THCFarmer.com
121,263 Members Log In Register
Log In Register

Tiny rock hard buds, look familiar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Madbud
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Tiny rock hard buds, look familiar?

Madbud 37 Replies 9,511 Views
Page 2 of 2 · Replies 21–38 of 38
#24
alpha.ganjaguy said:
opposite, plants grown with pgr's are typically rock hard dense, that's the entire point..
----
you can google your states regulations and what they test for afaik. To my knowledge they are not tested for (I don't even know if you could) and are most likely encouraged (speculating) as they are what give all the rec growers big harvest of dense nugs that the average rec user thinks is top quality.
Click to expand...
This is PA black market as far as i know. I read CO has a problem with a dispo selling treated hemp as pot. Anyway, I passed the heads up for pgr on, poor guy has cancer as it is.
 
#25
jdog22 said:
hate to say it but "rock hard" buds are usually PGR grown :( dont waste it just dont buy that shit again itll kill you over years man

if your buds not covered in white snow than somethings wrong
Click to expand...
Good point, and hes got a 100x scope.
 
#26
i use a iphone 14 pro camera :P thats with the 1200w light and ac blowing on the plant not bad right ?
 

Attachments

  • 384550354_1250045152355266_261481933153789218_n.jpg
    384550354_1250045152355266_261481933153789218_n.jpg
    162 KB · Views: 6
  • 381461395_3513422128905591_1931259167612432518_n.jpg
    381461395_3513422128905591_1931259167612432518_n.jpg
    166.7 KB · Views: 7
#28
alpha.ganjaguy said:
sadly though, like everything cannabis, there isn't one answer
View attachment 2052965
Click to expand...
As always, we need to be careful about what we see on the internet. I quoted the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) below. It is, at least, from the original source, so I would trust it more than a second-hand source that apparently only has one dispensary in the state. I would have quoted the code earlier, but it's complex. I'm glad there are governmental controls for things that are so complex. Imagine what life might be like if there weren't any. I'm sure these types of regulations require frequent updates.

In the end, one of the reasons I grow my own is because I have a reasonably accurate notion of what's in the weed I consume. Perhaps we can never be 100% certain about the nutrients and soil amendments we use. I dare say we can get pretty darn close, though.

WAC 314-55-084​

Cannabis plant production.​

(1) Only the following specified soil amendments, fertilizers, other crop production aids, and pesticides may be used in the production of cannabis:
(a) Pesticides registered by WSDA under chapter 15.58 RCW as allowed for use in the production, processing, and handling of cannabis. Pesticides must be used consistent with the label requirements.
(b) Commercial fertilizers registered by WSDA under chapter 15.54 RCW.
(c) Potting soil, crop production aids, soil amendments, and other growing media available commercially in the state of Washington may be used in cannabis production. Producers growing outdoors are not required to meet land eligibility requirements outlined in 7 C.F.R. Part 205.202.
(2) Examples of prohibited products:
(a) The use of products containing plant growth regulators not allowed for use on food crops including, but not limited to, any of the following ingredients, is prohibited:
(i) Ancymidol;
(ii) Chlormequat chloride;
(iii) Clofencet;
(iv) Colchicine;
(v) Colloidal silver;
(vi) Daminozide;
(vii) Dikegulac-sodium;
(viii) Flumetralin;
(ix) Flurprimidol; and
(x) Paclobutrazol.
(b) The use of vitamin-hormone products not intended for use on food crops is prohibited.
(c) The use of products containing the insecticide DDVP (Dichlorvos) is prohibited in all areas where cannabis is being grown or processed.
(3) Soil amendments, fertilizers, growing media, other crop production aids, and pesticides that do not conform to subsections (1) and (2) of this section cannot be used, kept, or stored on the licensed premises.
(4) The following cannabis and cannabis products are subject to seizure and destruction:
(a) Cannabis exposed to unauthorized soil amendments or fertilizers; and
(b) Cannabis with levels of unauthorized pesticides or plant growth regulators as provided in WAC 314-55-108.

[Statutory Authority: RCW 69.50.342 and 2022 c 16 § 168. WSR 22-14-111, § 314-55-084, filed 7/6/22, effective 8/6/22. Statutory Authority: RCW 69.50.325, 69.50.342, 69.50.345, and 69.50.369. WSR 18-22-055, § 314-55-084, filed 10/31/18, effective 12/1/18. Statutory Authority: RCW 69.50.342 and 69.50.345. WSR 16-11-110, § 314-55-084, filed 5/18/16, effective 6/18/16; WSR 14-10-044, § 314-55-084, filed 4/30/14, effective 5/31/14. Statutory Authority: RCW 69.50.325, 69.50.331, 69.50.342, 69.50.345. WSR 13-21-104, § 314-55-084, filed 10/21/13, effective 11/21/13.]
Click to expand...
 
