Cannabis has long been judged at the point of cultivation. Genetics, lighting, nutrients, and environmental controls dominate the conversation. Yet the final character of the plant, its flavor, stability, and commercial value, is determined after it leaves the grow room.

David Sandelman, CTO and co-founder of Cannatrol, has spent his career working in industries where that reality is taken for granted. Wine, cheese, and dry-aged meats are defined by post-harvest discipline. Cannabis, he argues, is still catching up.

“A winery is basically all about post-harvest,” Sandelman said. “That industry spends 90 plus capital on building a winery post-harvest. And then we get into cannabis, and it’s an afterthought in the closet very often.”

That imbalance is beginning to shift as legal markets mature. The consumer is becoming more discerning. Operators are facing tighter margins and the science behind drying, curing, and storage is moving from intuition to repeatable systems.

Food Science to Cannabis

Cannatrol’s origin story sits outside the traditional cannabis arc. Sandelman and his team began as engineers working in food science.

“We originally developed a technology for the cheese industry, which then moved into charcuterie and dry aged meats,” he said. “It was that aha moment. Gee, would this work for a cannabis flower?”

The underlying principles translated directly. Shelf stability, moisture migration, and water activity govern whether a product holds its quality or degrades. Cannabis flower presents the same variables, just in a different form factor.

The first prototype was a test, but the response was immediate.

“And a week or two later, they said, ‘This is some of the finest flower they ever produced,’” according to Sandelman.

That feedback triggered a deeper dive into the mechanics of post-harvest cannabis. Terpene retention, trichome integrity, and yield preservation became measurable outcomes, eschewing anecdotal claims based on taste tests only.

Controlling the Variables

Traditional cannabis drying relies on environmental cycling. Air conditioners and dehumidifiers remove moisture in bursts, often overshooting the target. Operators intervene manually, moving product, burping containers, or adjusting conditions to avoid overdrying or mold.

Sandelman sees that process as fundamentally unstable.

“Every time they cycle on, the vapor pressure drops, it removes moisture from the product, and that’s a continuous process,” he said. “If you leave the flower in a room with air conditioners and dehumidifiers, it’s going to dry it to dust.”

Cannatrol’s approach centers on maintaining constant vapor pressure. Instead of forcing moisture out, the system allows the flower to reach equilibrium.

“What we do is we maintain a constant vapor pressure in the space so that it’s constantly drying until it gets to equilibrium and then stops drying because it’s at equilibrium,” he explained.

The Economics of Moisture

Cannabis, like cheese and meat, is sold by weight. Every percentage point of moisture lost beyond the optimal range is product that cannot be sold.

“If you overdry the product, you degrade the quality… and also you’re losing revenue,” Sandelman said. “That’s money coming right off your top line.”

This is where engineering and economics merge. A controlled dry and cure process protects both the sensory profile and the bottom line. The industry is starting to recognize that connection, particularly as margins tighten and competition increases across mature markets.

Rethinking Standards

One of the more technical, and consequential, debates in cannabis regulation centers on how product stability is measured.

Most jurisdictions rely on percent moisture. Sandelman argues that metric is insufficient.

“Definitely the percent moisture should be done away with, and it should just be about water activity because it’s water activity that determines when mold and microbes can grow,” he said.

Water activity measures the availability of free water that can support microbial growth. It is a standard used across food science. In cannabis, it offers a more accurate picture of shelf stability.

“What we’re finding and learning is that the percent moisture will vary based on the cultivar,” he added.

That variability creates risk. A one-size-fits-all moisture target can lead to underdrying in one strain and overdrying in another. Water activity provides a consistent benchmark across cultivars. As legal markets mature, these kinds of technical adjustments are likely to shape both compliance frameworks and product quality.

The conversation around post-harvest inevitably loops back to the industry’s origins. Before legalization, quality control was inconsistent at best. Storage conditions were unknown and contaminants were common.

