U.S.

Department of Justice
National Drug Intelligence Center
Product No. 2007-L0848-001
February 2007

Domestic Cannabis
Cultivation Assessment 2007
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Table of Contents
Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Key Judgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Primary Cannabis Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Cannabis Cultivation Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Outdoor Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Indoor Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Violence, Countersurveillance, and Camouflage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Associated Environmental Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Eradication Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Intelligence Gaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix A. Primary Cannabis Cultivation Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Western Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
California . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appalachian Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Indoor Cannabis Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

i
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Appendix B. Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

ii
 U.S. Department of Justice
National Drug Intelligence Center
Assessment
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007
26 February 2007
Purpose
The Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assess-
ment 2007 is a national-level strategic assess-
ment of cannabis cultivation and marijuana
production in the United States. This assessment
addresses major trends in domestic cannabis
cultivation, both indoor and outdoor, with a
focus on cannabis cultivation operations in pri-
mary areas of production at the state and county
levels. This assessment addresses wide-ranging
issues regarding cultivation operations, includ-
ing planting and harvesting seasons; use or pres-
ence of weapons, booby traps, and counter-
surveillance; resultant environmental damage;
and the operational trends of drug trafficking
organizations and other criminal groups. This
assessment draws upon reporting and data pro-
vided by the Office of National Drug Control
Policy, the National Marijuana Initiative (see
text box on page 2), and numerous federal, state,
and local law enforcement agencies.
Key Judgments
• Domestic cannabis cultivation has
increased sharply since 2000 as more drug
trafficking organizations (DTOs) relocate
cannabis cultivation operations from Mex-
ico and Canada to the United States. These
DTOs are relocating to reduce the risk of
marijuana seizure or loss during cross-
border transport, gain direct access to local
drug markets, and achieve higher profit
margins for domestically produced mari-
juana, particularly higher-grade marijuana.
1
Product No. 2007-L0848-001
• Domestic outdoor cannabis cultivation by
Mexican DTOs is most prevalent in remote
and isolated areas of U.S. public and pri-
vate lands, primarily in California, Oregon,
and Washington.
• Mexican DTOs are expanding cannabis
cultivation operations eastward, including
into some areas east of the Mississippi
River, such as North Carolina and Tennes-
see, in order to increase their role in
domestic marijuana distribution and to be
closer to eastern drug markets.
• Many Mexican criminal groups that have
established grow sites in new areas of the
country maintain direct contact and affilia-
tion with larger DTOs in California and
Mexico and maintain a level of coordina-
tion among operating areas, moving labor
and materials to the various sites—even
across the country—as needed.
• Indoor domestic cannabis cultivation is
increasing as criminal groups attempt to
avoid intensified outdoor eradication, reduce
their risk of detection, and produce higher
potency marijuana to increase their profits.
• Caucasian criminal groups are the predom-
inant indoor producers of marijuana in the
country; they are particularly active in the
Appalachian Region.
• Domestic cannabis cultivation by Asian
DTOs at indoor locations is increasing, a
particular concern because many are well-
organized, Canada-based groups that pro-
duce and distribute high potency marijuana.
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

National Marijuana Initiative

The National Marijuana Initiative (NMI), funded by the Office of National Drug Control Policy
(ONDCP), was established in 2001 to coordinate federal, state, and local agencies in areas
that produce the largest amounts of marijuana in order to significantly reduce cannabis culti-
vation. The Initiative is specifically intended to foster partnerships among agencies in states
where DTO operations impact federal lands. The NMI is designed to assist in the investiga-
tions of DTOs operating in the seven primary cannabis cultivation and marijuana production
states (often referred to as the M7 states): California, Hawaii, Kentucky, Oregon, Tennes-
see, Washington, and West Virginia. The NMI supports law enforcement efforts in identifying
the infrastructure of marijuana DTOs through expanded investigations and collection of intel-
ligence in an attempt to disrupt and eventually dismantle the organizations.

• Violent incidents by outdoor cannabis grow- factors have contributed to a continued

ers against law enforcement and the pres-
ence of weapons at outdoor grow sites are
increasing, most likely because of increased
law enforcement pressure and eradication.
• Rising law enforcement pressure—
although clearly a concern to cultivators
as evidenced by increasing violence and
weapons—has not yet stemmed the
increase in domestic cannabis cultivation,
either outdoors or indoors. Rather, DTOs
are simply adapting their methods (relo-
cating to new areas, changing their grow-
ing cycles, and growing higher potency
plants both indoors and outdoors) in order
to continue operating in the United States
while maintaining their profits.
Overview
Following September 11 and the resultant
increased border security, law enforcement
reporting indicates that DTOs—primarily
Mexican but also Canada-based Asian DTOs
(see Table 1 on page 3)—had moved many of
their cannabis cultivation operations into the
United States in an attempt to reduce the risk
of marijuana seizure during cross-border trans-
port. Since then, however, DTOs have recog-
nized additional benefits of domestic cannabis
cultivation, such as direct access to local drug
markets, which enable them to be more respon-
sive to market demands, and higher profit mar-
gins for domestically grown marijuana. These
increase in domestic cannabis cultivation, an
assertion seemingly supported by an overall
increase in detection and eradication of out-
door cannabis during that time period (see
Table 2 on page 3). Recent increases in domes-
tic cannabis cultivation have been accompa-
nied by improved cultivation techniques that
produce higher potency marijuana, a practice
that, if more widely used by DTOs, could sig-
nificantly increase the prevalence of higher
potency marijuana in the United States.
Primary Cannabis Cultivation Areas
According to national marijuana eradica-
tion data and law enforcement reporting,
there are two primary outdoor cultivation
regions in the United States: the Western
Region, composed of California, Hawaii,
Oregon, and Washington, and the Appala-
chian Region, composed of Kentucky, Ten-
nessee, and West Virginia. Eradication data
for 2006 show that 89 percent (5,262,065 of
5,901,880) of outdoor plants eradicated in the
United States were eradicated in these seven
states (see Table 3 on page 4, and Map 1 in
Appendix B). These states consistently sus-
tain high levels of outdoor cannabis cultiva-
tion because their climates are conducive to
cannabis cultivation. As a result, cultiva-
tors—especially Mexican DTOs in the West-
ern Region and Caucasian independent
growers in the Appalachian Region—have

2
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Table 1. Primary Cultivators in Leading Cannabis-Growing Areas

Region State Outdoor Indoor
Caucasian DTOs, criminal groups,
Kentucky Caucasian independent growers
and independent growers

Caucasian DTOs, criminal groups,

Appalachian Region Tennessee Caucasian independent growers
and independent growers

Caucasian DTOs, criminal groups,

West Virginia Caucasian independent growers
and independent growers

Asian and Caucasian DTOs and crim-

California Mexican DTOs and criminal groups
inal groups

Polynesian DTOs, Asian and Cau-

Hawaii Asian and Caucasian groups
casian criminal groups
Western Region
Asian and Caucasian DTOs and crim-
Oregon Mexican DTOs and criminal groups
inal groups

Asian and Caucasian DTOs and crim-

Washington Mexican DTOs and criminal groups
inal groups

Caucasian criminal groups and

Alabama NA
independent growers

Arizona Mexican DTOs and criminal groups NA

Caucasian and Cuban DTOs and

Florida NA
Other Areas of Interest criminal groups

Caucasian criminal groups and

Georgia NA
independent growers

Caucasian DTOs, criminal groups,

North Carolina NA
and independent growers
NA–not applicable

Table 2. Domestic Cannabis Eradication, Outdoor and Indoor Plant Seizures, 2000–2006
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Outdoor 2,597,798 3,068,632 3,128,800 3,427,923 2,996,225 3,938,151 4,083,433

Indoor 217,105 236,128 213,040 223,183 203,896 270,935 403,322

Total 2,814,903 3,304,760 3,341,840 3,651,106 3,200,121 4,209,086 4,486,755

Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.

established long-standing, entrenched and North Carolina; these areas have

growing operations. Other areas of increas- recently experienced significant increases in
ing significance with regard to cannabis cul- outdoor cultivation.
tivation include Alabama, Arizona, Georgia,

3
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Table 3. Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated Table 4. Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated
in Primary Outdoor Production States in Primary Indoor Production States
2005–2006 2005–2006
Percent of Percent of
State 2005 2006 State 2005 2006
Change Change
California 2,914,193 3,674,069 +26.1 California 107,047 203,559 +90.2

Kentucky 734,351 557,628 -24.1 Washington 32,936 43,416 +31.8

Tennessee 462,904 483,231 +4.4 Florida 45,217 36,172 -20.0

Hawaii 251,163 188,742 -24.9 Hawaii 3,950 12,358 +212.9

Oregon 84,493 187,548 +122.0 New Hampshire 304 11,085 +3,546.4

Washington 137,319 115,459 -15.9 Five-State Total 189,454 306,590 +61.8

West Virginia 56,758 55,388 -2.4 National Total 270,935 403,322 +48.9

Seven-State Total 4,641,181 5,262,065 +13.4 Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program;
U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture
National Total 5,546,509 5,901,880 +6.4 Forest Service.

Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression program;

U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service. Table 5. Total Cannabis Plants Eradicated
in Primary Production States, 2005–2006
Indoor cannabis cultivation appears to be
Percent of
most pervasive in western states, primarily in State 2005 2006
Change
California and Washington (see Table 4, and
Map 2 in Appendix B). Eradication data for California 3,021,240 3,877,628 +28.3

2006 indicate that 61 percent (246,975 of Kentucky 736,991 558,756 -24.2

403,322) of indoor plants eradicated nation-
Tennessee 463,557 483,342 +4.3
ally were eradicated in California and Wash-
ington alone. Cannabis is cultivated by a Hawaii 255,113 201,100 -21.2
variety of growers, including Caucasian crim- Oregon 91,829 194,453 +111.8
inal groups and independent dealers; how-
Washington 170,255 158,875 -6.7
ever, cultivation by Canada-based Asian
DTOs is increasing significantly. West Virginia 57,600 57,582 0.0

Law enforcement reporting indicates excep- Seven-State Total 4,796,585 5,531,736 +15.3
tionally high levels of cannabis cultivation National Total 5,817,444 6,305,202 +8.4
(indoor and outdoor combined) in California, Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program;
Kentucky, Tennessee, Hawaii, Oregon, Wash- U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture
ington, and West Virginia. Total cannabis Forest Service.

eradication suggests that these seven states

constitute the most significant cannabis culti-
vation states overall (see Table 5, and Map 3 in
Appendix B).

4
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Cannabis Cultivation Trends States. Many of these groups maintain direct

contact and affiliation with larger DTOs in Cal-
Outdoor Cultivation ifornia and Mexico and maintain a level of
Some Mexican DTOs are shifting cannabis coordination among operating areas, moving
cultivation away from intense eradication labor and materials to the various sites—even
areas—even into eastern states—a shift that across the country—as needed.
may enable these DTOs to further increase
Mexican DTOs’ extensive use of public
domestic cannabis cultivation. Mexican DTOs
lands for cannabis cultivation is increasing,
are relocating some of their operations to loca-
even in areas that generally are not consid-
tions north and east of their principal operating
ered conducive to planting and growing can-
areas in California, seemingly to avoid
nabis. Mexican DTOs commonly grow
improved aerial detection and eradication in the
cannabis in remote areas of public lands, where
state. This move will enable them to increase
there is limited law enforcement presence. The
cultivation in remote areas that have never been
occurrence of cannabis cultivation on public
cultivated. In 1999 Mexican DTOs began relo-
lands has increased significantly over the past
cating some of their operations from northern
several years, largely the result of increased
California into Oregon, Washington, and cen-
domestic cultivation operations by Mexican
tral Idaho. In 2003 Mexican DTOs established
DTOs. In 2005 cannabis cultivation on
more cannabis grow sites in Idaho and in areas
National Forest System (NFS) lands nation-
east of the Mississippi River, such as remote
wide rose sharply, reaching the highest levels
areas of Arkansas and Georgia. Recently, these
ever observed by law enforcement—a 49.6
groups have established outdoor grow sites in
percent increase from 744,276 plants eradicated
other areas of Arizona and in western North
in 2004 to 1,113,446 plants in 2005. This trend
Carolina and eastern Tennessee. Mexican can-
continued in 2006 as eradication rose an addi-
nabis growers operating large-scale grows east
tional 26 percent between 2005 and 2006
of the Mississippi River are increasingly being
(1,403,023). More cannabis plants were eradi-
linked to Mexican DTOs operating in Califor-
cated in national forests in California than in
nia and Mexico, suggesting a coordinated effort
any other state nationwide in 2006 (1,133,563,
with respect to domestic cannabis cultivation
or 81 percent of total NFS eradications), with
by Mexican DTOs that now spans the United

Cannabis Cultivation in Arizona: An Increasing Concern

Elevated cannabis cultivation and eradication totals in Arizona in 2005 were somewhat surprising
to some law enforcement officials because of the large amounts of Mexican marijuana available
within the state. According to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Arizona High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA), law enforcement authorities are continuing to see an
influx of cannabis cultivation operations in the state. In 2005 law enforcement authorities seized
115,215 plants from seven sites in the Coconino and Tonto Forests, according to NFS data. As
of November 30, 2006, approximately 21 cannabis cultivation operations and a total of 72,549
plants were eradicated from Arizona national forests. Moreover, according to the U.S. Depart-
ment of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, approximately 12 of these sites were tended by Mex-
ican foreign nationals. Despite the apparent decline in the number of plants seized between
2005 and 2006, the number of sites eradicated increased, and the area in which operations were
eradicated expanded to cover three national forests (see Maps 4 and 5 in Appendix B). NFS data
indicate that in 2006, 21 cultivation sites were eradicated in national forests in Arizona: 17 in
Tonto, 2 in Prescott, and 2 in Coconino.

