Evidence suggests that drug-dealing markets can be disrupted or dispersed through the use of low- level police enforcement. However, often such disruption is temporary with drug dealing markets adapting quickly in response to such enforcement and re-emerging to trade again with new dealers in place. This study involved case studies of two local drug markets, chosen to be similar to each other in terms of economic stability, ethnic diversity, and population size. Low-level police enforcement refers to the techniques and strategies that are used to police street buyers and sellers and in a limited number of cases those who sell to street dealers. Results showed that few sellers in either market reported being concerned about police activity. Nor had there been a significant number of recent arrests in either site. While conventional policing methods were able to achieve a considerable impact on open street markets, they seemed to have little effect on closed ones in which communication was largely by mobile phone. Police officers believed that intelligence-led policing involving the use of sources might be the most effective way to disrupt market systems. Police sources also felt that high visibility policing had had an effect on drug markets, and community respondents wanted to see more officers patrolling known drug market areas. However, on the whole, local community members, although concerned about drug use and dealing, felt environmental issues were a more immediate problem. 5 figures, 4 tables, 42 references, and 2 appendices.