Cactus Conservation Institute has long held and voiced our belief that the Native American Church should control its own destiny — including in regard to cultivation. Unfortunately, our letter to the Senator’s office was interpreted by some to indicate that CCI was independently attempting to dictate to the Native American Church how to approach and conserve their sacred medicine. It has been made known to us that many felt it was hurtful. We are deeply sorry for our own missteps and any offense we have caused and wish to reiterate our dedication not only to the conservation of peyote, and other threatened and endangered cacti, but also to the cultural and religious rights and interests of the Native American Church. 

It is not our intent to dictate that NAC members should cultivate peyote, only that they should be able to cultivate it themselves, should that be their desire, and not rely upon others to do so.

We would also like to clarify some points of misunderstanding that are incorrectly being promoted online. