CHARLES A. S104 CANNABIS YIELDS (CO (I Feo 7? 4993 DIstRicr ATTORNEY JUNE 1992 . DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINI CosUIARY, pr ieer (ccegeiiee sativa ke: ccnuneld ale Yio20 tudies conducted during the summers of i990 and 1991 have determined ‘that the usable dry weight yield (Leaf and bud) for female cannabis plan eae up to 2-3 Kilograns (S.1 pounds). Based pon & survey of oa Mading producer states, the average plant yield for mature, domestically grown female cannabis plants jn 1991 was 440 grams (i pound). An accurate yield estimate con be made by weighing GhePeresh weight of a plant or measuring Ene plant‘s diameter at the broadest point in the canopy. N very significant factor af- fecting yield was planting density- 6 BACKGROUND dhe brug Enforcement Administration (DEA) during the summers of wee end 1992, conducted a detailed canmalis yield measttrencnt program at the University of Mississippi in Oxford. ‘the purpose Program foject was to determine the average yiet? ‘of outdoor cul- OF Ned camapss planta and identify factors te predict usable yield. Px andre initiation, the only quantitative jor to the proj yield. jorealcen were two studies self initiated by the Univer- hese two studies made a sity of Mississippi in 1985 and 100 Staleod tumper of observations and did not jdentify factors in~ fluencing plant yield. MprHopoLosy ithe overall intent of the studies was to introduce variation into the research design in order to gain a basic understanding of the ee the factors influencing plant yield. ‘The DEA sponsored someanch used different seed stocks from Mexico, Colombia, Jamaica, and a hybrid of South Africa-Afghanistan origin. ‘he 1990 effort consisted of a progressive planting of 3 separate jreas at 2 week intervals. Each area was planted with the same areas tock at an identical planting density. | te varying of the planting date permitted analysis of [Ne sensitivity of cannabis Pigla and plant development to planting dat ‘he 1991 effort yieie ad on’ tha velationship between planting density and yield. focse itterent ‘planting densities of Mexican seed stock | Were Throe gittekples 1 and 2 describe the average pant yields which are associated with specific densities. : Yield measurements were made on 90 days of older female pant Xifan duplicated the preference of a majority oF Mlomestic Growers _ to cultivate the larger yielding fenaies. Mowever, no :atl empt to Made to cultivate unfertilized female plants, commonly Known Meer liecailisae a cilia weet majority sou obecree Clouse a made on the very common, tall, narrow Leaflet, cannabis variety known as L :Neaetey mee easy! ye te Y ty ot "sativa" Wa very Limited number of observations were made on the cea veajoe variety, "indica". ‘the indica variety is a shorter hore compact, faster maturing plant with larger leavesy ‘ Yield measurements wee wade on 102 plants during the course of the two year study. Physical measurements were made of the plant’s height from ground level and the diameter at the broadest joint in the plant’s canopy. Upon completion of the physical Measurements, the plant was cul wound..level and. separated 07 into Tour comp Es — stem/brat wale £ Se _ihg~tops7—coni mn as | vol, \Caeeidual components saali weighed le de wis SE tae Sige, he material was dried 4n a convect fon Gran at 70 f degrees Meg. the dried material was reveialy it had sy Uo reached a constant weight, typically after 24 to 48 hours. This U (f second measurement 3s termed The wary" weight. During both yield Ko) Strveys, cannabis plants were, laren Land measured on a monthly oe basis to quantify yield throughout the growth cycle. ‘the selec tion of plaw ee iced upon a determination of their repre’ tiotative physical size, shape, and overs) vigor characteris~ Tee ine selection process captured the diversity of plant size by including cannabis plants ranging Crow the larger to the sma)~ Lee plant specimens. ‘the planting of ‘approximately 100° plants per cultivation area jusured that there woe large and repre~ Per eative poptlation from