#29
BB22 said:
Jdog ,, that looks full body high sleepy time ✌️
Click to expand...
there 2 days shy of 7weeks in flower, their also a hybrid of indica/sativa but indica dom.
had a smoke of the bud a week ago and its not very potent yet. their clear also no amber ones yet or even milky :(

what your seeing is my strong asf HPS yellow light
 
#30
heres some more pics of em :)
 

Attachments

  • 384549160_2046807538986020_3106533753476280450_n.jpg
    384549160_2046807538986020_3106533753476280450_n.jpg
    271.2 KB · Views: 8
  • 384549191_864524438322048_2207332263375281789_n.jpg
    384549191_864524438322048_2207332263375281789_n.jpg
    219 KB · Views: 9
  • 386888555_345218614610580_9015804582208682584_n.jpg
    386888555_345218614610580_9015804582208682584_n.jpg
    238.3 KB · Views: 11
#32
i m not using any PGR but some strain or some phenotype within a strain can produce rock hard bud as well.

so rock hard bud could be the result of a phenohunt or a specific strain as well not necessarely pgr
 
#34
LoveGrowingIt said:
As always, we need to be careful about what we see on the internet. I quoted the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) below. It is, at least, from the original source, so I would trust it more than a second-hand source that apparently only has one dispensary in the state. I would have quoted the code earlier, but it's complex. I'm glad there are governmental controls for things that are so complex. Imagine what life might be like if there weren't any. I'm sure these types of regulations require frequent updates.

In the end, one of the reasons I grow my own is because I have a reasonably accurate notion of what's in the weed I consume. Perhaps we can never be 100% certain about the nutrients and soil amendments we use. I dare say we can get pretty darn close, though.
Click to expand...
Yes but you have to realize there are different types of PGRs, some are and some are not effected by the law, it all has to do with their classification. The ban is not on anything considered a PGR it is specifically any that are also cross used as pesticides. so yea.. that's why you notice the law says; "Cannabis with levels of unauthorized pesticides or plant growth regulators as provided in WAC", meaning there is an 'acceptable or allowed level' of pgr

"Fortunately, Washington State bans the same PGRs from use on cannabis crops that it bans from use on food crops (this law applies to the use of pesticides and herbicides as well). However, there are no rules restricting the use of other PGRs, and this may be of concern to discerning cannabis consumers.

While no evidence exists that the use of legal PGRs in cannabis production is harmful to consumers, the resulting product may be very different than cannabis that is grown without PGRs. Cannabis grown with PGRs produces very dense flowers that are much less abundant in glistening trichomes,and thus lower in terpenes, the essential oils that give each strain its unique qualities. The flowers may have little aroma and little taste beyond “gassy,” and the highs may lack nuance and subtlety."
---
I don't have a dog in this race, I'm just trying to provide info on the topic based on the conversation coming up.

pgr's are bad but still widely used with new products being made to circumnavigate bans so nefarious growers can maximize their wallets.

isn't this part of why we're all here, to grow our own and control the inputs?
 
#35
Pgr is no good weed. I can always tell cuz it takes more to get me high and doesn't burn the same. Ugh. Pgr weed.
 
#37
that would be the case with or without pgrs, it should be safe if it was bought at a dispo as in theory everything through their is tested. It just may have no flavor and lack luster high

if they don't know the source you/their guess is as good as ours
 
#38
LoveGrowingIt said:
As always, we need to be careful about what we see on the internet. I quoted the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) below. It is, at least, from the original source, so I would trust it more than a second-hand source that apparently only has one dispensary in the state. I would have quoted the code earlier, but it's complex. I'm glad there are governmental controls for things that are so complex. Imagine what life might be like if there weren't any. I'm sure these types of regulations require frequent updates.

In the end, one of the reasons I grow my own is because I have a reasonably accurate notion of what's in the weed I consume. Perhaps we can never be 100% certain about the nutrients and soil amendments we use. I dare say we can get pretty darn close, though.
Click to expand...
Wow. Years ago I read about how colchicine-treated plants would produce polyploid seeds instead of diploid. But I think smoking the treated plant was not recommended, it was for seed production. Ditto for colloidal silver used for making feminized seeds.
 
Page 2 of 2 · Replies 21–38 of 38
Back
Top Bottom