“Let’s go back to the old days when you were getting bricks out of Mexico with stems, seeds, twigs, and everything else,” Sandelman said. “Who knows what kind of chemicals they were using… you had no idea.”

Legalization has introduced testing, traceability, and baseline standards. The product is cleaner, safer, and more consistent.

Read more: Electric Haze: Why Real Sativas Refuse to Rush

Extending Quality to Retail

Packaging is only one step in post-harvest. Storage at the retail level is emerging as a critical control point.

“You would never manufacture ice cream and then ship it to a retailer who leaves them out on the shelf in a non-refrigerated space,” Sandelman said.

Cannabis has historically done just that. Product moves through distribution and sits in dispensary vaults under inconsistent conditions. By the time it reaches the consumer, the original quality has degraded. Controlled storage systems are starting to close that gap.

“When I buy the same flower from the same producer at other dispensaries, it isn’t as good as when I buy it at your dispensary,” Sandelman recalled from customer feedback.

That observation reframes the retail environment as part of the production chain. Quality is maintained, or lost, all the way to the point of sale.

A More Informed Consumer

For years, the cannabis market has been driven by a single number. THC percentage dominated packaging, marketing, and purchasing decisions. That is finally beginning to change.

“The consumer is going to get away from, ‘give me your highest THC,’” Sandelman said. “People are going to start understanding the terpene profile, flavor, taste, a lot more.”

This shift aligns with broader trends in food and beverage. Consumers are moving toward complexity, nuance, and experience. Cannabis is following a similar trajectory. Post-harvest plays a central role in that evolution. Terpenes are volatile and flavor is fragile. Without controlled drying and storage, those attributes degrade quickly.

As consumers become more educated, the market will reward operators who can preserve those characteristics.

Scaling Across Markets

Cannatrol’s recent expansion into Europe, partnering with Dutch Garden Supplies highlights adaptability as another dimension of post-harvest technology. Germany’s social club model favors smaller-scale cultivation. Other markets may lean toward medical production under strict GMP standards. Each framework requires different infrastructure.

“Each country is going to be different how they roll out,” Sandelman said.

The common thread is consistency. Whether the system is serving a home grower or a pharmaceutical-grade facility, the expectation is the same. The product should perform predictably.

That expectation is pushing the industry toward standardized processes, even as regulations vary across jurisdictions.

Source link

“At the state level, we probably have more questions than answers.”

By Makenzie Huber, South Dakota Searchlight

A federal change in medical marijuana’s legal classification should help South Dakota’s medical cannabis industry claim business tax deductions and gain access to banking, officials told state lawmakers Monday, but questions remain about the broader impact.

Whitney Brunner, administrator of the state’s medical cannabis program, told the legislative Medical Marijuana Oversight Committee during a meeting at the Capitol in Pierre that the federal government has shared little information about the change with the state—other than to request data.

“At the state level, we probably have more questions than answers,” Brunner said.

In April, the federal government moved medical marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under federal drug law. Schedule I drugs are considered to have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule III drugs are recognized as having accepted medical uses and a lower potential for abuse.

Recreational marijuana remains a Schedule I drug under federal policy, even though 24 states and the District of Columbia allow recreational cannabis in various forms. South Dakota does not allow recreational marijuana use.

Medical marijuana has been legal in South Dakota since 2021, after voters approved it through a citizen-led ballot measure in 2020. Since then, South Dakota has built a regulatory framework—including licensing systems, testing requirements and oversight.

Brunner did not say whether South Dakota businesses will be required to register with the Drug Enforcement Administration to participate in the state program or what new compliance requirements they might face.

Kittrick Jeffries, chairman of the Cannabis Industry Association of South Dakota and owner of Puffy’s Dispensary in Rapid City, said some businesses are taking the initiative.

“A lot of our establishments within our association are currently going through the DEA inspection process to become licensed under the DEA,” Jeffries said.

Cannabis businesses have long been blocked from taking certain federal tax deductions because marijuana was classified as a Schedule I substance—meaning they couldn’t deduct ordinary business expenses the way other businesses can. Banks have also largely avoided working with cannabis businesses because marijuana remains broadly illegal under federal law, exposing financial institutions to regulatory penalties even in states where it’s legal.