5
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

most plants eradicated within the mountainous Table 6. Top 10 National Forests for
areas of Mendocino National Forest of northern Eradication of Cannabis Plants on
California (405,399), followed by San Bernar- National Forest System Lands, 2006
dino National Forest (157,994). NFS also
Total Plants
reports significant cannabis eradication in National Forest State
Eradicated
national forests beyond California, specifically
in Daniel Boone National Forest in Kentucky 1. Mendocino California 405,399
(148,828); and in Tonto National Forest in Ari- 2. San Bernardino California 157,994
zona (65,947). No Mexican DTO activity has
3. Daniel Boone Kentucky 148,828
been reported in Kentucky (see Table 6, and
Map 6 in Appendix B). 4. Shasta-Trinity California 118,797
Following consecutive annual record-level 5. Sequoia California 89,585
eradication since 2004, some cultivators who
6. Los Padres California 80,796
previously limited their operations to areas with
optimal weather, elevation, and slope character- 7. Tonto Arizona 65,947
istics have relocated to areas where growing 8. Stanislaus California 65,072
conditions are less conducive to cannabis culti-
vation. For example, Department of the Interior 9. Sierra California 60,866
(DOI) officials report that some cultivators are 10. Plumas California 55,673
relocating from coastal areas that are well- Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
suited for growing to California’s inland foot-
hills and more arid areas, planting under low- Mexican DTOs in California are producing
cover brush such as chaparral. Cultivators are higher potency marijuana from cannabis cul-
also relocating to other nonconducive growing tivated in some large outdoor grow sites, the
areas outside of California, including eastern result of improved cultivation techniques. In
Oregon, eastern Washington, eastern Idaho, and 2006 law enforcement reporting from several
the western slope of the Rocky Mountains. agencies revealed that some Mexican DTOs
Despite relocating to nontraditional growing that had previously produced marijuana with
areas, cultivators must maintain access to a average THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol)
water source. For instance, law enforcement levels of 2 or 3 percent from outdoor cultivated
reporting from San Bernardino County, Califor- cannabis began achieving 8 to 12 percent THC
nia, indicates that a several-thousand-plant levels by applying growing methods typically
grow was found covering nearly 2 square miles used by indoor growers of high potency can-
after officials responded to a wildfire in Little nabis. These DTOs typically use only select
Morongo Canyon. Although this area is particu- seeds from Mexico, prepare the seedlings in
larly arid, the grow site was within a mile of a greenhouses, plant the seedlings outdoors before
natural spring. Law enforcement officials late April, separate male from female plants
expect that grow sites will continue to be estab- prior to pollination, and use high-nitrogen fertil-
lished by cultivators at remote sites in nontypi- izer. Moreover, these DTOs are increasingly
cal growing areas as eradication efforts continue using cloned starter plants (see text box), irriga-
in traditional growing areas. tion systems composed of black polyethylene
(also known as PVC) drip lines extending to
each plant, and pesticides. The higher potency
marijuana produced from outdoor plants in
California often is comparable in quality to

6
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

U.S. Public Lands

U.S. Department of the Interior
The DOI is the primary conservation agency in the United States and manages 525 million acres
of land (23 percent of the land in the country), including 523 miles along the 3,987-mile U.S.–
Canada border and 782 miles along the 1,952-mile U.S.–Mexico border. The DOI comprises five
bureaus with law enforcement authority—the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Park
Service (NPS), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and Bureau of
Reclamation (BOR). Indian reservations are federal lands held in trust for the Indian Nations.
U.S. Department of Agriculture National Forest System
National Forest System lands, managed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service,
consist of 191.6 million acres of federally owned reserves composed of 155 national forests
and 22 national grasslands in 42 states and Puerto Rico. NFS lands adjoin approximately 700
miles of the U.S.–Canada border and nearly 60 miles of the U.S.–Mexico border.

Cloned Starter Plants

Cloned starter plants enable cannabis cultivators to select higher quality plants and avoid
male/female pollination, thereby raising potential THC content. Cloning a cannabis plant is
accomplished by simply taking a cutting of a select plant, allowing the cutting to sprout roots,
and then planting it as a seedling, thereby creating a plant of the same genetic makeup as the
parent plant. The use of clones also ensures that the plants will be well-established with a root
system when planted, thereby increasing the chance of a successful maturation process.
Cloned starter plants are increasingly being grown in California and Oregon and, to a lesser
extent, in Appalachian states, including Kentucky and Tennessee.

Canada-produced BC Bud1 and commands twice
the price of commercial-grade Mexican mari-
juana available in the region. Although data
regarding the number of eradicated, higher
potency outdoor grow sites are not available, this
practice still appears to be limited but is likely to
increase as other Mexican DTOs and U.S. Cau-
casian cannabis growers adopt these methods.
Outdoor cannabis cultivators are adapting
their cultivation and harvesting methods in
order to maximize profits and reduce the risk
of eradication. In 2006 law enforcement offi-
cials in several areas of the country, particularly
California and Tennessee, reported that cultiva-
tors were changing their cultivation process
from a single planting to two-crop plantings
with shortened growing cycles. Cultivators
achieve two growing cycles by planting specific
cannabis strains that mature faster or by plant-
ing seedlings earlier in the spring. Cultivators in
California, for example, are planting cannabis
that buds earlier than most varieties and matures
as early as June or July. Cannabis that is culti-
vated in the spring is harvested in early July,
and the plot is replanted, allowing for an addi-
tional harvest in September or October. Addi-
tionally, law enforcement officials have
reported that cultivators are harvesting as many
plants as practical, including marginally mature
plants, immediately prior to the height of eradi-
cation season or before eradication efforts move
into the area, in order to avoid the risk of an
entire crop seizure (see Figure 1 on page 8).

1. BC Bud, which originally referred to sinsemilla grown in British Columbia, has become synonymous with high-
grade marijuana from Canada. The THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) content of BC Bud ranges from an aver-
age of 10 to 15 percent but can be as high as 30 percent.

7
 Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007
NDIC
Figure 1. Crop harvested prior to eradication
efforts in Napa County, California, September 2006.
Outdoor cannabis cultivation by Caucasian
criminal groups in western states is relatively
low compared with that of Mexican DTOs;
however, cultivation by Caucasian growers in
Appalachian states is high and may be
increasing. While Mexican DTOs dominate
cannabis cultivation in western states, Cauca-
sian criminal groups and independent growers
control most cannabis cultivation in the Appala-
chian Region. Most of the criminal groups oper-
ating grow sites in Kentucky, Tennessee, and
West Virginia are typically composed of three
to eight Caucasian males who are related along
family lines. In fact, many of these family-based
groups have been involved in marijuana cultiva-
tion and trafficking for decades, spanning sev-
eral generations. Moreover, cannabis cultivation
by Caucasian growers is often accepted by the
local populace as a means for supplementing
incomes in economically depressed Appala-
chian communities. Eradication efforts in many
8
areas of Appalachia have increased in recent
years; however, cultivation also appears to be
increasing as cultivators relocate to areas
where eradication efforts are less intense.
Indoor Cultivation
Domestic indoor cannabis cultivation is
increasing in some areas of the country as
growers attempt to avoid outdoor eradication
and attain higher profits through production
of indoor-grown, high potency marijuana.
According to law enforcement reporting, vig-
orous outdoor cannabis eradication has caused
many marijuana producers in areas of Califor-
nia and Tennessee to relocate indoors where
production is more concealed (see text box
titled Indoor Grow Sites on page 9). In addi-
tion to a reduced risk of detection, indoor can-
nabis cultivators benefit from higher profits
because cultivation is a year-round process
with four to six harvests per year and con-
trolled conditions that enable growers to pro-
duce high quality marijuana that commands
higher prices in most drug markets. For exam-
ple, according to drug price data from the
National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC)
December 2006 National Illicit Drug Prices,
domestic midgrade marijuana grown outdoors
in Los Angeles sold for $700 to $750 per
pound, whereas high potency marijuana sold
for $2,500 to $6,000 per pound. This price dif-
ference is common in drug markets throughout
the country. These factors have contributed to
the sharp increase in indoor cultivation
reported by law enforcement, evidenced by a
71 percent increase in indoor plant eradication
from 2001 (236,128 plants) to 2006 (403,322
plants). Moreover, the number of indoor sites
seized increased 38 percent from 2001 (2,379
sites) to 2006 (3,286 sites).
Many Canada-based Asian DTOs that
cultivate cannabis at indoor grow sites are
relocating from Canada to the United States.
Canada-based Asian groups (primarily ethnic
Vietnamese and Chinese groups) are operating
Product No. 2007-L0848-001
Indoor Grow Sites
Indoor cultivation sites range from a single
closet to entire houses or buildings that are
converted into sophisticated grow opera-
tions. Indoor cannabis cultivators frequently
employ advanced agricultural practices
such as plant cloning; hydroponics; auto-
matic light metering, irrigation, and fertiliz-
ing; and refined insecticides to enhance the
rate of growth. Hydroponics is a particularly
effective cultivation method, especially at
indoor locations; however, it is not always
preferred by growers over traditional soil
cultivation. In fact, law enforcement report-
ing indicates that soil cultivation is preferred
over hydroponics by some groups, including
Asian DTOs operating indoor grows in
Washington and Cuban DTOs operating
indoor grows in southern Florida.
an increasing number of indoor grow sites
within the United States, predominantly in the
Pacific Northwest and throughout much of
California. However, indoor grow sites are
emerging in northeastern states, including
those in New England. To this end, prelimi-
nary law enforcement reporting suggests that
some of the Asian-operated indoor grows in
New England are linked to Asian organiza-
tions based in Canada. The emergence of
Asian-operated indoor grows in northeastern
states parallels the recent appearance of grow
sites controlled by Asian DTOs in eastern Can-
ada (Ontario and Quebec) reported by the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)—
Asian-operated grow sites typically have been
located in western Canada (British Colombia).
The extent of this activity has been difficult for
law enforcement to establish, since most Asian
DTOs that cultivate cannabis in the United
States are tight-knit, family-based groups that
are difficult to infiltrate. Asian DTOs often
conceal their indoor operations by purchasing
or renting houses, modifying the structure for
the purpose of cultivating high-grade cannabis,
and quickly abandoning the premises after
9
National Drug Intelligence Center
harvesting only four to six high potency crops.
In many instances, these DTOs spend thou-
sands of dollars to modify and equip their
indoor grow sites. For example, Asian DTOs
purchase and install advanced hydroponic
growing equipment such as grow lights, auto-
matically timed watering and fertilizing sys-
tems, and exhaust systems with large charcoal
HEPA filters. Sophisticated operations often
bypass electric meters, thereby eliminating
high-energy usage readings, large electricity
bills, and possible law enforcement scrutiny.
Seizure of Asian Indoor Grow Operations
in Elk Grove, California
On August 29, 2006, law enforcement
authorities reported that over 10,000 mari-
juana plants were seized from 14 Elk Grove,
California, area residences as part of an
investigation into Asian DTO-operated
indoor marijuana growing operations in the
San Francisco Bay area. According to DEA,
the electricity to each home had been
rewired to bypass the electric meter,
thereby creating a significant fire hazard
(see Figure 2 on page 10).
Cannabis cultivation in Florida has
increased dramatically in recent years, led by
an increasing number of indoor grow sites
operated by Cuban DTOs and criminal orga-
nizations. Indoor cannabis cultivation occurs in
many counties throughout Florida (see Map 7 in
Appendix B) and greatly exceeds that of out-
door cultivation in Florida, according to the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement
(FDLE). The predominance of indoor grows in
Florida is evidenced by the number of indoor
seizures (36,172 plants) compared with outdoor
seizures (10,354 plants) in 2006 (see Table 7 on
page 10). The FDLE further reports that the
number of indoor cannabis grows operated by
Cuban organizations in South Florida has
increased sharply and is the leading cause of the
increase in indoor grow seizures between 2001
(210) and 2006 (384). Cuban organizations
 Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007
City of Elk Grove, California, Police Department
Figure 2. Hazardous electrical diversion in an Elk Grove, California, indoor cannabis grow site.
Table 7. Number of Cannabis Plants Eradicated in Florida at Indoor
and Outdoor Grow Sites, 2001–2006
2001 2002
Indoor 15,151 19,506
Outdoor 13,055 18,348
Total 28,206 37,854
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
reportedly operate indoor grows throughout
Broward, Collier, Hendry, Miami-Dade, Palm
Beach, and St. Lucie Counties in Florida.
Cuban-operated indoor grows are not highly
sophisticated but are somewhat advanced, often
utilizing partial residence grows, single-room
air conditioners or multiple air conditioning-
units concealed behind fences, and insulated
walls and windows designed to conceal the heat
signature produced by grow lights.
Violence, Countersurveillance,
and Camouflage
Cannabis cultivation operations are deliber-
ately located by growers in remote areas of
public and private lands to lessen the chance of
discovery from passersby or law enforcement.
These sites are often concealed by camouflage
and protected by armed guards conducting
countersurveillance. Some sites are also
2003 2004 2005 2006
21,442 21,879 45,217 36,172
16,302 6,127 29,646 10,354
37,744 28,006 74,863 46,526
protected by potentially life-threatening booby
traps. These operations pose a particular threat
to unwitting visitors, hunters, and hikers who
often enter the remote areas where grow sites
are located and are confronted—and some-
times fired upon—by armed guards.
Cannabis growers, particularly Mexican
DTOs in California and Washington, are
becoming more aggressive in protecting culti-
vation sites. Since 2003 the number of armed
encounters between law enforcement officers
and cannabis grow-site operators in California
and Washington has significantly increased.
Cannabis cultivators are employing armed
guards who are strategically stationed at eleva-
tions above the grow site in order to detect
approaching law enforcement scouts—usually
one or two officers scouting remote areas for
grow sites. Over the past 3 years these guards,
10
Product No. 2007-L0848-001
armed with weapons ranging from pellet guns
to assault rifles, have increasingly engaged law
enforcement officials in armed standoffs and,
on several occasions, have exchanged gunfire
with law enforcement scouts. These guards
attempt to repel the patrols long enough for crop
tenders to harvest as much of the cannabis as
possible before a larger law enforcement contin-
gent returns to eradicate the site. According to
law enforcement officials, armed individuals
are increasingly protecting cannabis crops
because of their high value, increased competi-
tion with other growers, and increasing eradica-
tion pressure, and because many crop tenders,
who are illegal aliens, must harvest the crop as
payment to a Mexican DTO for their entry into
the United States. Armed encounters between
grow-site operators and private citizens report-
edly are infrequent; however, the likelihood of
such encounters is increasing, particularly since
DTOs are establishing more outdoor grow sites
on public lands, including national parks and
game lands, especially in northern California.
One such confrontation occurred in October
2006, when a man hunting in a remote location
within the Mendocino National Forest was fired
upon by four individuals after he inadvertently
approached the edge of a cannabis grow site.
Additionally, in June 2006, two individuals near
a grow site in a remote area north of Covelo,
California, were shot and killed.
The use of unattended booby traps by Mex-
ican DTOs at large outdoor cultivation opera-
tions in western states has decreased over the
past several years—armed guards are now
preferred. Until the mid- to late 1990s, Mexi-
can DTOs frequently protected outdoor can-
nabis grow sites from intrusion with
potentially lethal booby traps. Typical booby
traps included fishhooks strung from trees, rat
traps configured with shot gun shells designed
to discharge when tripped, trip lines, and ani-
mal traps. Since the late 1990s, however, culti-
vators have increasingly employed armed
guards, and at larger plots they often employ
11
National Drug Intelligence Center
several additional individuals (typically two
who tend the site on a rotating basis). As a
result, law enforcement officials are encoun-
tering fewer booby-trapped sites. However,
unlike law enforcement officials in western
states, the Kentucky State Police (KSP)
reported an increase in booby trap use in
smaller, usually unattended, outdoor cannabis
plots in 2006. Growers in Kentucky, predomi-
nantly Caucasian independent growers, use a
variety of booby traps, including punji sticks
(see Figure 3)—which may be camouflaged by
leaves and brush or incorporated into pits—
and explosive devices to reduce the risk of
crop theft.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Figure 3. Punji stick boards seized from cannabis
cultivation operations in Kentucky, 2006.
The use of camouflage and countersurveil-
lance by outdoor cannabis cultivators is com-
mon and often effective. Law enforcement
reporting from leading cultivation states,
including California, Kentucky, and Oregon,
indicates that grow-site operators commonly
camouflage marijuana crops by planting can-
nabis under tree canopies to conceal the crop
from aerial surveillance. Some cultivators also
camouflage their crops by commingling can-
nabis with legitimate crops. Tents and equip-
ment used by plot tenders also are often
camouflaged with netting or painted in camou-
flage colors and patterns. To further evade
detection, cultivators often employ methods of
countersurveillance to monitor activity in their
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