which plants were Af pled. Lf a pa Minelar plant was harvested for the measiy ant program, the Reighboring plants were ineligible for future selection which ceded changing the planting density during the study. Simiinriy wenapolant aon themoulere oie = selected to avoid Gage afrects which could skew restlts because of an asymmetrical planting density- YSRLD RESUS ALL measurements recorded in 1990 oF 199) ee contained in At- ALL me aemeen able J depicts tho average yield fot fal}, mature (320 days or older) cannabis plants grown ing a dense planting fittern of either 9 square feet per, plane or 18 square feet per Plant. At this relatively high planting density, the lateral Plane og OE adjacent canabis plants were touching by the middle branes OE herearter, the horizontal growth rate decreased in Telation to the vertical rate of ‘the results were tall, narrow plant canopies.ce plaka ees ei gee a ise ie ao | foun Cee J vable t Average Cannabis xields at Maturity for Migh Planting Densities sponsor Year bensity Yields . 1_Stock Univ. of MS 1985 9 ft.sq- 222 grams Mexico Univ. of MS 1986 9 ft.sq- 274 grams Mexico DEA 1990 1s ft.sq- 233 grams Colombia DEA 1991 9 ft.sq- 215 grams Mexico « yield = oven dry weight of usable leaf and bud from mature 120 day or older plants. ed day of oer ne similarity of plant yields contained in Tabie | is remarkable The fdering the variation in seed stock, year of cultivation, and consider itd ys. However, if the planting density js decreased, the plants have more room to laterally branch out. ‘the addi~ Ricna lepacepa lloucw tlic selec col otomes a natural canopy shape, eoacuhat@a in Dlacetons chi sccmans 47 o- whe larger branching Some were coupled with increased available sunlight, soil structs, and water resulted in significantly greater plant yields. ‘lable 2 displays the yields for cannabis at maturity for Yagiuical seed stocks at three low planting densities and for different planting dates and yea rable 2 average Cannabis Yields at naturity for Low Planting bensities Year sity. yield a ft. sq. 777 grams Nexico 3.990 Fels. 936 grams Hex DEA~C 3990 Chis. 640 gr Mexico DEA 1991 1,015 gi lexico DEA 1991. 860 grams Mexico * seedlings for the 1990 measurement program Sete planted at two feck dntecvale: DEA-A was planted on 4/2740 01 -N vas planted on $7, and DEA-C was planted on 5/17. The 1991, plantings were wade during the first week of June. atios for the Figure 1 reports select plant height-diame < hight planting densities used in 1990 and soo Pete tor the 9 foot square planting density plant canopy shape is different chan all: of Pane Ghich, hed relatively large aioults: of grow, ‘the height~diameter grap! i density is a significant factor which in turn affects plant yle Telationship between planting 3ddiscussed later in this paper. a 72 30, SQUANE FEET OF GROWING ANEA Fon PLANTS 149 HAYS Of OLDER AIO = HEIGHT / DIAMETER puring both growing seasons, only candard ixrigation, fertilizaq During per lyeeding activity were rendered 9° required. lowever, CeMorants, identification wumbers 107-0 and 103-01 in the 1991 Jou planting density plots, had ext anely high yields in com” parison to neighboring plants: |The airy. weight yield for plant Paria was 2,086.9 giams (4.6 pounds) Vind plant 103.01 yielded 2300.4 grams (5.5 pounds). These oH plants were located in 4 toy aren. rt ie believed that the Ratural slope of the land 2OW area ce plants to receive additional water ‘and possibly ad~ Sitjonal fertilizer through run on water The significance of eiascuy) aids @ieithatgthevacenole tas that certain agronomic practioas ‘ean produce higher average Yields than those reported in Table 2- : Analysis of the combined 1990 and 199) t yield data: shows that pee even dry weight material (Leal and iba) ; dnd mayen: F nabis plant is 14.4% of the plant/s total (roots exch iad} Weight. A break down of the four TYETE of waterLak fi mature female cannabis plant js presented ju Figure 2. my Ws =. — toa!FIGURE 2 : NON-SINSEMILLA CANNABIS COMPONENTS SEED 23% STEM/DNANCHES 43% LEAF 16% uD 