The reclassification will allow medical cannabis businesses to claim deductions, said Nicole Ezeh, a presenter with the National Conference of State Legislatures. It should also ease banking access for the industry.

The federal changes come as South Dakota’s program is in transition. Brunner told lawmakers the department overhauled its medical cannabis inspection program over the last year, after inspectors were missing violations and citing establishments inconsistently.

“We realized last year, and it wasn’t a difficult realization to make, that we had a lot of work to do on inspections and our processes,” Brunner said.

The department created new procedures and training, reorganized its supervisor structure and added a formal process for businesses to challenge citations, Brunner said.

Rob Krogstad, who operates Bad River Cannabis in Fort Pierre, told lawmakers his business was fined $3,000 for two “clerical errors” that were corrected before inspectors left the building.

“There will be human error,” Krogstad said, adding that the fine forced the business to delay other operational expenses. He suggested a three-strikes approach for minor clerical errors, with immediate fines reserved for more serious violations.

A rules package moving through administrative review would “make this a little easier on establishments,” Brunner said. The package would simplify language around inventory tracking training and reduce how long businesses must store security camera footage—changes Brunner said would be less expensive and less “cumbersome.”

The rules package would also restructure the fines system, making first-offense minor violations result in a corrective action plan rather than an immediate fine.

This story was first published by South Dakota Searchlight.

Source link

“Defendants are free to implement the law as they see fit, including accepting applications, holding a lottery, and issuing adult-use recreational and social equity cannabis licenses.”

By Christopher Shea, Rhode Island Current

A federal court order that blocked Rhode Island regulators from awarding cannabis retail licenses is now lifted, clearing the way for a new application process already underway.

U.S. District Court Judge Melissa DuBose on Friday dissolved the preliminary injunction she issued against the Rhode Island Cannabis Control Commission on April 8 now that the state’s 2022 Cannabis Act Act no longer requires all retail license holders to be majority-owned by Rhode Island residents.

“Defendants are free to implement the law as they see fit, including accepting applications, holding a lottery, and issuing adult-use recreational and social equity cannabis licenses,” DuBose, a Biden appointee, wrote.

DuBose indicated in a July 22 order she would grant the state’s motion to dissolve the April ruling once the three lawsuits challenging Rhode Island’s residency requirements were kicked down from Boston’s appellate court, which happened August 11.

Under the new law signed by Gov. Dan McKee (D) on June 10, applicants are defined as a person or a business who has “made an application for issuance of a license or certificate to own or engage in a cannabis business.”

The amended Cannabis Act voided the original application process, and the Cannabis Control Commission opened a new one on August 7. Online submissions for the state’s three license types will be accepted through Monday, November 23.

“The General Assembly’s passage of SB 3313 removed provisions deemed likely to violate the Constitution and because of that, the controversy at issue in the preliminary injunction is no  longer immediate or real,” DuBose wrote.

The legal challenges began in May 2024, when California cannabis entrepreneur Justyna Jensen sued the Cannabis Control Commission in U.S. District Court in Providence, arguing Rhode Island’s residency requirement for licenses under the original Cannabis Act violated interstate commerce protection. That same month, Florida resident John Kenney filed a second federal lawsuit against the commission objecting to the residency requirement. A California resident filed a third lawsuit on similar grounds on November 24, 2025.

DuBose initially dismissed the complaints in February 2025 since two were filed before the commission enacted the state’s inaugural cannabis regulations in May 2025. But the cases were revived in December by Boston’s federal appeals court, which demanded DuBose rule based on the merits of the cases.

Her April ruling barred the Cannabis Control Commission from holding a lottery to award licenses and reviewing the 97 license applications submitted for 20 new retail cannabis licenses.

Because of the state’s recent changes, regulators filed a motion in late June to dissolve DuBose’s preliminary injunction arguing the complaints against the residency requirement were moot.