area. The plot tenders’ most common method
of countersurveillance is simply patrolling a
grow site to observe any human activity. Addi-
tionally, the Oregon Department of Justice
reports that some plot tenders in that state are
beginning to sweep trails leading to grow sites
free from signs of foot traffic; they later check
trails for footprints as a method of monitoring
movement in the area.
Associated Environmental Damage
Outdoor cannabis cultivation, particularly
on public lands, is causing increasing envi-
ronmental damage. Outdoor cannabis cultiva-
tion poses significant environmental concerns
for law enforcement and other public agencies.
Grow site operators often contaminate and alter
watersheds; divert natural water courses; clear-
cut native vegetation; poach protected wildlife;
discard garbage, nonbiodegradable materials,
and human waste at deserted sites; and create
wildfire hazards. Moreover, the National Parks
Conservation Association (NPCA) reports that
while preparing land for cannabis cultivation,
growers commonly clear the forest understory,
which allows nonnative plants to supplant
native ones, adversely affecting the eco-system.
They also terrace the land—especially in
mountainous areas—which results in rapid
erosion. The cost of restoring land damaged by
such outdoor cultivation is significant; the
National Park Service estimates that for every
acre of forest planted with marijuana, 10 acres
are damaged, and further, the cost to repair and
restore an outdoor cultivation site is approxi-
mately $11,000 per acre.
Outdoor cannabis cultivators are diverting
streams and creeks for irrigation, sometimes
draining natural streams and wetlands. Out-
door cannabis plots typically are irrigated with
intricate watering systems. Cultivators often
dam up streams and redirect the water through
plastic gravity-fed irrigation tubing to supply
water to individual plants (see Figure 5 on page
13). Average size marijuana plots—approxi-
mately 1,000 plants—require up to 5,000 gal-
lons of water daily. This high demand for water
often strains small streams and damages down-
stream vegetation that depends on consistent
water flow. For example, on October 4, 2006,
law enforcement authorities eradicated a 1,200-
plant cultivation operation in San Ramon, Con-
tra Costa County after Park Rangers were
alerted that water was no longer running in a
nearby mountain stream. Cultivators had
diverted the stream, building a reservoir for
crop irrigation.

Dangerous Poisons From Mexico Polluting California National Forests

According to NFS and California Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement Campaign Against Mari-
juana Planting (CAMP), law enforcement officials are increasingly encountering dumpsites of
highly toxic insecticides, chemical repellants, and poisons (see Figure 4 on page 13) that are
produced in Mexico, purchased by Mexican criminal groups, and transported into the country
for use at their cannabis grow sites. Although similar chemicals could be purchased in the
United States, many Mexican DTOs are simply using Mexican chemicals rather than purchas-
ing bulk quantities locally, which could alert law enforcement to their cultivation operations.
Cultivators apply insecticides directly to plants to protect them from insect damage. Chemical
repellants and poisons are applied at the base of the cannabis plants and around the perimeter
of the grow site to ward off or kill rats, deer, and other animals that could cause crop damage.
These toxic chemicals enter and contaminate ground water, pollute watersheds, kill fish and
other wildlife, and eventually enter residential water supplies.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service; Environmental Protection Agency.

12
 Product No. 2007-L0848-001
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Figure 4. Toxic insecticide bottle found Figure 5. Reservoir used in a cannabis cultivation operation in
at a cannabis cultivation operation in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest in 2006.
California, 2006.
Eradication Estimates
Precise estimates regarding the number of
cannabis plants not eradicated during the most
recent eradication season are not feasible,
owing to many factors. The amount of mari-
juana cultivated in the primary states and coun-
ties is determined by three factors that are used
to calculate the quantity of marijuana available
in the United States: domestic cannabis eradi-
cation totals, cannabis plant yield estimates,
and the effectiveness of cannabis eradication.
Estimates vary greatly with respect to each of
these critical factors. Therefore, a true and
accurate point estimate of the amount of can-
nabis not eradicated within the primary cultiva-
tion states is not possible.
Although a precise estimate of cannabis not
eradicated is not possible, general estimates can
be made and ranges calculated using available
eradication data. For example, in the model in
Table 8 on page 14,2 the total number of plants
eradicated is derived by adding the estimated
number of eradicated plants reported by
2. This model was adapted from the Marijuana Availability Model used by the Drug Availability Steering Committee.
13
National Drug Intelligence Center
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program (DCE/SP), Forest Service, and DOI.
According to these sources, an estimated 6.3
million plants were eradicated in 2006. Assum-
ing a plant yield of 1 pound per plant (448
grams), approximately 2,825 metric tons of
potential marijuana were destroyed through
domestic cannabis eradication in 2006. Law
enforcement reporting indicates that eradication
programs destroyed 30 to 50 percent of can-
nabis plants during the 2006 season. Based on
these estimates and assumptions, between 2,825
and 6,592 metric tons of marijuana were not
destroyed during 2006 (see Table 8 on page 14).
Combining known eradication statistics with
estimates of cannabis not eradicated results in
an estimate of total potential domestic cannabis
cultivation ranging from 5,650 metric tons to
9,417 metric tons.
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Table 8. Estimated Number of Cannabis Plants Not Eradicated, 2006

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 (mt) Potential Marijuana Eradicated (mt)
DCE/SP 4,486,755 2,010

USFS/DOI 1,818,447 815

Total 6,305,202 2,825

Eradication Rate=> 30% 40% 50%

Potential Marijuana Not Eradicated (mt) 6,592 (70%) 4,236 (60%) 2,825 (50%)

Intelligence Gaps • Mexican DTO involvement in outdoor

Law enforcement efforts over the past sev-
eral years have provided significant insight into
the nature and extent of cannabis cultivation
and marijuana production in the United States.
However, intelligence gaps do exist, primarily:
• The extent of DTO and criminal group
involvement in the Appalachian region is
unknown because cannabis cultivation is
largely rooted in generations of families
within insular communities.
• Eradication statistics are underreported in
some areas because no requirements exist
for such reporting. Some counties do not
have agreements with DCE/SP, and there-
fore eradication totals are not recorded to
the DCE/SP program.
cannabis cultivation operations is signifi-
cant; however, determining the extent of
their involvement in many areas of the
country is difficult because law enforce-
ment resources are insufficient to fully
investigate these groups.
• Limited information as to the domestic
cannabis cultivation operations of Asian
DTOs and criminal groups—a result of the
insular nature of the communities—
degrades accurate analysis as to the full
extent of their operations in the United
States.

14
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Appendix A. Primary Cannabis Cultivation Regions

The following section addresses primary cannabis cultivation areas, planting and harvesting sea-
sons, organizations involved, and major trends and developments in outdoor and indoor cannabis
cultivation operations in each primary cultivation state. The primary cannabis cultivation areas are
located in two distinct regions: western states and Appalachia. Because many cultivation trends are
consistent among states within these unique regions, the summaries of each primary cultivation
state are grouped by region.

Western Region
California
Cannabis cultivation and marijuana production oper- California Cultivation Statistics
ations are extensive throughout California, particularly
in northern California. Outdoor cannabis cultivation is Primary cultivation area: Entire state
increasing dramatically in the northern region of the Top five cultivation counties: Lake, Shasta, Men-
state, primarily because of expanded cultivation by docino, San Diego, Riverside
Mexican DTOs; as a result, the area is becoming one of
2006*
the most significant outdoor cannabis grow areas in the
Total plants eradicated: 3,846,017
state. Indoor cannabis cultivation also appears to be
increasing. The increase is primarily attributed to the Total outdoor plants eradicated: 3,668,744
demand for higher potency marijuana. However, some Total indoor plants eradicated: 177,273
law enforcement officials in California report that the 2005
increase is partly the result of California Proposition Total cannabis plants eradicated: 3,021,240
215 (commonly referred to as the medical marijuana
law), which has negatively impacted marijuana-related *County-level data represent January through November
prosecutions, resulting in a perception among many 2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
indoor growers that law enforcement is reluctant to Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
seize plants or arrest growers.
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
The primary cannabis planting, growing, and harvesting seasons for southern, central, and north-
ern California are similar and typically occur from April through October. Cannabis seeds or seed-
lings are planted in spring, usually in April or May, and tended through the summer; they reach
plant maturity in September or October. However, this time frame can differ if cultivators plant
early by operating cannabis seed beds in an indoor operation for subsequent seedling transfer to
outdoor gardens as soon as the threat of frost has passed. Moreover, law enforcement officials have
reported a relatively new trend in which cultivators are harvesting the crop or the bud from the
plants as early as July to maximize profits and avoid possible loss through law enforcement seizure
during late season eradication operations.
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas
Outdoor cannabis cultivation operations, once concentrated in central and southern California, are
becoming increasingly prevalent in the remote regions of northern California, particularly in Lake,
Shasta, and Mendocino Counties. Eradication data indicate that between 2005 and 2006, increases in
eradication in northern California counties overshadowed moderate increases occurring in southern

15
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Campaign Against Marijuana Planting (CAMP)

CAMP is a multiagency law enforcement task force managed by the California Department of
Justice, Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement, and composed of local, state and federal agencies.
CAMP agents are broken into five teams covering northern, central, and southern California
regions. CAMP members are assisted in their eradication efforts by the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest
Service, the California National Guard, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Califor-
nia State Parks, and dozens of county sheriff agencies and local police departments.

counties. Outdoor cannabis eradication in northern California appears to be most prevalent in the
following adjacent counties: Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Mendocino, Placer,
Plumas, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo, and Yuba (see Table 9 on page
17). This increase is attributed primarily to Mexican DTOs expanding operations northward into
more remote areas of national forests and private lands, particularly mountainous areas, to avoid law
enforcement detection and discovery through aerial surveillance. However, counties in southern
California, primarily San Diego County, but also Riverside, Santa Barbara, and Ventura Counties
posted significant increases in cannabis eradication in 2006, albeit less than northern counties (see
Maps 8, 9, and 10 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cultivation operations in California dramatically increased over the past several years, as
a result of increased law enforcement pressure on outdoor cultivation, successes in aerial eradica-
tion, and improved technology for detecting outdoor grows. Indoor operations are generally con-
ducted by Caucasian independent growers, typically males between the ages of 25 and 35,
generally cultivating an average of 200 to 300 plants per cultivation cycle. Significant quantities of
cannabis plants—primarily from Caucasian-operated indoor grows—were seized in Humboldt,
Alameda, Mendocino, Sacramento, and San Francisco Counties in the first 11 months of 2006 (see
Table 10 on page 17). Additionally, law enforcement reporting indicates a continuing trend of typi-
cally larger, multithousand-plant indoor grows operating in Humboldt County contributing to a rise
in overall eradication. In fact, DCE/SP data indicate that Humboldt County had the highest reported
number of indoor plants eradicated between January and November 2006 (31,508), increasing 19
percent from 26,411 plants in 2005 (see Maps 11 and 12 in Appendix B).
Although Caucasian criminal groups and independent dealers are the primary indoor cultivators
in the state of California, law enforcement reporting indicates that Asian DTOs and criminal orga-
nizations are increasingly cultivating the drug indoors in several areas of the state. Asian organiza-
tions have been identified in central and northern California—specifically the San Francisco Bay
area. For example, an Asian organization was recently discovered operating indoor grow sites in 41
residences in the Sacramento and Stockton, California, areas. These indoor operations were typi-
cally located in residential housing within suburban neighborhoods in which entire houses had been
converted into highly sophisticated cultivation operations.

16
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Table 9. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in California, 2006*
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Lake 346,415

2. Shasta 264,287
3. San Diego 241,449

4. Mendocino 239,076

5. Riverside 210,005

6. Tehama 191,863

7. Fresno 172,075

8. San Bernardino 136,595

9. Tuolumne 126,706
10. Santa Clara 125,947
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program; U.S. Department of
the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

Table 10. Number of Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in California, 2006*
County Indoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Humboldt 31,508

2. Alameda 29,428

3. Mendocino 17,443

4. Sacramento 16,901

5. San Francisco 12,745

6. San Diego 10,849

7. Sonoma 9,080

8. San Mateo 7,980

9. San Luis Obispo 7,499

10. San Joaquin 6,100

Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

17
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Hawaii
Hawaii has long been a primary source area for high
potency marijuana; however, law enforcement pres-
sure and increased interdiction efforts have led to a
slight decline in overall marijuana production in the
state in recent years. Despite increased law enforce-
ment focus, local and Polynesian DTOs, Asian and
Caucasian groups, and independent dealers continue to
cultivate cannabis, primarily on the island of Hawaii.
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
Because of the tropical climate in the Hawaiian
Islands, cannabis is planted and harvested year-
round. The suitable climate combined with nutrient-
rich soils provides optimal cultivation conditions for
growers to plant and harvest marijuana at any time
of the year. As a result, no distinct planting or har-
vesting seasons exist.
Hawaii Cultivation Statistics
Primary cultivation areas: Hawaii and Maui
Counties
Top two cultivation counties: Hawaii and Maui
2006*
Total plants eradicated: 187,707
Total outdoor plants eradicated: 175,730
Total indoor plants eradicated: 11,977
2005
Total cannabis plants eradicated: 255,113
*County-level data represent January through November
2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas

Despite considerable decreases in outdoor cannabis
eradication rates in Hawaii since 2001, the state consistently ranks among the top four states for
the amount of cannabis eradicated each year. Law enforcement reporting indicates that most can-
nabis is cultivated on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, Kauai, and Oahu—four of the eight separate
islands composing the state. In addition, according to eradication data, domestic marijuana is cul-
tivated primarily on State Division of Land and Natural Resources lands in Hawaii and Maui
Counties. DEA Honolulu District Office reports that of the 159,702 plants eradicated from out-
door grow sites in the state of Hawaii from January through November 2006, 75 percent were cul-
tivated on public lands owned by the state of Hawaii. Specifically, NPS reports significant
cannabis cultivation in the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park on the island of Hawaii. Outdoor cul-
tivation operations are conducted primarily by local and Polynesian DTOs and Asians, as well as
some Caucasians, particularly those who have relocated to Hawaii from the U.S. mainland (see
Maps 13 and 14 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cannabis cultivation in Hawaii occurs less frequently than outdoor cultivation; however,
indoor cultivation appears to be stable or possibly increasing. According to DCE/SP, the number of
plants eradicated from indoor operations increased sharply from 314 plants in 2002 to 3,519 in
2003 and increased again in 2005 to 3,950. Moreover, DEA Honolulu District Office reports that
the number of indoor cultivation sites seized increased from 13 in 2005 to 37 as of October 31,
2006. Local Hawaiians, Caucasian independents, and Asian organizations operate most indoor
grow sites in Hawaii (see Maps 15 and 16 in Appendix B).

