Statewide Needs Assessment for the Hemp Industry in Oregon

Background

In Oregon, hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) has the potential to be an economically important agricultural commodity due to favorable climatic conditions and potentially high market value. This crop was relegalized as an agricultural commodity in the U.S. through the 2018 U.S. Farm Bill. Hemp, by legal definition, is a plant within the species C. sativa and contains 0.3% or less of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on a dry weight basis.

Hemp can be grown for grain, seed oil, fiber, smokable flower, cannabinoid production, or a combination of these uses. The Oregon hemp industry is in the early stages of development, making it challenging to identify the hemp production community’s needs. Since Oregon State University Extension is committed to supporting agriculture research and outreach across the state, OSU personnel involved with hemp research and outreach assessed the research and educational needs and priorities of the Oregon hemp industry.

This needs assessment identifies what is known about hemp cultivation and knowledge gaps recognized by industry members, including growers, processors and allied stakeholders. This information will help establish priorities for future research and outreach efforts that target programs and services for the hemp industry across the state. To our knowledge, there have been no prior efforts to comprehensively gather statewide information on Oregon hemp production needs. Gathering these data will inform future OSU hemp research and outreach programming activities.

The goal of this study was to identify and prioritize the research and educational needs of Oregon hemp growers and other industry members. The specific objectives were to:

Document the market and production concerns and challenges of current hemp producers.

Identify barriers to including or increasing hemp production in Oregon cropping systems or participating in the hemp product supply chains.

Prioritize research and educational needs that would facilitate market and production growth of the hemp industry in Oregon.

Approach to determining Oregon hemp industry needs

The Oregon Hemp Industry Needs Assessment used information gathered through a statewide workshop conducted in a hybrid format and a follow-up questionnaire that allowed participating stakeholders to rank, prioritize and add to the needs identified in the statewide workshop.

1. Oregon hemp industry needs assessment workshop

To conduct the workshop, we compiled a list of email addresses that included Oregon hemp growers from 2018–22; academic, federal, and state employees; and crop consultant stakeholders interested in the Oregon hemp industry. OSU hemp researchers and Extension faculty developed the agenda for this hybrid workshop (Table 1) and created an online registration form via a Qualtrics survey to gather information about each participant’s location and affiliation with the Oregon hemp industry. The workshop flyer and the online registration link were shared via email with 674 hemp industry stakeholders. To increase workshop participation, the announcement was shared multiple times through various organizations and agencies, including OSU’s Extension Service and the Global Hemp Innovation Center, the Oregon Department of Agriculture, and the Oregon Industrial Hemp Farmers Association.

Table 1. Agenda items for the Oregon hemp industry needs assessment workshop:

• Session 1 (20 min): What is your current focus of hemp production? What kind of hemp research and information would be valuable for your current production?
• Session 2 (20 min): What do you see as the greatest challenges for you and for the hemp industry in Oregon?
• Session 3 (20 min): Are you interested in producing other types of hemp? What hemp research would be valuable for you to expand into other types of hemp production?
• Session 4 (20 min): If you aren’t currently producing hemp, what do you need in terms of information or research in order to become a producer?

The workshop was held on Oct. 20, 2022 online and at five OSU-affiliated locations representing five hemp-growing regions around the state:

• Willamette Valley (Linn County Extension Office, Linn County)
• Southwestern Oregon (Southern Oregon Research and Extension Center, Jackson County)
• Central Oregon (Central Oregon Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Jefferson County)
• Columbia Basin (Columbia Basin Agricultural Research Center, Umatilla County)
• Eastern Oregon (Malheur Experiment Station, Malheur County)

Eighty people participated in the workshop via Zoom or in person at the various locations.

OSU faculty from each region facilitated the workshop. In addition to the facilitators, a note-taker at each location recorded the discussion in an electronic document developed before the workshop. Facilitators were provided with a seven-page instruction document to help them prepare for the workshop. Facilitators used a PowerPoint presentation for prompts to address topics to be covered in the discussion. The workshop consisted of a 15-minute welcome for all locations and participants. This was followed by four breakout sessions that focused on different topics (Table 1). The workshop concluded with each region summarizing its research needs to the statewide group. A social event with light refreshments followed the workshop.

General workshop outcomes

Participants created a list of high-priority challenges categorized as requiring short-, medium- and long-term or ongoing research efforts. The participants’ interests and concerns regarding hemp production varied by regions. For example, participants in Southwestern Oregon and the Willamette Valley were primarily interested in smokable flower and extracted cannabidiol (CBD) production, while Central Oregon, Columbia Basin and Eastern Oregon participants were mainly interested in CBD production. Also, participants in the Willamette Valley, Central Oregon and Eastern Oregon expressed interest in the evaluation of hemp for medicinal application. There was also interest in dual-purpose hemp varieties (that is, grown for both flower and fiber), particularly by Columbia Basin and Eastern Oregon participants. Regardless of the region, participants had a nominal interest in grain and fiber hemp production, which may be explained by the current lack of markets and processing infrastructure and the mandate that hemp pollen not be produced near feminized plants grown for flowers used in CBD production.