Kenney and his attorneys supported the state’s request. Jensen and her legal team opposed it, claiming the new law still disadvantaged out-of-state applicants because they would have to secure property in Rhode Island on a short timeline in order to qualify for a retail license.

DuBose was unpersuaded by Jensen’s argument.

“She has had years, not months, to scour the Rhode Island market in search of a suitable property,” DuBose wrote in Friday’s ruling. “She has also had at least four months to search for property since this court entered its injunction.”

Jeffrey Jensen, Justyna’s husband and attorney, did not immediately respond to request for comment Monday.

Charon Rose, spokesperson for the Cannabis Control Commission, said the agency welcomed DuBose’s decision to dissolve the injunction but declined to comment further amid the ongoing litigation.

No applications for adult-use retail licenses have been submitted as of Monday afternoon, Rose confirmed in an email. The commission has received 32 interest forms from prospective social equity applicants, with 13 applying for initial screening for the license type reserved for people adversely affected by the war on drugs.

Social equity businesses must be majority owned by one or more people who can show they were disproportionately impacted by criminal enforcement of past prohibitions, including being arrested or having a family member who was.

The certification process will remain open through September 11.

This story was first published by Rhode Island Current.

Source link

“Our focus is to maintain that momentum by implementing the amended Cannabis Act as efficiently as possible.”

By Christopher Shea, Rhode Island Current

Rhode Island’s Cannabis Control Commission on Friday reopened the application process for prospective retailers after regulators’ first attempt to license more pot shops was halted by a federal court order and voided under a new state law.

Gov. Dan McKee (D) on June 10 signed a pair of bills that undo a provision in the original 2022 Rhode Island Cannabis Act that required cannabis retailers be majority-owned by Rhode Island residents, along with kickstarting a new application process within 60 days.

They’re changes the state made in order to resolve the trio of federal lawsuits that led to U.S. District Court Judge Melissa DuBose blocking the Cannabis Control Commission from holding the lottery it was planning to hold in May to award licenses.

DuBose also stopped regulators from continuing to screen and review any of the 97 retail license applications submitted by the original December 29, 2025, deadline.

“Our focus is to maintain that momentum by implementing the amended Cannabis Act as efficiently as possible,” Michelle Reddish, chairperson of the three-member regulatory panel, said in a statement Thursday.

Online submissions for the state’s three license types will be accepted through Monday, November 23. Prospective retailers seeking a social equity license, reserved for those adversely affected by the war on drugs, must first receive certification by September 11.

The commission’s announcement did not include a timeline for regulators to review applicants nor say when licenses would be awarded.

The revised law requires social equity businesses to be majority owned by one or more people who can show they were disproportionately impacted by criminal enforcement of past prohibitions, including being arrested or having a family member who was.

Under the 2022 act that legalized recreational cannabis, the commission can offer 24 new licenses to retailers, with six reserved for social equity applicants and another six reserved for worker-owned cooperatives. But not every license type received an application in each of the six geographic zones during the first go, which left regulators with a maximum of 20 licenses to issue across the state.

As it stands, nine shops are selling recreational cannabis in Rhode Island under hybrid retail-medicinal licenses grandfathered in from the state’s medical marijuana program.

The halt in the state’s first application pool left many would-be business owners continuing to pay rent on storefronts they may not even be able to open. Though they can’t recoup their property costs, the new state law allows those initial applicants to be refunded any fees paid to the commission.

All prospective retailers were required to pay an application fee of $7,500 and a yearly $30,000 licensing fee. Fees were waived for the first year for approved social equity applicants.

Over half of all applicants—56—sought general retail licenses. Another 19 were worker cooperatives while the remaining 23 were for social equity applicants.

Charon Rose, spokesperson for the Cannabis Control Commission, said in an email Friday that refund checks are expected to be issued on a rolling basis beginning next week. She did not state how many of the 75 applicants who paid the original application fee sought refunds.

This story was first published by Rhode Island Current.

Source link