In article ,
Sla#s wrote:

Someone pointed out that the proposed wording (which was something
like 'grow, cause to grow or provide an environment suitable for
the growing of' could make people who planted beech trees liable
under the Act. That was felt to be undesirable :-)

Nevertheless the law was rushed through receiving Royal Assent on April 7
2005:

"Magic mushrooms are a class A drug
Class A drugs carry the most serious charges. Maximum penalties you can face
a
Seven years imprisonment plus an unlimited fine for possession.
Life imprisonment plus an unlimited fine for supplying or dealing.
Life imprisonment plus an unlimited fine for possession with intent to
supply."

No, it's not quite the same Act.

The Drugs Act 2005 does, indeed, make the possession of any fungus
containing psilocin a crime. If you pick an unknown fungus, you
could go down for seven years and, if you give it to a friend for
identification, you could get life.

Generously, there is an amendment stating that the penalties do not
apply to fungi growing naturally, but I don't think that it will
change the above.

However, you will not be liable to those penalties if you plant a
tree known to be a host for fungi that include psilocin. Aren't
our Lords and Masters kind to us?


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.