OzyM8
Well-Known Member
Under that, I’d rather by footprint too. Plant count imo is not good.the way I look at it that would disadvantage people who are more efficient with their grows. By licensing by footprint there’s some control to the grow (vs weight where they could have hectares and producing small amounts per sq/m) as quota licensing has been abused in the past (and currently by the Victorian timber industry).
I see licensing happening by footprint, plant counts or both and personally I’d rather it by footprint to allow versatility in grow styles.
Imagine by foot print...multi level SOG on rolling tables, for the max output per year, and lower licensing costs.