18
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Oregon
Outdoor cannabis cultivation appears to be Oregon Cultivation Statistics
increasing in Oregon, including on public lands, pri-
marily because of an increase in outdoor cultivation Primary cultivation area: Northwestern region of
by Mexican DTOs operating large-scale cannabis the state
grow sites. Top five cultivation counties: Jackson, Grant,
Josephine, Wheeler, and Linn
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
2006*
Oregon’s temperate climate, rich soil, and vast
expanses of remote, forested areas are particularly Total plants eradicated: 139,409
conducive to outdoor cannabis cultivation. Outdoor Total outdoor plants eradicated: 134,191
cannabis cultivation in Oregon typically spans the Total indoor plants eradicated: 5,218
months of May through October; however, weather 2005
conditions and the use of seeds and cloned starter Total cannabis plants eradicated: 91,829
plants can extend or reduce the growing season. In
the eastern region of Oregon—east of the Cascade *County-level data represent January through November
Mountains—cultivation operations begin as early as 2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
March or April, although most planting usually Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
occurs in May. Weather conditions during the grow-
ing months significantly influence the harvest time,
but plants typically are harvested during August and September. West of the Cascades, sites
are usually planted in June, tended through summer, and harvested in September and October.
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas
The number of large-scale outdoor marijuana grow sites in Oregon is increasing and will quite
likely continue to increase as Mexican DTOs currently operating in the state expand their opera-
tions. Several counties in Oregon—particularly in the southwestern section of the state—have been
identified by law enforcement as counties experiencing significant Mexican DTO-controlled can-
nabis cultivation. In addition to Mexican DTOs, Caucasian criminal groups and independent grow-
ers cultivate cannabis outdoors; however, Caucasian-controlled grow sites are generally much
smaller and contain fewer plants. According to eradication data and law enforcement reporting,
most outdoor cannabis cultivation in 2006 appears to have occurred in Jackson, Grant, Josephine,
Wheeler, and Linn Counties (see Table 11 on page 20). Many of the cannabis cultivation operations
in these counties have been located on remote lands in national forests and on tribal lands, primarily
in the northwestern section of Oregon. Areas where cultivation has been particularly high include
the Deschutes, Siskiyou, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman National Forests and Native American
tribal lands, including the Umatilla Indian Reservation (see Maps 17 and 18 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cannabis cultivation in Oregon is much less prominent than outdoor cultivation. Accord-
ing to the Oregon Department of Justice, indoor cannabis eradication is highest in Multnomah, fol-
lowed by Lincoln, Douglas, and Marion Counties (see Table 12 on page 20). Most indoor cannabis
grow sites are controlled by Caucasian criminal groups and independent growers; however, anec-
dotal reporting indicates that Asian organizations have become increasingly involved in indoor cul-
tivation over the past year. Caucasian criminal groups and independent growers typically operate
indoor grow sites that average 50 to 100 plants per cultivation cycle, particularly in the Portland
area (see Maps 19 and 20 in Appendix B).

19
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Table 11. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in Oregon, 2006*
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Jackson 50,995

2. Grant 20,138
3. Josephine 15,739

4. Wheeler 12,000

5. Linn 11,113

6. Coos 7,899

7. Union 4,800

8. Tillamook 2,988

9. Douglas 2,836
10. Lane 2,531
Source: Oregon Department of Justice; Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppres-
sion Program; U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

Table 12. Number of Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in Oregon, 2006*
County Indoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Multnomah 1,639

2. Lincoln 883

3. Douglas 475

4. Marion 444

5. Lane 335

6. Wasco 287

7. Benton 260

8. Klamath 257

9. Jackson 205

10. Coos 162

Source: Oregon Department of Justice; Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Sup-
pression Program.
*Date for 2006 data represent January through November 2006.

20
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Washington
Cannabis cultivation is increasing in Washington. Washington Cultivation Statistics
Outdoor cannabis cultivation is expanding primarily
because of increased cultivation by Mexican DTOs. Primary cultivation area: Eastern section of the
state
Indoor cultivation—particularly in the Puget Sound
area—also is increasing, as a result of an influx of Top five cultivation counties: Yakima, King, Fran-
Canadian-based Asian DTOs experienced in indoor klin, Chelan, and Stevens
cultivation techniques. 2006*
Total plants eradicated: 133,778
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
Planting and harvesting times differ greatly in Total outdoor plants eradicated: 101,339
Washington, depending on the location in the state; Total indoor plants eradicated: 32,439
Washington, much like Oregon, is divided into two 2005
distinct east and west sections that are separated by the Total cannabis plants eradicated: 170,255
Cascade Mountains. In the east, planting begins as
early as March or April, with most planting occurring *County-level data represent January through November
in May. Depending on the weather conditions during 2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
the summer months as well as other factors, including Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
the use of cloned seedlings versus seeds, crops typi-
cally are harvested between August and September.
West of the Cascade Mountains, planting and harvesting occur later in the year. Planting typically
begins in June, and harvest occurs in September or early October.
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas
Cannabis cultivation in outdoor sites is most prevalent in eastern Washington because of the
area’s climate. Large outdoor growing operations in eastern Washington, which typically are con-
trolled by Mexican DTOs, are usually located in remote areas near water sources on federal or state
lands. Counties reporting the highest plant eradication for 2006 include Yakima, Franklin, Chelan,
Stevens, and Benton (see Table 13 on page 22). The Northwest HIDTA reports that the counties
accounting for much of the outdoor cannabis cultivation in the state—which are largely the counties
with the highest eradication—are Yakima, Chelan, Franklin, Grant, Benton, Douglas, and Ferry.
Following the seizure of a single 64,000-plant plot on the Yakima Indian Reservation in 2004, many
cultivators stopped planting large plots and now plant several smaller plots instead to reduce their
losses if a plot is eradicated. Cultivators also commingle cannabis plants with legitimate crops such
as corn and olive trees to conceal cannabis plants (see Maps 21 and 22 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cannabis cultivation sites are typically operated by Caucasian independent growers and
are more common in urban areas. However, some Vietnamese DTOs have relocated their high
potency indoor cannabis cultivation operations from Canada to the Puget Sound area, primarily to
avoid seizures of their marijuana at the U.S.–Canada border. As a result, there has been an increase
in the availability of higher potency marijuana in local drug markets. King, Pierce, and Snohomish
Counties are the primary indoor cultivation areas for Asian DTOs and criminal groups, according
to reporting from the Northwest HIDTA, DEA, and other law enforcement agencies. These coun-
ties are also among the highest overall indoor cannabis eradication counties in Oregon (see Table
14 on page 22, and Maps 23 and 24 in Appendix B).

21
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Table 13. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in Washington, 2006*
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Yakima 51,730

2. Franklin 15,382
3. Chelan 7,802

4. Stevens 4,677

5. Benton 4,163

6. Grant 4,019

7. Grays Harbor County 3,319

8. Walla Walla County 3,102

9. Douglas County 1,588

10. Klickitat County 1,389
Source: Northwest High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area; Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program; U.S. Department of the Interior; U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

Table 14. Number of Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in Washington, 2006*
County Indoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. King 17,618

2. Whatcom 2,298

3. Pierce 2,077

4. Spokane 1,688

5. Stevens 1,650

6. Snohomish 1,488

7. Clark 1,366

8. Kitsap 1,095

9. Skagit 484

10. Thurston 441

Source: Northwest High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area; Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

22
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Appalachian Region
Cannabis cultivation in the Appalachian Region of the United States occurs primarily in portions
of Kentucky, Tennessee, and West Virginia. A relatively high poverty rate in these areas contrib-
utes to an acceptance of cannabis cultivation by many local residents. In some Appalachian coun-
ties, more than 30 percent of the population lives in poverty, and in impoverished communities
some residents regard marijuana production as a necessary means of supplementing low incomes.
In these communities cannabis cultivation is often a multigenerational trade as young family mem-
bers are introduced to the trade by older members who have produced the drug for many years.
Kentucky
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
Kentucky Cultivation Statistics
Cannabis growers in Kentucky typically cultivate
plots between March and October; however, several Primary cultivation area: Southeastern section
factors, including the weather and the use of cloned of the state
starter plants, can extend or reduce the growing sea- Top five cultivation counties: Knox, Bell, Leslie,
son. Cannabis planting in Kentucky typically starts in Letcher, and Clay
March. However, because the winter of 2006 was very
2006*
mild, many growers who started their plants indoors
Total plants eradicated: 527,820
were able to transplant the seedlings outside much ear-
lier than in most years. Kentucky State Police Mari- Total outdoor plants eradicated: 526,691
juana Suppression Unit reports that approximately 10 Total indoor plants eradicated: 1,129
to 15 percent of all cultivators start their plants 2005
indoors. No discernible differences exist for planting Total cannabis plants eradicated: 736,991
and harvesting times in various regions of the state.
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas *County-level data represent January through November
2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
Most outdoor cultivation in Kentucky occurs in the Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
southeastern section of the state on remote areas of Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
public and private lands; however, increased and
improved eradication efforts have led some growers to shift their operations to counties with less
eradication pressure. The highest eradication totals were reported in the southeastern section of Ken-
tucky from January to November 2006 in the following counties: Knox, Bell, Leslie, Letcher, Clay,
Perry, Breathitt, Wayne, Knott, and Whitley (see Table 15 on page 24). The focused eradication in
these counties has contributed to a shift toward cultivation in other counties. For example, law
enforcement reporting indicates that cultivation in Breathitt County is increasing after years of
decreased cultivation, largely because of eradication pressure in surrounding counties. In addition,
since 2003, cultivation has been increasing in areas where commercial logging is occurring, espe-
cially in the Daniel Boone National Forest. After land has been cleared as a result of logging opera-
tions, criminal groups and independent growers use the space for cannabis cultivation. Most
cannabis cultivation operations in Kentucky are composed of families or small groups rather than
large DTOs. These groups typically plant smaller plots, having averaged 67 plants per site in 2006
(see Maps 25, 26, 27, and 28 in Appendix B).
Indoor Cannabis Cultivation Areas
Eradication data and law enforcement reporting reveal that indoor cannabis cultivation is limited in
Kentucky but may be increasing. According to DCE/SP data for 2006, 1,027 plants were eradicated

23
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

from 35 indoor grow operations in Kentucky as of November 30. However, law enforcement agencies
report that they have been unable to locate several other indoor grow sites operating within the state.
Eradication data indicate that the limited indoor cultivation in the state occurs primarily in Greenup,
Bullitt, Meade, and Nelson Counties (see Table 16, and Maps 29 and 30 in Appendix B).
Table 15. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated
Top 10 Counties in Kentucky, 2006*
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Knox 48,670

2. Bell 39,877

3. Leslie 37,848
4. Letcher 35,814

5. Clay 30,580

6. Perry 30,344

7. Breathitt 29,847

8. Wayne 24,327

9. Knott 23,026

10. Whitley 20,188

Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program; U.S. Department of
the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

Table 16. Number of Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties in Kentucky, 2006*
County Indoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Greenup 256
2. Bullitt 216

3. Meade 124

4. Nelson 103
5. Fayette 83

6. Hardin 67

7. Larue 62

8. Boone 27

9. McLean 27

10. Jackson 24
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

24
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Tennessee
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
Tennessee Cultivation Statistics
Cannabis cultivation operations in Tennessee gener-
ally extend from March through October; the primary Primary cultivation areas: Cumberland Valley
planting season is late March and early April. How- and Smokey Mountains in the northeastern and
ever, some cultivators have been able to harvest a first southwestern sections of the state
crop in June and replant for a second crop. Generally, Top five cultivation counties: Warren, Cumber-
September and October are the prime harvesting land, Fentress, Morgan, and Wayne
months. Harvesting times in Tennessee do not differ 2006*
from one region of the state to another.
Total plants eradicated: 662,135
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas Total outdoor plants eradicated: 662,024
A great amount of high potency marijuana is pro- Total indoor plants eradicated: 111
duced in Tennessee by local Caucasian producers for
sale both within and outside the region. Primary out- 2005
door cultivation areas are located in remote areas with Total cannabis plants eradicated: 463,557
good growing climates, such as the Smokey Mountains
of southeastern Tennessee and the Cumberland Plateau *County-level data represent January through November
2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
of northeastern Tennessee. The numerous streams, Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
creeks, and rivers within these areas help provide culti- Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
vation sites with the necessary water to support plant
growth during the summer months. Of the top five cannabis eradication counties in Tennessee in
2006, four were located in the Cumberland Plateau: Warren, Cumberland, Fentress, and Morgan.
On the extreme western side of the Highland Rim in the middle section of the state, Wayne, Hick-
man, and Lawrence Counties also reported high plant eradication in 2006 (see Table 17). Although
Table 17. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated
Top 10 Counties in Tennessee, 2006*
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Warren 181,671

2. Cumberland 88,919

3. Fentress 43,828

4. Morgan 42,121

5. Wayne 40,641
6. Van Buren 37,308

7. Hickman 27,853

8. Grundy 26,757
9. Lawrence 26,553

10. Campbell 19,662

Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
*Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

25
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

these counties account for most of the cultivation in Tennessee, significant cannabis cultivation
occurs in other counties, but it fluctuates from year to year. In fact, counties where cultivation has
been dormant for several years have reemerged as significant sources of marijuana. For example,
the number of cannabis plants eradicated in Sequatchie County in the Cumberland Valley—a
county where cultivation had been low for several years—increased from 783 plants in 2005 to
10,846 plants in 2006, according to DCE/SP data (see Maps 31, 32, 33, and 34 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cannabis cultivation in Tennessee is limited. In 2005, DCE/SP data showed that only 653
plants were seized from 3 counties and most (611 plants) were seized in Cocke County, followed
by Montgomery County (33), and Campbell County (9) (see Map 35 in Appendix B). As of
November 2006, DCE/SP did not report any indoor grow operation seizures in the state of Tennes-
see. Although indoor cultivation is limited, law enforcement has seized advanced indoor grow
operations in past years (see text box). Although not reported to DCE/SP, the Tennessee Bureau of
Investigation (TBI) seized a single indoor grow operation in Franklin County in June 2006, result-
ing in the eradication of 111 plants.

