management to decide thats the spot you want to push the boundaries.. lol I can see the hurried perpetual method but its just not worth the risk, i don't think it would hold in a court room.

wannabe grower said:

The best possible outcome would be a person or persons who have been growing for a while have input on these new laws. Unfortunately, it seems in most cases we don't. We know that a plant isn't harvestable until 8+ weeks into flower, BUT a stupid legislator thinks that the plants can be harvested at 3-4 weeks into flower, because well, they just don't know. I think if we keep leaving the new laws up to people who know nothing we're gonna be screwed.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you here. You seem to be suggesting that a plant is worthless (i.e. has NO medicinal or other value) until it is 8+ weeks into flower. While it won't be nearly as good, you could harvest most of my plants much sooner. As soon as they have trichs they are harvestable, imo. Harvestable in the sense that taking them early will yield a usable product. Not harvestable in the sense of obtaining a good harvest.

So you agree with the lawmakers then? Bwahaha you ARE evil.

LOL I guess I do. But really, how else are they going to do it? I'd rather have this situation than an absolute limit on # of plants, whether they be flowering, vegging or newly-cloned.

Kinda like the abortion debate that's been going on since the 70's. Does life begin at birth or conception or somewhere in between? If we use that analogy then this will not likely be settled adequately any time soon.

Sure it will. When it is legalized. It is coming.

I wish you were right about legalization, but the more I think on it the less I believe it'll will come to pass. There's too much money in keeping it Illegal and too much greed to let it be legalized. Think of all the people who have sunk a lot of money into "legal" pot at this point. ispensaries, compassion centers, Dr.'s who've built whole offices on prescribing it. Notto mention the lawyers and taxes. You think they're just gonna let it go without a fight? To me the new greatest enemy to true legalization of marijuana is gonna come from the medical community not the general public.

In my younger days, you could only get hard liquor at a state owned/run liquor store. I envision the same sort of thing with mj. Regulation, licensing and taxation. Dispensaries and caregivers will have a leg up in that regard I believe, especially if they decide to limit the licenses when the day comes. All conjecture, of course

Maine doesn't have a "definitions" section of their general law? Like the definitions or not, in RI it's pretty much spelled out. We are allowed 12 "seedling" and 12 "mature". My seeds can be 2 months old and my mature plants 5 months. Or my seeds can be 2 months old and my mature plants all in party cups. Visable flowers to the unaided eye is what seperates the two.


(excert)

1.7 "Mature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant which has flowers or buds that are readily observable by an unaided visual examination.

1.8 “Medical use” means the acquisition, possession, cultivation, manufacture, use, delivery, transfer, or transportation of marijuana or paraphernalia relating to the consumption of marijuana to alleviate a registered qualifying patient’s debilitating medical condition or symptoms associated with the medical condition.


1.9 “Paraphernalia” , as used in these Regulations, means any equipment, product, or material of any kind that is primarily intended or designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body marijuana, including but not limited to: metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone, plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without screens, permanent screens, or punctured metal bowls; water pipes, roach clips: meaning objects used to hold burning material, such as a marijuana cigarette, that has become too small or too short to be held in the hand; bongs; ice pipes or chillers.

1.10 “Parent or legal guardian” means the custodial parent or legal guardian with responsibility for health care decisions for a person under eighteen (1 years of age.

1.11 “Practitioner” means a person who is licensed to practice medicine with authority to prescribe drugs pursuant to RIGL §5-37 or a physician licensed with authority to prescribe drugs in Massachusetts or Connecticut.

1.12 “Primary caregiver” means either a natural person who is at least twenty-one (21) years old or a compassion center. Unless the primary caregiver is a compassion center, a natural primary caregiver may assist no more than five (5) qualifying patients with their medical use of marijuana.

1.13 “Qualifying patient” means a person who has been diagnosed by a practitioner as having a debilitating medical condition and is a resident of Rhode Island.

1.14 “Registry identification card” means a document issued by the Department that identifies a person as a registered qualifying patient, a registered primary caregiver, or a registered principal officer, board member, employee, volunteer, or agent of a compassion center.