10% PERCENT OVEH ORY WELGILT FOR 120 DAC OF OLDER PLATTS SINSEMILLA CANNABIS COMPONENTS a > Bul (2 inet of fot oo Be Le _ ef bu tel yeed be PENCENT OVEI! DAY WEIGIIT FOR ape WHICH DIO HOT HAVE ANY SEED Ut [ey Mbyte CSN week race Wud 4 Clr levee ov Seobie 8 ley Qeoraen . ti ey ee tee_ wep Ot Lo ever Cun Joce © (eae ? YLELD PREDICTION nd yield data collected throughout the 1990 and ns shows that plant yield can be accurately Ne field measurements. Several field measure~ Prediicchniques were assessed including plant height, diameter, money weight, and the numberof grow days.” the predictive models sreel wed are valid for any sativa variety plants regardless of plant age or planting density- y ‘the best, predictor of, plant. eld was measurement of the plant's ‘ We resirdeight. Figur Tdi lepicts the Linear reJationship between Y plant jh weight and yield dry weight. whe ouly-reaquired 4 platurenent is the weighing o£ the plant at Time of seizure sfr-a-timely—fastionts avoid ex agsive71oss of pliant water. The whe plant growth an 1991 growing seaso! predicted from simp. v U fresh weight would not include the plant roots or any soll ad= heriiig-yo the plant. the fresh weight multiplied by the number estimate of usable dry weight waterial. e 1437 would result in an myrertamae g technique Eo Buf 4 Lael FIGURE 3 FRESH WEIGHT ~ Y' fs extremely accurate. YIELD DRY WEIGHT (a) 2500) ae | \ 1 200 1500 10x 1a ton Fnesit Welaitt (9) Ys o.aa7(x) n°2-,999 thAnother accurate method for predicting plant yield is based upon Anotieanent of the diancter of the plant at the broadest point in MeO omey. Figure 4 depicts the curvilinear xo) tionship between plant canopy diameter and the plant dry weight. The measurement Prva plant canopy diameter is | simpler than, the meastrement: of the phant/s fresh weight. However, the calculation of a yield cstinate requires a tyo step process. First, the measured diameter is ents ° the equation: Dey Welght = —3.76786 + (o.06666 * (Diameter *2)). this first equation estimates the piant’s total dry weight. Usable yield is then calcwlated using Phe percentages of bud and leaf descr ibed in Figure 2. FIGUR ER - PLANT DRY WEIGHT MODE 00 seco 00 xo 700 10 CANOPY DIAMETER (em) 198 y--3,700 0,0666(x)"2 12> 157Neither pidnt height data or the nunber of grow days were as ace curate a predictor of plant yield as were fresh weight or diameter measurements. However, height was a good fridicator of plant age and this relationship may ps useful in estimating planting date. The correlation, watr tc ineluded ii Attachment 1 Feports on the degree of association among :33 different plant measurements. MISCELLANEOUS DATA NIALYSTS Air Dry Weight z The use of oven dry weights, although scientifically acceptable se nee Gt can be reproduced, under-represents the amount of Praplemcterialy dnchetsillclcymerkel | oor legal material is usabiried or at the time of sale, is in equilibrium with sur~ asrading atmosphere which contains a certain amount of moisture. seen vastinated bagad upon the DEA studies that the leaf and bud se ie eet cannabis would weigh an additionay 20% to 20% if al- mate te ix dey naturally and equalize with che sv winding at mosphere. water Content Tn addition to the yield measw-ement tained in each plant vas measured. A mature cammabis plant has, tained tesh weight basis, 66% water and 24% dry plant matter (leaves, buds, seeds, stems/beanches) - pant water content cat vary with plant age. Young plants )ess than 55 days ojd have @ eee content. ranging from 75% to 82%. Older plants have water content ranging from Got to 70%. , the amount of water con~ Plant Height The average height of a mature cannabis Ren EE) Ge oe oo ee plant was between 270 cm nnabis plants were Akasured in excess of 400 cm (13.3 feet). 