Indoor Cannabis Operation Seized From Cave Under Residence

In December 2005 the 15th Judicial District Task Force (JDTF), assisted by the 18th JDTF, the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Lafayette Police Department,
and the Trousdale County Sheriff’s Office seized a sophisticated indoor cannabis operation in
Hartsville, Trousdale County, Tennessee. The indoor operation was located in a man-made
cave cut into the limestone under and adjacent to a private residence and was capable of pro-
ducing six grows per year. Law enforcement officials seized 853 plants under cultivation. The
entrance was sealed with a hydraulic door, and the growing area was equipped with custom irri-
gation systems and lighting, as well as humidity control devices.

26
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

West Virginia
Outdoor Planting and Harvesting
West Virginia Cultivation Statistics
Cannabis cultivation in West Virginia extends from
March through October. Cannabis typically is planted Primary cultivation area: Southwestern section
in March or April, tended through the summer, and of the state
harvested in September or early October. Top five cultivation counties: Monroe, Wayne,
Primary Outdoor Cultivation Areas Logan, Kanawha, and Clay
The amount of cannabis cultivated in West Virginia 2006*
is lower than that of other areas in the Appalachian Total plants eradicated: 64,974
Region; the marijuana produced usually is consumed Total outdoor plants eradicated: 63,809
locally. The amount of marijuana produced in West Total indoor plants eradicated: 1,165
Virginia does not come close to supplying demand
throughout the state; therefore, a significant amount of 2005
Mexican marijuana is smuggled to West Virginia. Total cannabis plants eradicated: 57,600
Cannabis cultivation is often a primary source of
income for residents in southwestern portions of West *County-level data represent January through November
2006 and include reporting from the Domestic Cannabis
Virginia, the primary cultivation area in the state, Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the
which generally is economically depressed, with an Interior, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
unemployment rate of nearly 50 percent. This section
of the state is particularly conducive to cannabis cultivation because of the vast tracts of remote,
mountainous terrain in the Appalachian Mountains, consistent rainfall, and moderate temperatures
during the growing season. According to 2005 and 2006 eradication data and law enforcement
reporting, the primary counties for cannabis eradication include Monroe, Wayne, Logan, Kanawha,
Clay, Mingo, Boone, Mason, McDowell, and Gilmer (see Table 18 on page 28). The West Virginia
Metropolitan Drug Enforcement Network Teams Eradication Unit reports that it discovers an aver-
age of 600 cannabis cultivation sites each year in the southwestern region. Although most plots are
relatively small, at least six sites in this region contained at least 1,000 plants each in 2006 (see
Maps 36, 37, 38, and 39 in Appendix B).
Primary Indoor Cultivation Areas
Indoor cultivation in West Virginia is far more limited than outdoor cultivation; however, the
eradication and investigation of indoor operations is increasing because of a rise in law enforce-
ment resources committed to such investigations in some counties. According to DCE/SP, the
number of indoor operations seized increased from 34 in 2005 to 60 in 2006, but the number of
plants eradicated rose from 843 to 1,165 during that same period. Most of the plants (1,151 of
1,165) eradicated in 2006 were eradicated from 14 sites in Kanawha and Gilmer Counties (see
Table 19 on page 28, and Maps 40 and 41 in Appendix B).

27
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Table 18. Number of Outdoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 10 Counties* in West Virginia, 2006**
County Outdoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Monroe 17,505

2. Wayne 12,906
3. Logan 9,709

4. Kanawha 6,027

5. Clay 4,543

6. Mingo 4,221

7. Boone 3,229

8. Mason 1,542

9. McDowell 1,150
10. Gilmer 780
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program; U.S. Department of
the Interior; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
*As of January 2007, data for 2006 were available for HIDTA counties only.
**Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

Table 19. Number of Indoor Cannabis Plants Eradicated

Top 5 Counties* in West Virginia, 2006**
County Indoor Cannabis Eradicated
1. Kanawha 845

2. Gilmer 306

3. Mason 6

4. Boone 5

5. Logan 3
Source: Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
*As of November 2006, data for 2006 were available for HIDTA counties only.
**Data for 2006 represent January through November 2006.

28
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Appendix B. Maps
1. Cannabis Eradication by State, Outdoor Plants Seized, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2. Cannabis Eradication by State, Indoor Plants Seized, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3. Cannabis Eradication by State, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Arizona, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Arizona, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
6. Domestic Cannabis Eradication, by State and National Forest, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
7. Indoor Plants Seized in Florida, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8. Outdoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
9. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in California, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
10. Outdoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
11. Indoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
12. Indoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
13. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
14. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
15. Indoor Plants Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
16. Indoor Plants Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
17. Outdoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
18. Outdoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
19. Indoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
20. Indoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
21. Outdoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
22. Outdoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
23. Indoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
24. Indoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
25. Outdoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
26. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
27. Outdoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
28. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
29. Indoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
30. Indoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
31. Outdoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
32. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
33. Outdoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
34. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
35. Indoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
36. Outdoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
37. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
38. Outdoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
39. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
40. Indoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
41. Indoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

29
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

This page intentionally left blank.

30
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 1. Cannabis Eradication by State,

Outdoor Plants Seized, 2006
WA
115,
459

MT ME
ND 7
6 9,78
275
OR VT
187, 1
548 MN 1,24
ID 825 NH
6,472 NY 793 MA
SD 8,445 677
56 WI
5,134
MI CT
4 RI
WY 20,913 1,12

IA PA
169 4,284 NJ
NE
NV 987
183 OH
1,704
UT IL IN 34,428 MD DE
5,433 5,229 720 153
CA 21,122 WV
3,67 CO
4 ,0 6 3,848 55,388
9 VA
KS
MO 18,632
3,303 KY
19,306
557,628
NC
99,554
TN
483,231
AZ OK
154,79 NM 18,634 AR SC
3
2,502 12,843 36,318
AL
MS 53,297 GA
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
2,346 65,178 1,000,000 +
100,000 - 999,999
10,000 - 99,999
TX 1,000 - 9,999
4,899 100 - 999
LA 1 - 99
3,562 None reported
AK Public lands
262 FL
10,378

Source: Drug Enforcement

Administration Domestic Cannabis HI
Eradication/Suppression Program, 188,742
U.S. Department of the Interior,
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service. NDIC 2007022101PKB

Map 1. Cannabis Eradication by State, Outdoor Plants Seized, 2006.

31
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

32
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 2. Cannabis Eradication by State,

Indoor Plants Seized, 2006
WA
43,4
16

ME
MT 0
69 1
ND 2,64
13
OR MN VT
6,90 46 9
5 3,937
ID NH
85
33 9 11 ,0 MA
WI NY
SD 72 4
19 3,2 91 6,021
WY MI CT
15 1 5,900 41 9 RI

PA
IA 8,604 NJ
NE 96 9
NV 341
1,782 OH
7,872 MD DE
UT IL IN
1,190 4,75 1 WV 3,790 14 5
CA 2,4 51
203, CO 2,194
559 3,667 VA
KS
MO 1,729
436 KY
2,00 4 1,128

NC
TN 2,11 0
111
AZ OK
53 7 444 AR
NM SC
75 3 680 19 4

GA
AL Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
MS 1,610
53 25 7 100,000 +
50,000 - 99,999
10,000 - 49,999
TX 5,000 - 9,999
7,90 5 LA 1,000 - 4,999
1,60 5 100 - 999
1 - 99
AK None reported
5,901
FL
36 ,1 7 2

HI
Source: Drug Enforcement 12,358
Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program. NDIC 2007012402PKB

Map 2. Cannabis Eradication by State, Indoor Plants Seized, 2006.

33
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

34
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 3. Cannabis Eradication by State, 2006

WA
158,
875

MT ME
ND 27
697 288 12,4

OR MN VT
0
194,
453 4,762 1,71
ID NH
78 MA
6,811
WI NY 11,8 1
6 1,40
SD
8,425 14,46
75
WY MI CT
26,813 3 RI
151 1,54

IA PA
169 12,888 NJ
NE
NV 1,956
524 OH
3,486
UT IN 42,300 MD DE
IL 25,873 4,510
6,623 298
CA 7,680 WV
3,87 CO
7 ,6 2 7,515 57,582
8 VA
KS
3,739
MO 20,361
21,310 KY
558,756
NC
4
TN 101,66
AZ 483,342
OK
155,33 19,078
0 NM AR SC
3,255 13,523 36,512
AL
MS 53,554 GA
2,399 66,788
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
1,000,000 +
100,000 - 999,999
TX 10,000 - 99,999
12,804 LA 1,000 - 9,999
5,167 100 - 999
1 - 99
AK None reported
6,163 FL
46,550

Source: Drug Enforcement

Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program, HI
U.S. Department of the Interior, 201,100
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service. NDIC 2007012403PKB

Map 3. Cannabis Eradication by State, 2006.

35
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

36
 Map 4. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized
in Arizona, by County, 2006
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

COCONINO
40
MOHAVE

37
NAVAJO APACHE
4,476

Map 4. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Arizona, by County, 2006.

YAVAPAI
503

GILA
LA PAZ 63,713

MARICOPA GREENLEE
1,757

GRAHAM
PINAL

YUMA

PIMA
78

COCHISE

SANTA CRUZ
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006
(January through November 2006) by Number of Plants
200,000 + (January through October 2006)
100,000 - 199,999 1 - 99
100 - 999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999 1,000 - 9,999

100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999

1 - 99
20,000 - 54,720
None reported
Public lands
Miles
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, 0 20 40
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Maricopa County
Sheriff's Office, Arizona Department of Public Safety, Gila County
NDIC 2007012404PKB
Task Force, and Phoenix Police Department.
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

38
 Map 5. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized
in Arizona, by County, 2005
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

COCONINO
17
MOHAVE
13

39
NAVAJO APACHE

Map 5. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Arizona, by County, 2005.

YAVAPAI

GILA
LA PAZ 20,965

MARICOPA GREENLEE
932

GRAHAM
PINAL

YUMA

PIMA
180

COCHISE
52

SANTA CRUZ
42

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2005

by Number of Plants
200,000 +
1 - 99
100,000 - 199,999
100 - 999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999
1 - 99
20,000 - 54,720
None reported
Public lands
Miles
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, 0 20 40
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Maricopa County
Sheriff's Office, Arizona Department of Public Safety, Gila County
Task Force, and Phoenix Police Department. NDIC 2007012405PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

40
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 6. Domestic Cannabis Eradication,

Mt. B
a ker 5
4 by State and National Forest, 2006
Colv
ille
We n 224
atc h
14,4 ee
WA S 32
HIN
158,8 GTON
75
Idaho
E
Panha
ndle MONTA MAIN 7
2
Sius
22 NA NORTH DAKOTA 12,4
law Mt. H 697
48 ood 288
75
Willa
m ett
e 1,3
Ump 9 5
qua T
MINNESOTA MON
Sisk 33 ORE
G Wallo VER 10 IRE
iy o
1,00 u 194,4 ON Whim a
w Gallatin
6 4,762 1,7 PSH
0 53 HAM
Rog
ue R 3,000
an
NEW 11,878
Six 4,86 iver IDAHO ETTS
Riv 9
WISCONSIN HUS
25,9 er s Klam 6,811
Huron YOR
K S AC
01 a
34,3 th 8,425 NEW 66 MAS 1,401
56 SOUTH DAKOTA Manistee 14,4
819
75
Las s
en RI
Sha 8,20 WYOMIN
s ta 0 G
TIC UT
Trin
118,7 ity
151
MICHIGA
N N EC
CON 1,543
97 26,813
NEVA NIA
DA SYLVA
Me n
do
Plum
a
3,486 IOWA PEN N ,88 8 EY
405,3 c ino 55,6 s 169 12 JERS
99 73 Hum
bolt/T
NEBRASKA NEW 56
oiyab 524 1,9
le 1,7
53
OHIO L AN D
MARY 0 E
Stan
isla 42,300 4,51 WA R
65,0 us UTAH DELA 8
72
6,623 ILLINOIS INDIANA 29
7,680 25,87 3 WEST
IA ton
Sierr VIRGIN Was hing on
a COLORADO 57,58 2 & Jeffe
rs
60,8
66 7,515 MISSOURI 360
CAL 21,31 0 Daniel IA
IFO KANSAS
3,877 RNIA Boone VIRGIN
,628 3,739 148,828 20,361
Sequ Shawnee
oia 11
89,58
Los
P adre 5 KENTUCKY
s8 0,79 ARIZO
NA 558,756
6 Mark Twain 166 LINA
155,33 e 71 H CARO
Ange
le
0 Cheroke NFS in NORT 1,664
13,17 s Lincoln arolina 10
4 Presc ot
& North C
E 175
6,102
t
Cocon Ozark St. Francis 22 TENNESSE
San B
erna 500
ino 483,342
157,9 rdino OKLAHOMA
94
NEW MEX 19,078
ICO ARKANSAS n
Clev e 3,255 Mar io
lan 13,52 3 oc hee Francis
13,47 d Chattaho 183 r
8 Tonto e & Sum te
& O cone
65,947 1,176
bama
Ouachita 6,302 NFS in Ala INA
5,377 CARO L
SOUTH ,51 2
IA 36
GEOR G
MISSISSIPPI 66,788
2,399
ALABAMA
Cannabis Eradication by State, 2006 53,554
1,000,000 + LOUISIANA
TEXAS
100,000 - 999,999 5,167
12,804
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999 orida 24
NFS in Fl
100 - 999
1 - 99
A
None reported FLORID
46,55 0
Cannabis Eradication by National Forest, 2006
100,000 +
50,000 - 99,999
10,000 - 49,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration's

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NDIC 2007012406PKB

Map 6. Domestic Cannabis Eradication, by State and National Forest, 2006.

41
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

42
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HOLMES
SANTA ROSA
8 OKALOOSA WALTON JACKSON
ESCAMBIA
5 83
WASHINGTON NASSAU
20 JEFFERSON 104
GADSDEN
HAMILTON
LEON MADISON
BAY CALHOUN
BAKER DUVAL
23
5 1,078
LIBERTY
WAKULLA COLUMBIA
SUWANNEE
2
TAYLOR UNION
9 CLAY
GULF
LAFAYETTE BRADFORD 95
20 FRANKLIN ST. JOHNS

GILCHRIST
ALACHUA
PUTNAM
DIXIE 299
151
FLAGLER
4
LEVY
MARION
16
VOLUSIA
16

CITRUS
6 LAKE
SEMINOLE
SUMTER 3
236
HERNANDO
170 ORANGE
38

Map 7. Indoor Plants Seized PASCO

17

in Florida, by County, 2006 PINELLAS

389
HILLSBOROUGH POLK
OSCEOLA
BREVARD

146 732

INDIAN RIVER

HARDEE
OKEECHOBEE
MANATEE 6 ST. LUCIE
HIGHLANDS 3,750
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 5

(January through October 2006) SARASOTA DESOTO

194
MARTIN
10,000 +
GLADES
5,000 - 9,999 CHARLOTTE 432
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999 PALM BEACH
100 - 499 LEE 1,114
50 - 99 912 HENDRY
171
1 - 49
None reported
BROWARD
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic COLLIER 2,305
492
Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.

