Come for the Pot, Stay For the Powder? Colorado Finds Roughly Half of Tourists Visit Due To Legal Marijuana

Marijuana LeafWe have been following the expanding market pressures in favor of legalization of marijuana in the United States. Now a new study seems to support those who have argued that legalization is a powerful economic lift for the Colorado economy. It appears that the powder on the slopes is less of a draw than the pot for tourists.


A study commissioned by the Colorado Tourism Office found that tourists indicated that the marijuana laws influenced vacation decisions nearly 49 percent of the time. Of course, such surveys may not accurately reflect the full range of tourists, many of whom could be quietly avoiding the state for the same reason.

However, the emerging view is that legalization has worked economically for Colorado. Denise Miller, director of tourism surveys for Strategic Marketing and Research Insights, or SMARI, is reported as saying that, while it may not be the motivator for most tourists, “it’s become more of a motivator for those who want to do it.”

Notably, however, only 8 percent of tourists said they visited a marijuana dispensary during their trip to Colorado. Of those saying that they visited such stops, it is not surprising to see a greater draw from the laws: 85 percent said marijuana was a primary motivator of their visit to Colorado – up from 29 percent last year.

Source: Denver Post

37 thoughts on “Come for the Pot, Stay For the Powder? Colorado Finds Roughly Half of Tourists Visit Due To Legal Marijuana”

  1. I appreciate the support from all. My purpose is commenting about my condition at all, and only here (though others who’ve read it here have posted it elsewhere) is to potentially assist those who may also be facing it and not saying anything. I’ll go day by day and try to be clear so that my experience won’t be a vague war story about chemo. We’ve all heard various things about chemo, but few of us have faced it, so I hope what I relate will help at least one other person.

  2. Thank you, BarkinDog.

    Aridog, as formerly argumentative and staunch atheist gone agnostic, I’ve kept you in my thoughts since your announcement. Good luck. Your disposition will aid your journey greatly.

  3. You continue in my prayers, Ari. There are mixed results for the effectiveness of cannabis for issues like pain, anxiety, MS, Parkinson’s, etc. But, there is no doubt cannabis is highly effective for nausea and glaucoma.

  4. Weekend Warrior reporting for duty! ๐Ÿ˜€ As I’ve mentioned on another thread, I am dealing with an issue that just may require I use cannabis for nausea…although I have prescribed alleged alternatives. If they don’t work, you can bet your sweet bippy, I will opt for some form of cannabis. Never cared for weed in my college days (1960’s), it just made me sleepy. The lucky guys who got all “aroused” by it amazed me. But if it can relieve nausea that may hit me, now, you bet your butt I’ll use it again, ideally if I can get it as a solution for my Vapor device. John Law can kiss my tender behind if necessary. Michigan is weird about what’s “legal.” I already have a police record, so what’s a new entry…given my that my top secret clearance expired about 4 years ago, and was restricted after I retired anyway, never mind I have no need for a new one anyway.

    My “Chemo” begins Monday, after a couple weeks of “tests” through various “opsies,” with a Chemo injection in my spine, followed by more toxins injections through a nice under skin “port” on my chest on Tuesday. If nausea hits and the RX’s don’t manage it…I’ll be looking for pot…and I have three people so far who have promised to deliver it if needed. Bless them all. And y’all better deliver ๐Ÿ˜€ !

    All said and done, my finding is that alcohol is far more inductive to a**hole behavior than any doses of weed…so there’s that. The worst trouble makers I’ve known, including myself back in the day, were drunks…I am so glad I quit that … with the exception of a an ounce or two or cognac now and then. You guzzle cognac you will pay…I mean you WILL PAY!! with a headache like nothing you can imagine otherwise. You’ll only do it once I assure you…unless you are just flat out nuts. AT $50 + a shot, you have to be flipping nuts to drink too much of that divine stuff otherwise. If you’re a cognac apprentice I recommend Baron Otard or Camus Borderies XO, if you can find it….and afford it ($100++) …when you can find it, enjoy it. NYC folk and Chicago folks have the best selections…the rest of us must abide what our states permit. Or smuggle now and then ๐Ÿ˜€

  5. I agree with Steg in the comment above. But I have one poison which should be prohibited from being sold and used: tobacco. It kills millions. Most death certificates have some weeny reason on there to say that JoeBob died of heart disease or somesuch instead of the poison he imbibed for forty five years.

  6. Professor Turley,

    I see you’re doing what you can, thank you, I like that, as am I, doing what positive things I can.

    But for fun, My wife and I’m complying, sic, a playlist of classics & art of our time.

    Res ipsa loquitur

    38 years and I still enjoy talking to my wife, we’ve always consulted with the other for approval of issues we found compelling.

    What all have we’ve forgotten??

  7. (music)
    Roper dopers need love too stickers…
    And its up against the wall Redneck Mothers.
    Mothers who have raised a son so well.
    He’s 34 and drinkin in honky tonks.
    Kickin hippies arses and raisin hell.