The first and second breakout sessions focused on individual hemp producers. In the first pair of breakout sessions, many agronomic challenges were unique to particular regions (Appendix A). Pollen drift and planting into black plastic were common challenges mentioned among all regions. Participants also brought up the lack of information about optimal planting density and harvesting techniques and technology.

All regions identified a need for breeding to improve hemp genetics. Other commonly mentioned needs included:

• The development of varieties adapted for specific climatic zones in the state.
• Varietal standardization along with decreased heterogeneity.
• Better genetic stability within varieties.
• The development and availability of dual-purpose varieties.

Most regions identified insect pests, plant diseases and weeds as challenges, although the specific pest problems varied among regions (Appendix A). Lack of water was identified as an issue in Central Oregon and would likely be acknowledged by producers in other regions of Oregon. Across most regions, participants were concerned about regulatory issues associated with THC restriction levels for hemp and the need for more and quicker registration of pesticides labeled for use in hemp. Southwestern Oregon and the Willamette Valley also expressed concern about a lack of information about the current market for smokable and CBD products. In breakout sessions, individuals brought up issues related to finding CBD extractors for small batches, easier access to hemp production, economic data and product statistics, and public education about products such as hempcrete.

An array of specific market and economic challenges were identified by individual regions. This included market instability, banking support, hurdles to marketing online and exploring new products. Infrastructure needs for various types of hemp production (such as cordage, hempcrete and grain) were identified by Eastern Oregon and Willamette Valley participants. Breakout session attendees expressed interest in general science information, commodity grading, and co-op establishments.

Session 3 focused on expanding the types of hemp production and associated hurdles. The problems identified were unique for each region, except for the need for information about fiber processing (Appendix A). There was interest in most areas, except for Southwestern Oregon, in expanding the types of hemp produced, depending on markets and infrastructure (Appendix A).

Session 4 examined roadblocks for novice hemp growers. Information on agronomy and pest management was identified for Southwestern Oregon and the Willamette Valley. Regulatory aspects were also highlighted as barriers for new hemp growers in several regions. Insufficient time was allotted in the workshop to discuss unique findings from individual regions to more fully assess their commonality to other regions in the state. Therefore, a Qualtrics survey was developed after the workshop to better assess the relative importance of the issues and ideas that were identified in the breakout sessions of the hybrid workshop.

2. Post-meeting Qualtrics survey

The post-workshop survey provided Oregon hemp industry stakeholders the opportunity to see the breadth of production challenges identified from the workshop activities and to rank the importance of identified issues for their farm or business. There were 20 questions in the survey. The first four questions asked for background information about the survey respondents, including their affiliation with the hemp industry in Oregon, how many years they have been producing hemp and which regions they represent. The remaining questions addressed the industry challenges identified in each topic area of the in-person workshop. Survey participants could rank specific challenges and identify other challenges or considerations. The survey was open to all workshop participants and hemp growers, processors, seed producers, seed company representatives, pesticide stakeholders, researchers and educators, and any other stakeholders unable to join the meeting. Fifty-seven participants responded to the online survey.

3. Survey outcomes

Agronomy and production issues

Respondents noted nutrient management (61%) as an important issue, followed by optimization of the harvesting system (54%), pollen management (53%), and current cropping system (50%) (Table 2). The topics considered less important included irrigation management and THC remediation.

Genetics, varieties and phytochemistry issues

The majority of respondents reported that the development of varieties adapted for fiber harvest, increased availability of hemp varieties with stable genetics, development of varieties adapted to specific climatic conditions and research on other hemp component phytochemicals beyond CBD and CBG (cannabigerol) as important industry needs (Table 3). Topics considered less important included varietal standardization and decreased heterogeneity within varieties, development of dual-purpose hemp varieties, drought-resistant varieties and varieties where preharvest THC levels are not elevated after drying and stripping.

Insects, mites and rodent issues

In regard to pest issues, respondents noted there was a lack of information about safe-use patterns for insecticide applications in and around hemp. This was considered the most important need, followed by damage caused by corn earworm (Helicoverpa zea) or other bud-feeding caterpillars and faster and/or more insecticide registrations for use in hemp in Oregon (Table 4). Rodent chewing damage, aphids, seed corn maggots, grasshoppers and early insect control for direct seeding were considered of lesser importance.