MIAMI-DADE
11,596
MONROE

Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012507PKB

Map 7. Indoor Plants Seized in Florida, by County, 2006.

43
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

44
 Map 8. Outdoor Plants Seized
in California, by County, 2006

DEL NORTE
1,257 SISKIYOU
110,199
MODOC
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

SHASTA
LASSEN
HUMBOLDT TRINITY 264,287
20,463
60,892 118,104

TEHAMA
191,863 PLUMAS
64,555

45
BUTTE
GLENN 50,320
104,689 SIERRA
MENDOCINO
239,076
NEVADA
YUBA 8,611
COLUSA 11,417
76,084 PLACER
LAKE SUTTER 17,044

Map 8. Outdoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2006.

346,415 3,699

EL DORADO
YOLO 31,432
SONOMA 28,104
ALPINE
124,456 NAPA
39,257 SACRAMENTO AMADOR
1,015
SOLANO CALAVERAS
MARIN 56,558 10,038
78,816 TUOLUMNE
CONTRA COSTA SAN JOAQUIN 126,706
5,501 MONO
SAN FRANCISCO
ALAMEDA
STANISLAUS MARIPOSA
SAN MATEO 2,752 59,959
5,850
SANTA CLARA MERCED
125,947 1,948
SANTA CRUZ MADERA
42,838 18,598

FRESNO
172,075
SAN BENITO
45,216 INYO

TULARE
MONTEREY 119,655
95,930 KINGS

SAN LUIS OBISPO KERN

32,358 67,156

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 SAN BERNARDINO

136,595
(January through November 2006) SANTA BARBARA
41,071
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999 VENTURA
21,431 LOS ANGELES
10,000 - 99,999 37,053
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported RIVERSIDE
ORANGE 210,005
Public lands

SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL

241,449

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012308PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

46
 Map 9. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized
in California, by County, 2006
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

47
Map 9. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in California, by County, 2006.
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
(January through November 2006)
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006

by Number of Plants
(January through October 2006)
1 - 99
100 - 999
1,000 - 9,999
10,000 - 19,999

20,000 - 54,720

Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and
Campaign Against Marijuana Planting. Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012309PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

48
 Map 10. Outdoor Plants Seized
in California, by County, 2005

DEL NORTE
314 SISKIYOU
44,116
MODOC
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

SHASTA
HUMBOLDT TRINITY 218,384
29,361 LASSEN
19,127

TEHAMA
81,006 PLUMAS

49
BUTTE
GLENN 7,044
6,740 SIERRA
MENDOCINO
138,084
NEVADA
YUBA 424
COLUSA
281 9,518 PLACER
LAKE 33
SUTTER
136,781

Map 10. Outdoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2005.

EL DORADO
YOLO 22,709
SONOMA 505
107,631 NAPA ALPINE
75,446 SACRAMENTO AMADOR
3,948
SOLANO
40,875 CALAVERAS
MARIN
15,870
TUOLUMNE
CONTRA COSTA SAN JOAQUIN 35,784
11,944 MONO
SAN FRANCISCO
ALAMEDA
STANISLAUS MARIPOSA
SAN MATEO 21,962 5,086
167
SANTA CLARA MERCED
82,106 2,145
SANTA CRUZ MADERA
11,449 12,159

FRESNO
SAN BENITO 137,600
28,255 INYO

TULARE
MONTEREY 157,441
23,498 KINGS

SAN LUIS OBISPO KERN

14,917 61,726

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005 SAN BERNARDINO

200,000 + 20,443
SANTA BARBARA
100,000 - 199,999 2,306
10,000 - 99,999 VENTURA
9,740 LOS ANGELES
1,000 - 9,999 100,236
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported
RIVERSIDE
ORANGE 36,372
Public lands

SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL

169,452

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012310PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

50
 Map 11. Indoor Plants Seized
in California, by County, 2006

DEL NORTE
399 SISKIYOU
553
MODOC
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

HUMBOLDT SHASTA
31,508 TRINITY
LASSEN
2,042

TEHAMA
192
PLUMAS

51
BUTTE
GLENN 354
SIERRA
MENDOCINO
17,443
NEVADA
YUBA 599 PLACER
COLUSA
LAKE 34

Map 11. Indoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2006.

SUTTER

EL DORADO
YOLO 350
SONOMA
NAPA ALPINE
9,080
118 SACRAMENTO
AMADOR
16,901
SOLANO CALAVERAS
113 1,702
MARIN TUOLUMNE
CONTRA COSTA SAN JOAQUIN 126
6,100 MONO
SAN FRANCISCO
12,745
ALAMEDA
29,428 STANISLAUS MARIPOSA
SAN MATEO 3,663
7,980
SANTA CLARA MERCED
252 MADERA
629
SANTA CRUZ
652

FRESNO
5,872
SAN BENITO
596
INYO

MONTEREY TULARE
1,460 KINGS

SAN LUIS OBISPO KERN

7,499
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
(January through November 2006)
SAN BERNARDINO
10,000 + 2,930
SANTA BARBARA
165
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999 VENTURA
238 LOS ANGELES
500 - 999 2,365

100 - 499
50 - 99
RIVERSIDE
1 - 49 2,336
ORANGE
None reported

SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL

10,849

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012311PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

52
 Map 12. Indoor Plants Seized
in California, by County, 2005

DEL NORTE
41 SISKIYOU
356
MODOC
Product No. 2007-L0848-001

HUMBOLDT SHASTA
26,411 TRINITY 24
LASSEN
462

TEHAMA
547
PLUMAS

53
BUTTE
GLENN 140
42 SIERRA
MENDOCINO
13,148
NEVADA
COLUSA YUBA 394 PLACER
59 19 104
LAKE

Map 12. Indoor Plants Seized in California, by County, 2005.

7,581 SUTTER

EL DORADO
YOLO 369
SONOMA
NAPA ALPINE
11,049
101 SACRAMENTO
AMADOR
256
SOLANO CALAVERAS
9 86
MARIN TUOLUMNE
CONTRA COSTA SAN JOAQUIN 164
18 MONO
SAN FRANCISCO
ALAMEDA
STANISLAUS MARIPOSA
SAN MATEO 2,561
479
SANTA CLARA
MERCED MADERA
SANTA CRUZ 1,393
3,521

FRESNO
SAN BENITO
406
INYO

TULARE
MONTEREY 69
157 KINGS

SAN LUIS OBISPO KERN

225 1,349

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

SAN BERNARDINO
10,000 + 2,884
SANTA BARBARA
240
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999 VENTURA
936 LOS ANGELES
500 - 999 3,882

100 - 499
50 - 99
RIVERSIDE
1 - 49 3,462
ORANGE
None reported

SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL

15,651

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. Miles

0 50 100
NDIC 2007012312PKB
National Drug Intelligence Center
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

54
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 13. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Hawaii, by County, 2006
KAUAI
7,565

HONOLULU
4,737

MAUI
37,814

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006 HAWAII

(January through September 2006) 125,614

Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration's

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Miles

0 20 40

NDIC 2007012513PKB

Map 13. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2006.

55
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

56
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 14. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Hawaii, by County, 2005
KAUAI
3,009

HONOLULU
6,689

MAUI
78,320

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported
HAWAII
152,194
Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2005

Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration's

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Miles

0 25 50

NDIC 2007012514PKB

Map 14. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2005.

57
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

58
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 15. Indoor Plants Seized

in Hawaii, by County, 2006

KAUAI

HONOLULU

MAUI
2,158

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999 HAWAII
9,819
100 - 499
50 - 99
1 - 49
None reported

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.

Miles

0 25 50

NDIC 2007012515PKB

Map 15. Indoor Plants Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2006.

59
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

60
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 16. Indoor Plants Seized

in Hawaii, by County, 2005

KAUAI
75

HONOLULU

MAUI

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999 HAWAII
3,875
100 - 499
50 - 99
1 - 49
None reported

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.

Miles

0 25 50

NDIC 2007012516PKB

Map 16. Indoor Plants Seized in Hawaii, by County, 2005.

61
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

62
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 17. Outdoor Plants Seized

CLATSOP
COLUMBIA
in Oregon, by County, 2006
132

UMATILLA WALLOWA
TILLAMOOK WASHINGTON
MULTNOMAH
2,988 59 HOOD RIVER
440

SHERMAN MORROW
GILLIAM
UNION
YAMHILL 4,800
1,344
CLACKAMAS
WASCO
261

POLK MARION
333 36

WHEELER BAKER
LINCOLN
12,000
80
JEFFERSON
BENTON
101 LINN
11,113 GRANT
20,138

CROOK

LANE
2,531 DESCHUTES
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
(January through November 2006)

200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
DOUGLAS
2,836 100 - 999
COOS MALHEUR
7,899 1 - 99
None reported
HARNEY

Public lands
KLAMATH LAKE
303 1 Source: Drug Enforcement
Administration's Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program,
U.S. Department of the Interior,
CURRY
62
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
JACKSON
JOSEPHINE 50,995
Forest Service.
15,739

Miles

0 25 50 NDIC 2007012217PKB

Map 17. Outdoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2006.

63
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

64
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 18. Outdoor Plants Seized

CLATSOP
155 COLUMBIA
in Oregon, by County, 2005
188

UMATILLA WALLOWA
WASHINGTON
102 MULTNOMAH HOOD RIVER
TILLAMOOK

SHERMAN MORROW
GILLIAM
UNION
YAMHILL 13
CLACKAMAS
82 WASCO

POLK MARION
190 98

WHEELER
BAKER
LINCOLN 6,308
JEFFERSON
BENTON
LINN
44 GRANT
90

CROOK

LANE
589 DESCHUTES
7
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
DOUGLAS
3,883 100 - 999
COOS MALHEUR
42 10,676 1 - 99
None reported
HARNEY

Public lands
KLAMATH
LAKE
37 Source: Drug Enforcement
Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program,
U.S. Department of the Interior,
CURRY
224
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
JACKSON
JOSEPHINE 17,835
Forest Service.
153

Miles

0 25 50 NDIC 2007012218PKB

Map 18. Outdoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2005.

65
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

66
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 19. Indoor Plants Seized

CLATSOP
in Oregon, by County, 2006
COLUMBIA

UMATILLA WALLOWA
WASHINGTON 5
MULTNOMAH
TILLAMOOK
36 HOOD RIVER
1,639

SHERMAN MORROW
GILLIAM
UNION
YAMHILL
24
CLACKAMAS
WASCO
23
287

POLK MARION
6 444

LINCOLN WHEELER BAKER

883
JEFFERSON
BENTON
LINN
260
63 GRANT

CROOK

LANE
335 DESCHUTES
95

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
10,000 +

5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
DOUGLAS
475
COOS 500 - 999
MALHEUR
162
100 - 499
HARNEY
50 - 99
1 - 49
KLAMATH LAKE
257 16
None reported

Source: Drug Enforcement

CURRY Administration Domestic Cannabis
JACKSON
JOSEPHINE 205 Eradication/Suppression Program.
3

Miles

0 25 50 NDIC 2007012219PKB

Map 19. Indoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2006.

67
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

68
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 20. Indoor Plants Seized

CLATSOP
COLUMBIA
in Oregon, by County, 2005
15

UMATILLA WALLOWA
TILLAMOOK WASHINGTON 2 19
MULTNOMAH
3 3 HOOD RIVER
2,198

SHERMAN MORROW
GILLIAM
UNION
115
YAMHILL
CLACKAMAS
WASCO

POLK MARION
4 242

WHEELER BAKER
LINCOLN
JEFFERSON
BENTON
LINN
65
18 GRANT

CROOK

LANE
1,095 DESCHUTES
630

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
DOUGLAS
460
COOS MALHEUR 500 - 999
69 22
100 - 499
HARNEY
50 - 99
1 - 49
KLAMATH
202 LAKE None reported

Source: Drug Enforcement

Administration Domestic Cannabis
CURRY
137
Eradication/Suppression Program.
JACKSON
JOSEPHINE 262
1,362

Miles

0 25 50 NDIC 2007012220PKB

Map 20. Indoor Plants Seized in Oregon, by County, 2005.

69
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

70
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 21. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Washington, by County, 2006

WHATCOM
138

SAN JUAN

PEND OREILLE
OKANOGAN
38
SKAGIT
FERRY
243
STEVENS
4,677
ISLAND

CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
30
245

CHELAN
7,802
JEFFERSON
111 DOUGLAS
1,588
SPOKANE
KITSAP 99
203 LINCOLN
8
KING
113
MASON
443

GRAYS HARBOR
3,319
KITTITAS GRANT Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
168 4,019 (January through November 2006)
PIERCE
136 ADAMS 200,000 +
THURSTON 447
168 WHITMAN 100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
PACIFIC LEWIS
267 None reported
764 FRANKLIN
15,382
YAKIMA
GARFIELD
Public lands
51,730
Source: Drug Enforcement
WAHKIAKUM
COLUMBIA Administration Domestic Cannabis
COWLITZ
BENTON WALLA WALLA ASOTIN Eradication/Suppression Program,
4,163 3,102 U.S. Department of the Interior,
110
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service.
SKAMANIA
184

KLICKITAT
1,389
CLARK
253

Miles

0 20 40 NDIC 2007012221PKB

Map 21. Outdoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2006.

71
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

72
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 22. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Washington, by County, 2005

WHATCOM
37

SAN JUAN
95
OKANOGAN PEND OREILLE
1,344 24
SKAGIT FERRY
971 25 STEVENS
1,003
ISLAND

CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
22
215

CHELAN
37,026
JEFFERSON
52 DOUGLAS
3,300
SPOKANE
KITSAP 457
477 LINCOLN
19
KING
32
MASON
196

GRAYS HARBOR
1,532
KITTITAS GRANT
20,518

PIERCE
THURSTON
ADAMS Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005
2,173 WHITMAN
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
PACIFIC LEWIS 1 - 99
55 105 None reported
FRANKLIN
8,386
YAKIMA
GARFIELD
Public lands
14,788
Source: Drug Enforcement
WAHKIAKUM COLUMBIA Administration Domestic Cannabis
1,235
COWLITZ
BENTON WALLA WALLA ASOTIN Eradication/Suppression Program,
3,527 2,350 U.S. Department of the Interior,
62
and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service.
SKAMANIA
79

KLICKITAT
1,088
CLARK
685

Miles

0 20 40 NDIC 2007012222PKB

Map 22. Outdoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2005.

73
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

74
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 23. Indoor Plants Seized

in Washington, by County, 2006

WHATCOM
2,298

SAN JUAN

OKANOGAN PEND OREILLE

185 31
SKAGIT
FERRY
484
STEVENS
1,650
ISLAND

CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
321
1,488

CHELAN
51
JEFFERSON
406
DOUGLAS

SPOKANE
LINCOLN 1,688
12
KITSAP KING
1,095 17,618
MASON
337

GRAYS HARBOR
250
KITTITAS GRANT
3 128 Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
PIERCE (January through November 2006)
2,077 ADAMS
THURSTON
441 WHITMAN
10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999
LEWIS 100 - 499
PACIFIC
193 50 - 99
FRANKLIN

YAKIMA
1 - 49
GARFIELD
None reported
WAHKIAKUM
COLUMBIA

COWLITZ BENTON
ASOTIN Source: Drug Enforcement
WALLA WALLA
47 19
Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program.
SKAMANIA
251

KLICKITAT
CLARK
1,366
jk

Miles

0 20 40 NDIC 2007012223PKB

Map 23. Indoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2006.

