An article recently published in the Bismarck Tribune says it’s time to start growing support for hemp in North Dakota.  From the article:

Farmers want to raise hemp as a crop. It can be used for products ranging from rope to lotion.

While ruling against the farmers, Hovland suggested they ask Congress to change the definition of industrial hemp.

The chances of that happening don’t look good. North Dakota’s congressional delegation says it won’t introduce or push legislation to change the definition.

Sens. Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan along with Rep. Earl Pomeroy, all Democrats, say they are being practical.

They argue that as long as the Drug Enforcement Administration is taking a hard line, any legislation can’t get through Congress. The delegation says Congress doesn’t want to be seen as weak on drugs.

In interviews and statements to the Associated Press, the delegation’s support of industrial hemp could be described as lukewarm at best.

There is pro-hemp legislation in Congress. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, introduced the measure, but it shows no signs of going anywhere.

Dave Monson, one of the plaintiffs in the hemp case, wants the delegation to fight for the legislation even if it appears doomed.

Monson, a Republican state legislator, argues that a congressional fight would show courts there is an interest by lawmakers in a change.

Going unsaid by the state’s delegation is the apparent lack of support in the state for a change.

Despite Monson’s arguments that North Dakotans favor a change and the North Dakota Agriculture Department establishing hemp regulations, there likely isn’t widespread support for industrial hemp.

Dorgan, Conrad and Pomeroy haven’t been reluctant to fight for “lost causes” that have solid North Dakota support.

Hemp supporters need to launch a public relations campaign to prove the merits of hemp to the state populace. Then they need to prove to the delegation that they have broad-based support in the state.

If they can do that, the delegation might fight for them.

However, it will take a long fight to turn a “lost cause” into victory.

I like the idea of another cash crop for North Dakota.  At the same time, it wasn’t until recently that I understood that industrial hemp and marijuana were two different things.  I’m assuming there are a lot of people like me out there who are truly uniformed about the issue.

That said, I wonder what would happen if North Dakota really could grow industrial hemp.  Would it put a strain on our law enforcement resources to make sure marijuana isn’t grown along with the industrial hemp?  I’ve never seen pictures of the two plants side by side.  How different are they from each other in looks?