  8. Karen S. …The problem goes beyond pot smokers who inadvertantly violate a neighboring state’s pot laws. The problem includes get the “Special Idaho Welcome” whether you use/possess pot or not. That’s where the “generally fishing expedition” comes in; “let’s stop enough cars (pretext traffic stops) with the ” wrong” plates, and we’re bound to find something”.
    So if the speed limit is 70, most cars are doing 75, you could be pulled over for doing 72MPH. It’s not about your driving;it’s an excuse to interrogate and search. That’s what a pretext traffic stop is.
    For cc.15-20 years, SCOTUS has gone out of their way to trash 4th Amendment protections for motorists. I’d say they’ve done a pretty good job of it.

  9. re: Karen S at 1:09 PM – I agree with much of what you say and I think you have the right attitude.

    I do want to weigh in on the ‘7 times more potent’ comment as well as Karen S’s further worry that this somehow indicates that marijuana may turn into a ‘hard drug’.

    It may very well be the case that weed (I will say ‘weed’ rather than ‘cannabis’ because the only context in which the ‘7 times more potent’ meme makes sense is when talking about the leafy version of cannabis, rather than concentrates or edibles) is stronger today than it was in the past. In fact, let’s assume it is.

    The conclusion that this fundamentally alters the chemistry or effects of weed is false. It only means that the parts that get you high (typically THC % is the measurement used) are more concentrated. A joint has more THC now than in the past.

    This is very similar to the difference between beer and wine and distilled alcohol. Wine, according to Google just now, averages between 9% and 16% alcohol content per volume. Whiskey is distilled, and therefore more concentrated and averages 40% to 68% by volume.

    But it’s still ethyl alcohol.

    One of the benefits of bringing cannabis out of the black market is the quality control and product knowledge.
    Imagine walking into a liquor store and not knowing what kind of booze you were buying. It would all be moonshine, and whatever the dealer could tell you about the contents of a bottle would be what you knew about it.

    But customers buying alcohol – or legal, regulated cannabis – pretty much know what they are getting and what to expect. They know that drinking eight ounces of beer is not the same as drinking eight ounces of 151 rum and dose accordingly.

    The bottom line here is that weed with higher THC content is weed most of us simply consume less of, to get the same effect. Stronger pot is still just smoked, not injected into the veins.

    1. Joel Grant……you are correct that the (high) taxed price of legal pot is generally much higher than the black market price. This leads me to believe that legalization will not encourage a big smuggling problem for neighboring states.
      It doesn’t make sense that a major dealer would buy at the inflated taxed price, and with restrictions on the amount per purchase, then smuggle large amounts across a border to sell in a state where pot is illegal.
      That dealer is far more likely to continue buying large quantities “wholesale” from illegal suppliers.
      So Idaho’s aim seems to be catching “the small fish”. The way that those idiots are going about it, I’d sooner take my chances with Cheech and Chong than having those idiots flying out at me at 100MPH+ as soon as they see my Washington State plates.
      Idaho could lose it’s reputation as such a diverse,tolerant, welcoming state ๐Ÿ˜‰if they keep up this foolishness.

      1. re: Tom Nash – Yes, and it is trivial for a black market dealer to know how much the legal stuff costs and beat the price by enough to make it worthwhile to buy on the black market. In WA state I would love to see what percentage of legal cannabis product is purchased by people from another state vs. percentage purchased by WA state residents.

        I know a couple of people who, from time to time, will patronize one of the local cannabis shops and buy a joint or an 1/8 of an ounce. No doubt there are people (relatively affluent, I would think) who are more regular customers.

        I do think the price trend, in the long run, is down. We can hope the tax situation is changed to the point where the black market folks – no offense! – have to find another source of (usually secondary, I think) income.

  10. How was it that the only legal way to prohibit alcohol was to pass a constitutional amendment and a constitutional amendment to un ban alcohol yet the govt didn’t pass the needed constitutional amendment to ban ans control drugs?

    I still believe these drug bans are unconstitutional.

    I seen an article showing data out of Colorado that was claiming cigarettes and alcohol consumption was dropping like a rock now that cannabis use is now legal.

    I’m interested if that trend will continue.

    I used to smoke cannabis when I was younger and it was easy to quit as it’s not physically additive.

    I used it also to quit drinking years back. If I wanted a drink I’d just smoke cannabis.

    It worked great and then quit both of them.

    But a back problem came up a few years back so I started drinking beer again as a pain killer.

    If Oklahoma would legalize cannabis I’d start smoking it again tomorrow and at the same time quit drinking alcohol and cigs at the same time.

    Below is a very interesting documentary into some real research into cannabis.

    I believe it’ll open some peoples eyes/minds.

    The Scientist Medical Marijuana Documentary New 2015HD

Comments are closed.