75
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

76
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 24. Indoor Plants Seized

in Washington, by County, 2005

WHATCOM
338

SAN JUAN

OKANOGAN PEND OREILLE

52 141
SKAGIT FERRY
988 65 STEVENS
553
ISLAND

CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
311
1,562

CHELAN
60
JEFFERSON
385 DOUGLAS
23
SPOKANE
LINCOLN 2,358
28
KITSAP KING
949 17,103
MASON
1,893

GRAYS HARBOR
KITTITAS GRANT
100 3
PIERCE Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005
2,005 ADAMS
THURSTON
1,039 WHITMAN 10,000 +
1
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999
LEWIS 100 - 499
PACIFIC
941 50 - 99
FRANKLIN
YAKIMA 1 - 49
GARFIELD
1,418
WAHKIAKUM None reported
23 COLUMBIA
7
COWLITZ
BENTON
WALLA WALLA
ASOTIN Source: Drug Enforcement
165 1 Administration's Domestic Cannabis
58
Eradication/Suppression Program.
SKAMANIA
102

KLICKITAT
67
CLARK
1,042
jk

Miles

0 20 40 NDIC 2007012224PKB

Map 24. Indoor Plants Seized in Washington, by County, 2005.

77
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

78
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 25. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2006 BOONE
KENTONCAMPBELL

GALLATIN
213 BRACKEN
PENDLETON
354
CARROLL GRANT 48
TRIMBLE 331 533 MASON
5,401 232 GREENUP
ROBERTSON LEWIS 15
OWEN
190 1,244
322
HENRY HARRISON
OLDHAM
264 355 FLEMING BOYD
CARTER 36
NICHOLAS
SCOTT 1,280
10
FRANKLIN 110
SHELBY BOURBON ROWAN
475
JEFFERSON 650 BATH ELLIOTT
FAYETTE 155 11,402 LAWRENCE
MONTGOMERY 232
SPENCER WOODFORD
ANDERSON 331 35
87 CLARK
BULLITT 191 MENIFEE
MEADE 29 MORGAN
242 762
1,629 353
JESSAMINE JOHNSON
HANCOCK POWELL 3,679 MARTIN
NELSON 79 914 26
HENDERSON 77 BRECKINRIDGE MERCER
8,310 WASHINGTON WOLFE
54 2,629 250 MAGOFFIN
HARDIN 6,207 MADISON 1,985
DAVIESS ESTILL 5,865
1,438 470
24 GARRARD 686
UNION BOYLE LEE
808 548 9,497 FLOYD
WEBSTER LARUE MARION BREATHITT 5,859 PIKE
381 MCLEAN 4,709 6,848 29,847 10,549
285 OHIO GRAYSON LINCOLN
153 1,077 JACKSON OWSLEY
CRITTENDEN 794
2,308 11,119 KNOTT
29 TAYLOR ROCKCASTLE
HOPKINS CASEY 4,658 PERRY 23,026
1,936
3,781 HART 1,622 30,344
5,129 GREEN
LIVINGSTON
EDMONSON 3,381
1,202 BUTLER CLAY
CALDWELL MUHLENBERG 2,118 LAUREL LETCHER
698 283 30,580 LESLIE
BALLARD 7,439 PULASKI 1,210 35,814
ADAIR 37,848
19 MCCRACKEN 2,020
LYON 2,379
132 WARREN METCALFE RUSSELL
310 BARREN 2,087
743 5,798
CARLISLE CHRISTIAN KNOX HARLAN
MARSHALL
7 890 TODD LOGAN 48,670 12,737
227 TRIGG
875 1,279 WAYNE
111 CUMBERLAND
GRAVES ALLEN 24,327 WHITLEY BELL
SIMPSON
HICKMAN 316 241 MONROE MCCREARY 20,188 39,877
750 CLINTON
12,637 11,620 1,791
CALLOWAY
FULTON
575

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Public lands
Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NDIC 2007012525PKB

Map 25. Outdoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006.

79
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

80
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 26. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2006

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006

(January through November 2006) by Number of Plants
200,000 + (January through October 2006)
1 - 99
100,000 - 199,999
100 - 999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999
1 - 99
20,000 - 54,720
None reported
Public lands

Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and NDIC 2007012526PKB
Kentucky State Police.

Map 26. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006.

81
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

82
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 27. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2005 BOONE
37 KENTON CAMPBELL
31 58

GALLATIN
444 PENDLETON BRACKEN
115 243
CARROLL GRANT
TRIMBLE 412 150 MASON
5,189 66
ROBERTSON LEWIS GREENUP
OWEN
73 3,071 1,405
324
HENRY HARRISON
OLDHAM 389 877 FLEMING BOYD
44 92 CARTER
NICHOLAS
6,492
SCOTT 151
FRANKLIN 279
SHELBY ROWAN
JEFFERSON 558 BOURBON
309 BATH 606
367 64 ELLIOTT
FAYETTE 625 2,177 LAWRENCE
2,790
SPENCER WOODFORD MONTGOMERY
84 ANDERSON 164 75
MEADE BULLITT 41 CLARK MENIFEE MORGAN
2,406 14 60
JESSAMINE JOHNSON
HANCOCK POWELL 1,589 MARTIN
NELSON MERCER 37 5,620
HENDERSON 5 308
BRECKINRIDGE 6,900 241 WOLFE
WASHINGTON
901 HARDIN MADISON 3,269 MAGOFFIN
2,096 ESTILL
UNION DAVIESS 272 1,329 4,913
1,555
54 113 BOYLE GARRARD
1,273 LEE FLOYD
92 10,202
WEBSTER LARUE MARION BREATHITT 8,320
MCLEAN 2,688 PIKE
118 4,967 29,003 12,286
OHIO GRAYSON LINCOLN
702 288 187 JACKSON OWSLEY
973 20,019 KNOTT
CRITTENDEN TAYLOR ROCKCASTLE
HOPKINS 6,257 CASEY 2,426 PERRY 20,723
2,084 HART 15,123 41,181
LIVINGSTON 202 GREEN
MUHLENBERG EDMONSON 1,967
BUTLER CLAY
CALDWELL 643 269 LAUREL LETCHER
339 9,718 LESLIE
210 PULASKI 3,997 20,587
BALLARD ADAIR 22,821
97 MCCRACKEN 1,773
75 LYON 5,791
71 WARREN RUSSELL
BARREN METCALFE
198 5,638 3,039
MARSHALL CHRISTIAN 1,216 KNOX
CARLISLE HARLAN
199 LOGAN 21,891 50,962
TODD
TRIGG 1,108 WAYNE
CUMBERLAND 11,925 WHITLEY
GRAVES SIMPSON ALLEN BELL
2,725 CLINTON 5,494
HICKMAN 21 1,026 1,118 MONROE MCCREARY 76,161
11,796 5,671 175
CALLOWAY
FULTON 343
200

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Public lands

Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NDIC 2007012527PKB

Map 27. Outdoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005.

83
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

84
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 28. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2005

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2005

by Number of Plants
200,000 +
1 - 99
100,000 - 199,999
100 - 999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999
1 - 99
20,000 - 54,720
None reported
Public lands

Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and NDIC 2007012528PKB
Kentucky State Police.

Map 28. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005.

85
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

86
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 29. Indoor Plants Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2006 BOONE
27 KENTONCAMPBELL

GALLATIN
PENDLETON
19 BRACKEN
CARROLL
GRANT
TRIMBLE MASON GREENUP
LEWIS 256
OWEN ROBERTSON

HENRY HARRISON
OLDHAM FLEMING BOYD
CARTER
NICHOLAS 2
SCOTT
FRANKLIN BOURBON
SHELBY ROWAN
JEFFERSON
BATH ELLIOTT
LAWRENCE
SPENCER FAYETTE
WOODFORD MONTGOMERY
16 ANDERSON
83
MEADE BULLITT CLARK
124 216 MENIFEE MORGAN

JESSAMINE JOHNSON
HANCOCK POWELL MARTIN
HENDERSON
NELSON MERCER
BRECKINRIDGE 103
6 WASHINGTON WOLFE MAGOFFIN
HARDIN MADISON
DAVIESS 67 6 ESTILL 12
UNION
2
BOYLE GARRARD
LEE FLOYD
LARUE BREATHITT
MCLEAN MARION
WEBSTER 62 3
27 PIKE
OHIO LINCOLN
GRAYSON JACKSON OWSLEY
2
CRITTENDEN ROCKCASTLE 24 KNOTT
8 TAYLOR
CASEY 10 PERRY
HOPKINS HART
LIVINGSTON 2 GREEN
MUHLENBERG EDMONSON
BUTLER
13 LAUREL CLAY
CALDWELL LETCHER
PULASKI 1 LESLIE
BALLARD MCCRACKEN ADAIR 14
LYON
WARREN METCALFE RUSSELL
BARREN
MARSHALL CHRISTIAN
KNOX
CARLISLE 10 HARLAN
TRIGG TODD LOGAN
1 WAYNE
CUMBERLAND
GRAVES SIMPSON ALLEN WHITLEY
BELL
HICKMAN CLINTON MCCREARY
3 MONROE
CALLOWAY
11
FULTON

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999
100 - 499
50 - 99
1 - 49
Miles None reported

0 25 50 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. NDIC 2007012529PKB

Map 29. Indoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2006.

87
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

88
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 30. Indoor Plants Seized

in Kentucky, by County, 2005 BOONE
KENTONCAMPBELL

GALLATIN
PENDLETON BRACKEN
GRANT 33
TRIMBLE CARROLL
8 MASON GREENUP
OWEN LEWIS 44
ROBERTSON
1
HENRY HARRISON
OLDHAM FLEMING BOYD
CARTER
NICHOLAS
SCOTT
FRANKLIN 5
SHELBY BOURBON ROWAN
2 2
JEFFERSON 38
BATH ELLIOTT
LAWRENCE
FAYETTE
SPENCER WOODFORD MONTGOMERY
8
MEADE ANDERSON
BULLITT CLARK
1 MENIFEE MORGAN

JESSAMINE JOHNSON
HANCOCK POWELL
18 MARTIN
NELSON MERCER
HENDERSON 10
63 BRECKINRIDGE WOLFE
HARDIN WASHINGTON MAGOFFIN
166 MADISON 11
DAVIESS 24 ESTILL
UNION
42
BOYLE GARRARD
LEE FLOYD
LARUE BREATHITT
MARION PIKE
WEBSTER MCLEAN 84 2 13
OHIO GRAYSON LINCOLN
JACKSON OWSLEY
4 KNOTT
CRITTENDEN TAYLOR ROCKCASTLE
HOPKINS 47 CASEY PERRY
3 30 160
LIVINGSTON HART GREEN
MUHLENBERG 3
BUTLER EDMONSON
CLAY
CALDWELL LAUREL
LESLIE
LETCHER
BALLARD 450 ADAIR PULASKI
MCCRACKEN
6
LYON
WARREN RUSSELL
39 BARREN METCALFE 30
MARSHALL CHRISTIAN 147
CARLISLE 1 KNOX HARLAN
TODD LOGAN
TRIGG WAYNE
CUMBERLAND 34
GRAVES ALLEN WHITLEY
SIMPSON CLINTON MCCREARY BELL
HICKMAN MONROE 76
CALLOWAY
FULTON

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999
100 - 499
50 - 99
1 - 49
Miles None reported

0 25 50 Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Domestic

Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program. NDIC 2007012530PKB

Map 30. Indoor Plants Seized in Kentucky, by County, 2005.

89
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

90
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 31. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Tennessee, by County, 2006

CLAY PICKETT SULLIVAN

STEWART MONTGOMERY HANCOCK
ROBERTSON MACON 2,411 18,006 CLAIBORNE JOHNSON
455 52 SUMNER 6,915 HAWKINS
LAKE SCOTT CAMPBELL
OBION
1,695 HENRY TROUSDALE JACKSON FENTRESS 2,313 19,622
1,010 WEAKLEY OVERTON WASHINGTON
43,828 CARTER
160 HOUSTON 4,041 2,888 UNION GRAINGER
1,839
1,230 CHEATHAM SMITH 456 1,002
1,016 502 HAMBLEN GREENE
DICKSON DAVIDSON PUTNAM
DYER BENTON WILSON MORGAN ANDERSON UNICOI
240 16,632 JEFFERSON
745 1,387 42,121 2,630
GIBSON HUMPHREYS 350
939 CARROLL 1,548 KNOX
362 DE KALB 21
WHITE CUMBERLAND COCKE
WILLIAMSON 2,437 88,919 12,783
CROCKETT 312 RUTHERFORD ROANE
LAUDERDALE HICKMAN CANNON 305
352 LOUDON SEVIER
207 27,853 89
45 6,975
VAN BUREN
HENDERSON PERRY WARREN
MADISON 37,308 RHEA BLOUNT
HAYWOOD 23 MAURY 181,671
496 1,590 BLEDSOE 768
307 DECATUR 317
TIPTON LEWIS 2,960
744 BEDFORD
4,288 MARSHALL COFFEE
CHESTER 618 MONROE
378
103 MEIGS MCMINN 650
GRUNDY SEQUATCHIE
26,757 10,846
WAYNE MOORE
SHELBY FAYETTE HARDEMAN LAWRENCE 408
MCNAIRY HARDIN 40,641 GILES
203 26,553 HAMILTON
215 1,471 458 FRANKLIN
LINCOLN BRADLEY
MARION 201 POLK
777 1,817
362 2,401

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006

(January through November 2006)
200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Public lands
Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NDIC 2007012331PKB

Map 31. Outdoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2006.

91
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

92
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 32. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Tennessee, by County, 2006

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006

(January through November 2006) by Number of Plants
200,000 + (January through October 2006)
100,000 - 199,999 1 - 99
10,000 - 99,999 100 - 999
1,000 - 9,999 1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999
1 - 99
None reported 20,000 - 54,720

Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Miles Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
0 25 50 Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
NDIC 2007012332PKB

Map 32. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2006.