Plant disease issues

Most respondents identified safe-use patterns for fungicide application in hemp and around hemp and faster and/or more fungicide registrations for hemp as important industry needs. Respondents perceived diseases caused by gray mold and bud rot (Botrytis) and powdery mildew as most important (Table 5). Sclerotinia white mold, Fusarium diseases, beet curly top virus and hop latent viroid were perceived as less important. Verticillium wilt and leaf spot diseases were the lowest-ranked disease problems.

Weed issues

Most respondents identified safe-use patterns for herbicide applications in hemp and around hemp as their primary need, and weed suppression with cover or row cropping as their primary challenge (Table 6). Respondents would like faster and/or more registrations of herbicides for hemp. A few specific weed species (kochia, tumbleweed, etc.) were identified as problems but were ranked lower among their concerns.

Issues surrounding knowledge and information availability

Some issues stood out as important, including access to production and marketing data, information on extractors and processors, background information on hemp varieties, pest management information and ease of navigation of current Oregon hemp production rules and regulations (Table 7). The majority of respondents considered guidelines on hemp production as important and information on phytochemistry components as less important.

Oregon infrastructure issue

Respondents identified a need for general scientific information on growing hemp and infrastructure for fiber production (Table 8). The majority of respondents thought that infrastructure for grain and CBD production was also important. The lowest-ranked topics included infrastructure for floral production, product classification criteria and finding extractors willing to process small amounts of hemp.

Market and economic issues

Participants identified several key topics, including insurance and banking support, which is not currently available for hemp growers; market research for hemp paper, cordage and hempcrete; and research on factors that influence market stability (such as marketing rules, infrastructure, channels, options, supply and demand) (Table 9). Most respondents considered the potential for and level of economic return of different types of hemp crops to be important. Topics considered less important included developing a co-op for the sale of hemp products, research on marketing for hemp residuals such as stem and leaf materials from smokable/CBD-type hemp and dynamic enterprise budgets to look at multiyear rotations.

Issues surrounding federal rules and regulation

The most important issues were current federal or state rules regulating THC levels and current protocols used by the Oregon Department of Agriculture to test THC levels (Table 10). Most participants also ranked as important research and federal approval of hemp for animal feed, creation of a pinning map for protection of hemp fields from unwanted pollen dispersal and remediation of illegal cannabis production and/or wild plants. Significant but less important issues were the establishment of flower zones, barriers to advertising and brand promotion, and the 30-day harvesting window requirement after preharvest testing.

4. Conclusions

Oregon hemp growers and industry members are experiencing numerous and varied challenges associated with hemp agronomy and production, variety development, pest management, information availability, infrastructure, marketing and regulation. These growers and industry members identified as top issues the need for general science information on growing hemp that is supported by scientific data, increasing the THC levels allowed in hemp above the current threshold of 0.3% and sampling/testing protocols conducted by the Oregon Department of Agriculture. Specific needs that were deemed as most important included:

Agronomy and production

• Nutrient management for specific regions.
• Optimization of harvesting and cropping systems.
• Pollen management.

Variety development

• Varieties with stable genetics.
• Varieties adapted for fiber harvest.
• Varieties adapted for specific climatic conditions.

Pest management

• Safe-use patterns for fungicide, insecticide and herbicide application in and around hemp.
• Faster and more registrations of fungicide, insecticide and herbicide products.

Information availability

• Access to production and marketing data.
• Information on extractors/processors, hemp varieties and best pest management practices.
• Production rules and regulations presented in an understandable format.

Infrastructure, marketing and regulatory

• Scientific information on growing hemp.
• Infrastructures for grain and CBD production.
• Insurance and banking support.
• Market research for hemp paper, cordage and hempcrete.
• Research on factors that influence market stability.
• Federal or state rules and regulations for THC levels, including sampling and testing protocols used by the Oregon Department of Agriculture.

In conclusion, the workshop and follow-up survey identified top hemp industry needs for research and Extension. Through the participatory discussions and activities that were conducted, a framework of needs has been developed. This framework will serve as a guide for research and outreach by Oregon State University and others affiliated with the Oregon hemp industry.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Oregon State University Extension Service, the College of Agricultural Sciences, and the Global Hemp Innovation Center. We thank the growers, consultants and associated industry stakeholders who participated in the needs assessment. We are grateful to partner organizations, the Oregon Department of Agriculture and the Oregon Industrial Hemp Farmers Association, who shared the need assessment workshop information through their networks. We appreciate help from the OSU Extension Technology and Media Support team for providing logistical support for the online participation, as well as Dr. William J. Thomas and Rick Hilton for taking notes during the workshop.

Appendix A. Summary of Findings from 2022 Oregon Statewide Hemp Industry Research Needs Workshop