1.15 “RIGL” means the General Laws of Rhode Island, as amended.

1.16 "Seedling" means a marijuana plant with no observable flowers or buds.

1.17 “These Regulations” mean all parts of Rhode Island Rules and Regulations Related to the Medical Marijuana Program [R21-28.6-MMP].

1.18 "Unusable marijuana" means marijuana seeds, stalks, seedlings, or unusable roots.

1.19 “Usable marijuana” means the dried leaves and flowers of the marijuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks, and roots of the plant.

And yes it says "Bong" and "Roach Clip" in the Rhode Island General lawbook. I think we understood the paraphenlia definition without those two words... and people think mj users are out to lunch. Who writes this stuff!

Buddy232 said:

And yes it says "Bong" and "Roach Clip" in the Rhode Island General lawbook. I think we understood the paraphenlia definition without those two words... and people think mj users are out to lunch. Who writes this stuff!

Click to expand...

coke heads & alcoholics and sex addicts... just saying, youd think with the people we elect, drugs would be legal by now, along with child prostitution... not thaty im for it, but, the lawmakers really seem to be into it....

and some football coaches too

It appears that RI has gone a little bit further than ME in its definition. Yeah, we have a definitions section, that's where the "harvestable" term came from. I like what RI did, because the less doubt and confusion there is, the better it is for everyone (the community and the authorities).

More important, I think, will be the education of the courts and police of all this. I don't know what the RI says about violations (or perceived violations), but here in ME the benefit of doubt goes to the cops. If they believe you are in violation they can take your plants/weed. If it turns out they are wrong, you have to request, in writing within 7 days, to have your property returned. Apparently no sanctions whatsoever for such errors in judgement.

tet1953 said:

It appears that RI has gone a little bit further than ME in its definition. Yeah, we have a definitions section, that's where the "harvestable" term came from. I like what RI did, because the less doubt and confusion there is, the better it is for everyone (the community and the authorities).

More important, I think, will be the education of the courts and police of all this. I don't know what the RI says about violations (or perceived violations), but here in ME the benefit of doubt goes to the cops. If they believe you are in violation they can take your plants/weed. If it turns out they are wrong, you have to request, in writing within 7 days, to have your property returned. Apparently no sanctions whatsoever for such errors in judgement.

Click to expand...

Well I guess it's good that our state went above and beyond in their definitions section. About time they put effort into something. Although even after it was passed the law got veto'ed by the then Govenor and had to get overturned... so it had to be solid as a rock in the first place.

It's very unfortunate they included the word "harvestable" in your definitions, as that depends on a lot of things - however there has to be a reason for it. How do they define it in the definitions, and more importantly where and in what context does it reside in the general law?

I think it's unfortunate if there are problems with the law and patients up there. I'm not sure exactly how they know who is doing what though? Unless they can physically see it - we can't have outdoors gardens here. Here if your in a situation where you must present your card (a last resort) theres a number to call to confirm it's an active license #. No names, etc. I don't think they answer the phone on the weekend though, so I've heard. So in the case of getting your "stash" taken... you'd have to wait a few days. If your house were to actually get raided... I'm not sure if they would take them if you were legal. However if they did, I'd sure as hell let them. I'm legal, and there has already been case law in the US where settlements had to be made to reimburse patients for dead mmj plants.

Buddy232 said:

It's very unfortunate they included the word "harvestable" in your definitions, as that depends on a lot of things - however there has to be a reason for it. How do they define it in the definitions, and more importantly where and in what context does it reside in the general law?

Click to expand...

There is no definition of the word harvestable in the law. In context i tend to believe that the intent is to ensure availability of meds for the patient by staggering crops (e.g i could have 6 plants that are at week 7 of flowering and 6 plants that are at week 3 of flowering simultaneously and only the 7-week plants would count against the allowed total).

The problem is that Maine's law specifies that dried leaf weight must be applied to your total. Since the DA can include weight he can assert to the judge that any plant is harvestable under the law and can therefore count any plant that has flowers showing. At that point it's a crapshoot as to what the judge decides.