bong,jamesbong

To All,
I was wondering if anyone had detailed information on the use and accuracy of thermal imaging devices on plants of our favour. Time of day it would be used, I would assume nightime ? How close it would have to be. What other plants have similar signature, if there is any difference at all? I will do some research, any help would be beneficial for everyone. Thank you.
JB

az.cats

id like to also add to the question. What other detection methods are there? And how accurate are they?

Highguy

Thermal Imaging is easy. All it takes is a hand held imager. The imager detects the heat and displays the "Thermal Image" as a picture. The cops are not walking around the dtreets taking thermal pics of peoples houses unless they suspect you are growing weed. In order to get a Search Warrant a thermal pic might be used as supporting evidence, but I doubt any Judge would sign a warrant on the sole evidence of a thermal image. Cops use thermal devices at night when the temp difference is greatest. If you are worried keep the temp in the grow area down by moving lots of air.

az.cats

what about detecting plants outside? besides walking thru the woods looking for the stuff

SaTaN674

Police also use helicopters with thermal imaging cameras mounted on them to find large fields of marijuana in wooded areas. The best way to prevent the "5-0" from finding your plants, if you grow outdoors, is to seperate them. Don't plant them all together, because the thermals can't really see just 1 plant too well, but they can sure as **** see 25 all nicely in rows.

Ganja Warrior

As one of the cops involved in detecting and eradicating dope, I can tell you that thermal imaging is not used much for outdoor grows.

In the early 1990's when peace broke out, the DoD and other agnecies with hi-tech equipment that was suddenly under-used came to law enforcement and touted their wares. We tried everything from computer analyzed, false color photography, IR, and thermal imagining. None of them were very effective on outdoor grows.

Thermal imaging is still VERY BIG with indoor grows because of the heat generated by the cultivation.

Infra red (IR) and thermal gear worked best on outdoor grows when used during the heat of the day. The water lines, being cooler, than the surrounding terrain and vegatation show up very well, but there was no way to tell if they were domestic water supply or supporting a grow.

Perhaps the most insidious use of this spy technology was the attempts to use sensitive equipment to detect the minute amounts of radio isotopes in the galvanized chicken wire and the low level electrical impulses put out by batteries in the water timers. These happened at a level much higher than my lowly position so I don't know if they had any success.

bong,jamesbong

Thank You,
I wasn't under the impression the plants actually had a different temperature than other plants, and that the thermal stuff was for the cooler temps as a result of watering.If the plants are scattered and the trails are not pronounced the thermal imaging is not really a threat.
again thanks
JB

lilbuddie

Brrrr... felt a chill on the back of my neck. Big Brother is always watching

I surfed around most of the day looking for information on the newest imaging technology and found a few sites with cool pictures from their latest gear. And they expressly state that their unit WILL aid in discovering marijuna production indoors! Scary thoughts but at least it is mostly related to large grow operations with obviuos increased heat.

Stay safe
LB

rip cobalt

I had a friend who felt safe growing outdoors because of spread out plantings. I told her that local police can buy several spectral ranges of sattelite imagery for $2.00 a sheet. Of course, police are not creative by nature, so they do not need high tech to burn crops. they depend on sneaky interpersonal tacticts.
i read a book at Linda Hall Library in Kansas City about 1990, the title "remote sensing of plants". Sorry, I forgot the authors. Two chapters were of great interest. One dealt with laser reflection spectography. The idea was to bounce a laser (either aerial or handheld, from platforms in a large orchard) and measuring the shift in the reflection off the ground to measure such things as nutrient content and moisture in fruit crops. The moisture measurement is made as different levels of retained moisture in the leaves cause the space between the cells to differ. Thick vs. thin cell walls are also identified. It takes little paranoid imagination to see that this has police potential. Many acres could be lased from the top of a grain elevator. Pipeline companies typically rent space on their inspection and mapping aircraft to law enforcement agencies. These make frequent fly overs of all areas. The other chapter of interest was about the capabilities of the landstat series of sattelites. These have microwave-length sesors that measure plant color and structure and nutrient content from space by the same technique as above. They have 3 meter resolution. The article dealt with identifying and cataloging phytoplankton on the oceans surface. If it can identify a single celled organism, how do you think your big bush fares? The lesson is, police look not for dope, but profit trails. They don't care if you smoke, but they hunger for the money drug dealing provides. They can always find plants. Love, sik mik.

rip cobalt

Good News from NORML:
January 6, 2000

Infrared Thermal Imaging Deemed Unconstitutional Search By PA State Supreme Court
Erie County, PA: The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has upheld an appellate court ruling that the warrantless use of an infrared thermal imagining device, used to detect marijuana growing in a home, violates the constitutional rights of the homeowner under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
In the 2-1 decision, Judge Stephen A. Zappala, writing for the majority, contrasted the differences between the use of thermal imaging devices and the use of drug-sniffing dogs, which the U.S. Supreme Court has found to be legal without a warrant.
Zappala wrote, "The thermal imaging device, unlike the trained drug dog, does not have the ability to distinguish between legal and illegal activities occurring within the home based upon the amount of heat detected. In this respect, [use of the thermal imager] is the very antithesis of a dog sniff because the trained narcotics dog alerts only in the presence of contraband whereas the thermal imager indiscriminately registers all sources of heat. "
The case began in April 1994 when an informant told the Erie County Mobile Drug Task Force that Gregory Gindlesperger was growing marijuana at his home using artificial heat lamps. A thermal imaging device was then used to scan Gindlesperger's home, which indicated an unexplained heat source in the basement which was not consistent with a furnace or other home heating sources. These results were then used to obtain a search warrant for the house and Gindlesperger was subsequently arrested for cultivating 21 plants. The trial court rejected the defendant's motion to exclude the evidence and found him guilty. The case was appealed and the appellant court sided with the defendant saying the use of the device was a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
"We applaud the court's decision," said Tom Dean, Esq., NORML Foundation Litigation Director. "High-tech surveillance by overzealous police officers is perhaps the greatest threat to personal security that we will face in this new century."
For more information, please contact Tom Dean, Esq., NORML Foundation Litigation Director, at (202) 483-8751. To view the decision, visit http://www.aopc.org/OpPosting/index/...ve/121999.cfm.
Note the use of "informant". That would be your best friend who got busted for D.U.I. two blocks away and had a roach in the ashtray. Remember to be nice when you get assigned the same cell.

[This message has been edited by rip cobalt (edited April 28, 2000).]