4 he tallest plant re- Eacucaivaces vom (04, te ceet) mle anno determined not to be Gery sensitive to planting density factors. crop cycle The crop cycle se cece apt was typical of canmabis crops grown in the. ates. the crop cycle consists of two stages. mud —r—“=EE""™ contiguous st stage serene vegetative state which is characterized by iat period of vigorowts growth of sexually undigferent: Fypical plantings occur in April or May and the? extends until late July or early August. ‘The trati Vegetative stage to the second stage, now as the: tgiting period, results from the reduction in 8sociated with the photoperiod peaking on the stwmer solstice of June 21. . qhe flovering or fruiting stage lasts for the remainder of the plant’s life cycle. Beginning 1 Rugust, male plants form the Ptamens from which huge amounts of pollen ard released. The male plants usually die by the middle of September or soon after they pistase their pollen. Female plants live a Jouget time in order te produce seed for the next generation. whis reproductive stage fo Prvonuial for naturally growing camabis because it_is an_an- nya]. plant_and.~can-not survive the ¥inker months. Féiiale plants We iproduce a protective leafy bud te sv round the pistulate vabroductive organs and develop seed, it fertilized. ‘the bud Eeeuccuvagis (Nightly (des tredubys i)! tc) -Egsoee because it con~ structing highest number of 2UC producing glans. Yield Adjustment Factors wee eno nead to adjust yield estinatsous of outdoor mature cannabis crops if at the time o Seizure there are no itale plants. If male plants are present, then evidence of this ‘fact Pied be apparent by early August. the estimated yield of a ee plant an early August, the point ot which it begins to senesce and loose leaf cover be approximately 50 % of the Geight of a female plant of si ye and grouth stage. hy late weigher or October, the only harvestable cannabis plants remaining will be fewale plants- Te the female cannabis plants are unfertilized, then no seed ill be produced. The average usable yield (leaf and bud) of a wxture fewalé plant will be 57% of the plant/s dry weight where matte yield for a typical fertilized: seed bearing cannabis plant will be 34% of the the plant dry veight (Figure 2). ee LUNTE: ponEsT EC rhe jdentification of accurate plant yield estimation ee cislogies makes possible the opportunity Ce ee wate the MMerage domestic yield using eradication tatistics and play ecdae fa iemecerig incormaclontes Nmetivey coma JTeading producer SenekY Mas conducted by DEA to determine the aversge diameter of seaees Wants eradicated in September 1991. Table 4, lists they Mverage diameter of mature plants ohserved in that state as teported by the DEA state eradicatlon coordinator. ‘The estimated tgkble yield for each state’s eradicated plant Total was calcu- 9lated using the predictive methodology described in Figure 4 This methodology uses average plant canopy diameter information as the predictor variable to estimate plant dry weight. The plant dry weight is adjusted to estimate usable air dry weight yleld by first taking 34% of the dry weight to calcwlate usable yield, and adding 10% to the oven dry weight to obtain the air ary yield. ‘This estimate is valid for female cannabis plants at maturity which contain seeds. Au estimate for seedless cannabis (sinsemilla) is derived by Eixst taking 58% of the plant dry weight, and then adjusting upward by 10% to convert from even dry weight to an air dry yield. ee = , ee os : 6 BH EOL Sp able 4 Fbwh Ae Estimated Cannabis Plant Yields ip dat atten a pee Estimated ete, Estimated 1991 Bradicated Average © Non-Sinsemilla Sinsemilla Plant Tota. ¥ield (a). jela (a) Alabama 163,294 369 Arkansas 106,405 369 California 151,529 284 Florida 92,190 + 420 Georgia 300,503 369 Illinois 337,730 243 Indiana 206,494 369 Kansas 22,751 369 Kentucky 809,366 243 Louisiana 79, 009 204 Minnesota 191,790 369 Missouri 104,493 284 N. Carolina 198,470 369 Tennessee 508,816 369 Texas 22,997 466 3.05 £t. 345 grams $89 grams Average: * Source: DEA Cannabis Investigations. Section survey May, 1992- The average yield for the entire outdoor domestic cultivated can- nabis crop can be calculated by averaging the non-sinsemilla and sinsemilla yields in the same proportion as reported in the 1991 end of year’ eradication program results. The total