Marijuana surplus poses problem in Oregon | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Marijuana surplus poses problem in Oregon

Deb Erdley
1400522_web1_marijuana

Five years after it legalized recreational marijuana, Oregon has a new problem and it’s not the munchies.

Stateline reports a large surplus of recreational weed in Oregon storehouses and processing plants has led to concerns that licensed growers may turn to the black market or look across state lines to sell their harvest.

Oregon is among 11 states that have legalized recreational marijuana over the last seven years.

Its surplus dilemma begs the question: could price supports for growers be far behind?

Pennsylvania, which is among 33 states that have legalized medical marijuana, is weighing the pros and cons of recreational marijuana. Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a longtime advocate of recreational marijuana, completed a highly publicized statewide listening tour, visiting every county in Pennsylvania this spring to gauge public sentiment on the issue.

Back in Oregon, Stateline quoted a report from the state agency that regulates legal marijuana in which it estimated that growers had produced enough surplus to satisfy recreational users there for more than six years.

Meanwhile, word is getting around about the surplus.

Michael Getlin, a licensed grower in Oregon City told Stateline he gets regular cold calls from out of state residents offering two to three times the Oregon market price.

Those selling to such buyers could risk their growers’ license as well as scrutiny from federal authorities who take a dim view of interstate commerce involving the weed that is still classified as a class one controlled substance.

Deb Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Deb at 724-850-1209, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.