93
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

94
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 33. Outdoor Plants Seized

in Tennessee, by County, 2005

CLAY PICKETT HANCOCK SULLIVAN

STEWART MONTGOMERY ROBERTSON MACON 12,413 JOHNSON
10,918 CLAIBORNE 60
241 634 482 SUMNER 2
4,334 HAWKINS
255 SCOTT CAMPBELL
LAKE OBION TROUSDALE FENTRESS 1,341 18,365
777 HENRY JACKSON OVERTON
WEAKLEY 375 55,781 WASHINGTON CARTER
1,762 HOUSTON 1,724 250 UNION GRAINGER
624 107 504
1,096 CHEATHAM SMITH 6,156 1,291 HAMBLEN
1,572 267 4,275 GREENE
DICKSON DAVIDSON WILSON 6,500 UNICOI
DYER BENTON PUTNAM MORGAN ANDERSON
1,520 89 JEFFERSON 8
411 1,801 10,482 105
GIBSON HUMPHREYS 14,607
380 CARROLL 1,581 KNOX
DE KALB
926 WHITE CUMBERLAND 2,197 COCKE
185
WILLIAMSON 206 88,961 30,745
CROCKETT 128 RUTHERFORD ROANE
LAUDERDALE HICKMAN
42 CANNON 1,420 SEVIER
14,645 1,165 5,177
LOUDON
HENDERSON VAN BUREN
PERRY WARREN 31,851 BLOUNT
HAYWOOD MADISON 90 MAURY
DECATUR 6,390 RHEA
47 105 273 BLEDSOE
211 6,548
TIPTON LEWIS BEDFORD 6,867
3,511 MARSHALL COFFEE
CHESTER 102 86 MONROE
229 MCMINN
MEIGS 3,928
GRUNDY SEQUATCHIE 2,400
16,163 783
FAYETTE HARDEMAN WAYNE MOORE
SHELBY LAWRENCE
103 185 MCNAIRY HARDIN 24,697 GILES
1,840 15,371 HAMILTON
954 3,541 FRANKLIN BRADLEY
LINCOLN MARION 218
1,295 1,200 POLK
235 618 981

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Public lands

Miles Source: Drug Enforcement Administration

Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
0 25 50 Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, and
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
NDIC 2007012333PKB

Map 33. Outdoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005.

95
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

96
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 34. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in Tennessee, by County, 2005

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005 Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2005

by Number of Plants
200,000 +
1 - 99
100,000 - 199,999
100 - 999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999 10,000 - 19,999
1 - 99
20,000 - 54,720
None reported
Public lands
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Miles Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression
Program, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
0 25 50 Department of Agriculture Forest Service, and
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
NDIC 2007012334PKB

Map 34. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005.

97
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

98
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 35. Indoor Plants Seized

in Tennessee, by County, 2005

CLAY PICKETT HANCOCK SULLIVAN

STEWART MONTGOMERY ROBERTSON MACON JOHNSON
CLAIBORNE
33 SUMNER HAWKINS
CAMPBELL
OBION SCOTT 9
LAKE TROUSDALE
HENRY JACKSON FENTRESS WASHINGTON
WEAKLEY CHEATHAM OVERTON CARTER
HOUSTON UNION GRAINGER
SMITH HAMBLEN
GREENE
DICKSON DAVIDSON UNICOI
WILSON PUTNAM MORGAN
DYER ANDERSON
BENTON
GIBSON HUMPHREYS JEFFERSON
CARROLL KNOX
DE KALB COCKE
CUMBERLAND
WHITE 611
WILLIAMSON
CROCKETT ROANE
LAUDERDALE RUTHERFORD
HICKMAN CANNON SEVIER
LOUDON
HENDERSON WARREN VAN BUREN
PERRY BLOUNT
HAYWOOD MADISON
MAURY
BLEDSOE RHEA
TIPTON DECATUR
LEWIS
BEDFORD
COFFEE
CHESTER MARSHALL MONROE
MEIGS MCMINN
GRUNDY SEQUATCHIE

MOORE
SHELBY FAYETTE HARDEMAN WAYNE LAWRENCE
MCNAIRY HARDIN GILES
HAMILTON BRADLEY
LINCOLN FRANKLIN
MARION POLK

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

10,000 +
5,000 - 9,999
1,000 - 4,999
500 - 999
100 - 499
50 - 99
1 - 49
None reported
Miles
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
0 25 50 Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program.
NDIC 2007012335PKB

Map 35. Indoor Plants Seized in Tennessee, by County, 2005.

99
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

100
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HANCOCK

Map 36. Outdoor Plants Seized

BROOKE
in West Virginia, by County, 2006
OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA
WETZEL
MORGAN

MARION
TYLER PRESTON BERKELEY

MINERAL
PLEASANTS
TAYLOR HAMPSHIRE JEFFERSON
DODDRIDGE HARRISON
WOOD
RITCHIE
BARBOUR
TUCKER GRANT

WIRT
LEWIS
197 HARDY
GILMER
780 UPSHUR
JACKSON CALHOUN
MASON RANDOLPH
1,542
ROANE BRAXTON
753 PENDLETON

PUTNAM
WEBSTER
CABELL CLAY
491 4,543
KANAWHA
6,027 POCAHONTAS
NICHOLAS

LINCOLN
686
WAYNE
12,906

BOONE FAYETTE
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
3,299 (January through November 2006)
GREENBRIER 200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
LOGAN
9,709
10,000 - 99,999
RALEIGH 1,000 - 9,999
MINGO
100 - 999
4,221
1 - 99
SUMMERS None reported
WYOMING
MONROE
17,505
Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement

MCDOWELL MERCER Administration Domestic Cannabis
1,150 Eradication/Suppression Program,
U.S. Department of the Interior,
Miles and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service.
0 25 50
NDIC 2007012436PKB

Map 36. Outdoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006.

101
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

102
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HANCOCK

Map 37. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

BROOKE
in West Virginia, by County, 2006
OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA
WETZEL
MORGAN

MARION
TYLER PRESTON BERKELEY

MINERAL
PLEASANTS
TAYLOR HAMPSHIRE JEFFERSON
DODDRIDGE HARRISON
WOOD
RITCHIE
BARBOUR
TUCKER GRANT

WIRT
LEWIS
197 HARDY
GILMER
780 UPSHUR
JACKSON CALHOUN
MASON RANDOLPH
1,542
ROANE BRAXTON
753 PENDLETON

PUTNAM
CLAY WEBSTER Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
CABELL (January through November 2006)
491 4,543
KANAWHA
200,000 +
6,027 100,000 - 199,999
POCAHONTAS
NICHOLAS 10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
LINCOLN 100 - 999
686
WAYNE 1 - 99
12,906 None reported
BOONE
3,299
FAYETTE Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2006
by Number of Plants
GREENBRIER
(January through September 2006)
LOGAN 1 - 99
9,709 100 - 999
RALEIGH 1,000 - 9,999
MINGO
4,221 10,000 - 19,999
SUMMERS 20,000 - 54,720
WYOMING
MONROE
17,505
Public lands
Source: Drug Enforcement
Administration Domestic Cannabis
MCDOWELL MERCER
Eradication/Suppression Program,
1,150
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Miles Department of Agriculture Forest Service,
and West Virginia National Guard.
0 25 50
NDIC 2007012437PKB

Map 37. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006.

103
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

104
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HANCOCK
9

Map 38. Outdoor Plants Seized

BROOKE
in West Virginia, by County, 2005
OHIO

MARSHALL
188

MONONGALIA
WETZEL
MORGAN
38
14
MARION PRESTON BERKELEY
TYLER 1 31
PLEASANTS MINERAL
83 TAYLOR 46 JEFFERSON
HAMPSHIRE
9
HARRISON
DODDRIDGE
WOOD 105
RITCHIE
1,186
BARBOUR TUCKER
GRANT
838 441
WIRT
595 LEWIS
52 HARDY
GILMER
43 UPSHUR
JACKSON CALHOUN 90
3,971 188
MASON RANDOLPH
2,016 80
ROANE
BRAXTON
192 PENDLETON
69

PUTNAM
114 WEBSTER
CLAY
CABELL 581
KANAWHA
8,512 POCAHONTAS
NICHOLAS 180
49
LINCOLN
1,382
WAYNE
7,531

BOONE FAYETTE
3,948 473 Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005
GREENBRIER
1,155 200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
LOGAN
8,254
10,000 - 99,999
RALEIGH 1,000 - 9,999
MINGO 805 100 - 999
1,284
1 - 99
WYOMING SUMMERS
None reported
2,024 203 MONROE
143
Public lands

Source: Drug Enforcement

MERCER Administration Domestic Cannabis
MCDOWELL
472 Eradication/Suppression Program,
9,363
U.S. Department of the Interior,
Miles and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service.
0 25 50
NDIC 2007012438PKB

Map 38. Outdoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005.

105
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

106
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Map 39. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized

in West Virginia, by County, 2005

Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005

200,000 +
100,000 - 199,999
10,000 - 99,999
1,000 - 9,999
100 - 999
1 - 99
None reported

Cannabis Eradication Sites, 2005

by Number of Plants
1 - 99
100 - 999
1,000 - 9,999
10,000 - 19,999
20,000 - 54,720
Public lands
Source: Drug Enforcement
Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program,
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.
Miles Department of Agriculture Forest Service,
and West Virginia National Guard.
0 25 50
NDIC 2007012439PKB

Map 39. Outdoor Plants and Sites Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005.

107
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

108
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HANCOCK

Map 40. Indoor Plants Seized

BROOKE
in West Virginia, by County, 2006
OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA
WETZEL
MORGAN

MARION
TYLER PRESTON BERKELEY

MINERAL
PLEASANTS
TAYLOR HAMPSHIRE JEFFERSON
DODDRIDGE HARRISON
WOOD
RITCHIE
BARBOUR
TUCKER GRANT

WIRT
LEWIS HARDY
GILMER
306
UPSHUR
JACKSON CALHOUN
MASON
RANDOLPH
6
ROANE
BRAXTON
PENDLETON

PUTNAM
WEBSTER
CLAY
CABELL
KANAWHA
845
POCAHONTAS
NICHOLAS

LINCOLN

WAYNE

BOONE
FAYETTE Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2006
5
(January through November 2006)
GREENBRIER
10,000 +
LOGAN 5,000 - 9,999
3
1,000 - 4,999
RALEIGH
MINGO 500 - 999
100 - 499
WYOMING
SUMMERS 50 - 99
MONROE
1 - 49
None reported

MERCER Source: Drug Enforcement

MCDOWELL Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program.
Miles

0 25 50
NDIC 2007012438PKB

Map 40. Indoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2006.

109
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

110
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

HANCOCK
2

Map 41. Indoor Plants Seized

BROOKE
in West Virginia, by County, 2005
OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA
WETZEL
MORGAN
20
4
MARION BERKELEY
TYLER PRESTON 31
MINERAL
PLEASANTS HAMPSHIRE
TAYLOR JEFFERSON
HARRISON 24 52
DODDRIDGE 10
WOOD
RITCHIE

BARBOUR TUCKER
GRANT
2 10
WIRT
LEWIS
128 HARDY

GILMER
UPSHUR
JACKSON CALHOUN
RANDOLPH
MASON
4
ROANE
BRAXTON PENDLETON
64

PUTNAM
67
WEBSTER
CLAY
CABELL
KANAWHA
135
POCAHONTAS
NICHOLAS

LINCOLN

WAYNE

FAYETTE
BOONE
20
Cannabis Plants Eradicated, 2005
GREENBRIER
65
10,000 +
LOGAN 5,000 - 9,999
RALEIGH 1,000 - 4,999
MINGO 205 500 - 999
100 - 499
WYOMING
SUMMERS 50 - 99
MONROE
1 - 49
None reported

MERCER Source: Drug Enforcement

MCDOWELL
Administration Domestic Cannabis
Eradication/Suppression Program.
Miles

0 25 50
NDIC 2007012441PKB

Map 41. Indoor Plants Seized in West Virginia, by County, 2005.

111
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

112
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

Sources

Federal
Executive Office of the President
Office of National Drug Control Policy
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
Appalachia
Arizona
Demand Reduction Office
Post Seizure Analysis Team
Atlanta
Central Florida
Central Valley California
Marijuana Investigative Team
Chicago
Gulf Coast
Hawaii
Houston
Lake County
Los Angeles
Michigan
Milwaukee
Nevada
New England
New York/New Jersey
Northern California
North Florida
North Texas
Northwest
Ohio
Oregon
Philadelphia/Camden
Puerto Rico/U.S. Virgin Islands
Rocky Mountain
South Florida
Southwest Border
Washington/Baltimore
National Marijuana Initiative
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
National Forest System

113
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

University of Mississippi
Potency Monitoring Project
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
Criminal Division
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force
Drug Enforcement Administration
Atlanta Field Division
Boston Field Division
Caribbean Field Division
Chicago Field Division
Dallas Field Division
Denver Field Division
Detroit Field Division
Domestic Cannabis Eradication/Suppression Program
El Paso Field Division
El Paso Intelligence Center
Houston Field Division
Los Angeles Field Division
Miami Field Division
Newark Field Division
New Orleans Field Division
New York Field Division
Philadelphia Field Division
Phoenix Field Division
San Diego Field Division
San Francisco Field Division
Sacramento District Office
Seattle Field Division
St. Louis Field Division
Washington, D.C., Field Division
Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys
U.S. Attorneys’ Offices
Federal Bureau of Investigation
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Reclamation
National Park Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

114
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

State
Alabama
Alabama Bureau of Investigation
Marijuana Eradication Program
Alabama National Guard
Arizona
Arizona Department of Public Safety
Arizona State Land Department
Gila County Task Force
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office
Phoenix Police Department
Arkansas
Arkansas State Police
California
California Department of Justice
Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement
Campaign Against Marijuana Planting
Narcotic Information Network
California National Guard
California Secretary of State
Connecticut
Southington Police Department
Florida
Domestic Marijuana Eradication Program
Florida National Guard
Office of Agricultural Law Enforcement
Florida Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services
Florida Department of Law Enforcement
Miami-Dade Police Department
Port St. Lucie Police Department
Kentucky
Kentucky State Police
Marijuana Suppression Unit

115
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

Oregon
Oregon Department of Justice
Tennessee
Lafayette Police Department
Tennessee Bureau of Investigation
Governor’s Task Force for Marijuana Eradication
Tennessee Judicial Drug Task Forces
15th Judicial District Task Force
Trousdale County Sheriff’s Office
Texas
Texas Department of Public Safety
Domestic Marijuana Eradication Program
Washington
Valley Narcotics Enforcement Team
Washington State Patrol
West Virginia
West Virginia Army National Guard
West Virginia State Police
Bureau of Criminal Investigations
Canada
Government of Ontario
Department of Justice Canada
Legislative Assembly of Ontario
Montreal Police Department
Royal Canadian Mounted Police

116
Product No. 2007-L0848-001 National Drug Intelligence Center

This page intentionally left blank.

117
Domestic Cannabis Cultivation Assessment 2007

319 Washington Street 5th Floor, Johnstown, PA 15901-1622 • (814) 532-4601

NDIC publications are available on the following web sites:
031007

ADNET http://ndicosa LEO home.leo.gov/lesig/ndic

RISS ndic.riss.net INTERNET www.usdoj.gov/ndic

Cover photos: BNE, NDIC, and Southington Connecticut Police Department