number of cultivated outdoor cannabis plants eradicated in 1991 was 5,257,406. The number of sinsemilla plants was 2,251,735 or 42.0% of the total, and the number of non-sinsemilla plants was 3,005,751 or 57.2% of the total. A weighted ‘average using the yields reported in Table 4 results in an average domestic plant yield of 440 grans or approximately 4 pou 10: concLus rons detailed field measurements and mathematical Sr — rl E€§ = analyetely estimated. Continued field observations at illicit gultivation locations, both domestically ‘and overseas, will provide the opportunity to further: validate the ‘relationships Proorted. Development of cannabis yield methodologies is essen- reporteor understanding of the size of illicit cultivation problem and the drug abuse threat. qhe application ofATTACHMENT 1 1990-91 DEA YIELD DATA.Productivity Oata for Hisstssippt Fteld Clots, 1990-1891 ‘Wield Seed 3a ‘ry Fresh ey 4 ae ant Plait Stee Se Ory Mater «fresh thy : a 9. yaar ree Dena iy Plait F lane Naber Days wee Olan, ea 7010) | 020) 1 0.00.0 U 00 0.0 a0 0-0 00 0.0 00 0.0 00 0.0 00 0.0 o0 0.0 a0 0.0 v0 0.0 oo 0.0 oo 0.0 oo 0.0ictivity Data for Kississipet Fletd Plots, 1990-1991 tr “Tete tre ae YF Baa Fant — Size Staa Seed —— seat Waaber ays fresh Mater Fresh Ory Fresh ory ust 3 * a 8 1a 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 00 0.0 00 0.0 9.0 = 615-4 7 266 13 6255:5 Bro. 26h 13957.6 4392.2 Mexican Var fety.= 2.81.0 o Mant ie 199 300.30 8 et aie. 300130 ye 220 jo 0°30 Be ow 0.30 n ca ot 030 2 6-5 60.30 % "9 a 0.30 ao a 6.30 “3 2 0.30 65 wat 0.30 33 0.39 59 0.30 56 1 0:30 57 ww 0.30 39 0.30 a 24-4 6-1 128 0.30 59 1a " i 19 0:30 63 WIZ 1056.4 6704.8 2693.0 096.6“progucttutty Vata for lisstsstppt Feld Clots, 1990-1991 Te see — Sea Tex ran ety Fane aE PRT Biaat—Stex—_—Siew tuner + ays“ We. Ola. Fresh Water Fresh Ory ry Fresh tot on a 4. £ _. 4. = a. Hextcan Variety ~ 0,910.9 » Planting 1991 oroz 30 1200 GF SST 00 0.0 90.09. 30 a 38 4590 STS oo 0.0 99.09 30 3m GT AT IR 00 0.0 gout 65 14s 106 656-2 100-072 0 0.0 as 65 0 tod. 324.0 IT 0.0 0.0 ou 65 i 76 aed eee 00 0.0 go. 65 25212610783 6.2 8 90 0.0 ag 6s joo 05 asd M422 70 00 0.0 ariz at foo 00 «565.6 1942 OE 0.0 0.0 oo.12 i St SAR _ 00 00 6.4 Hino - 039.9 296-9 6S 00 0.0 ara jos 179 732-0 24-4 GP a0 0.0 aga ot fro 99 1000.2 Sats 70 00 9.0 96:13 ge 133 Nasa, S42 St 00 0.0 grt4 at Boa? 2aar.6 * 763-3 8 a0 0.0 orig 120 2 2612 69 oa 0.0 95.23 120 ye ty acs at oo 0.0 a7ig 120 mou 6so2 St 35218 130.4 96:22 120 a r6r.0 60 517.6 | 200-8 arty 120 B88 2ars G2 00 0.0 9716 120 205129 ot 56 52219 226.0 99.16 121 zm 55.6 5? 35.2 153.9 100.15 122 an 10 ons 59 Bar.9 203.0 100117 122 is 128 W456 634.6 300.5 Coloabtan Variety = Clot €, 0.91x1.0. Mantieet, 1999 Py ee eee 1% SA BT Ot 00k YOK SL. 75 169-3 32.9 9) 0c) 37 $00 752-0 32 307-9 100.2 110 0601021213058 jo TSS 220-3 470.60 200,100, 1131-0 te sase 236-1 May 0.60, 720140369. 66 980.0 357.9 147 0.60250, 143. 2627.9 66 (1496.7 555.7 [ybeid vartety = Plot F, 0.91xt.0 2 f aooo 1m 0.ctstdmk Hg 59-8 LES 33.5 963-6 2605 Se at roase 3760.5 O12 PS a M6 6.88 on 0.0 106, 17D H.RCorrelation tatehe for Hartjuana Plant favaneter Relat touships. 1990-91. Grovth Density Plant Plant Plant Plant Clank Sten, hee Yield Yleld Seed Seed Bays: Wete otamster Fresh Dey water: fresh fe Fresh Ory fresh Ory Wetgie Weight fetahe Mefghe Weight Weight Metght etgh Growth Oays , Plant Hetght 1.000 Plant Olarater 0.030 1.000 t Fresh Wetghit 0.607 0.067 1.000 - t Dry Hetght 0.704 0.670 0.909.000 Plant ater woreet 0-476 0.378 -0.470 1.000 Sten fresh Metght see “olom 0.939 0.917 0.332 Sten ry Hetghe Oye glass 01943 0.945 -0.442 Teld Fresh Wetght 1609.84 0.962 0.932 -0.200 000 Yield Ory Metght 0.630 0.043 0.969 0.950 -0.358 0.990 1.000 Seed Fresh Metght Gr59¢ 01828 0.660 0.728 0.190 0.565 0.637 1.000 Seed Ory Hetght O:403 01523 9.632 0.706, -0.527 0.820 0.601 0.994 1.000 eT aE RITTER VALE ETAL, FOO =ATTACHMENT 2 1985-86 YIELD DATA UNIVERSITY OF MSSISSIPPTVLIVC AGQIS ATHIA $86t IddISSISSIN JO ALISHHAINNAIVG AGOLS GTHIA 986T IddISSISSIW AO ALISWHAINA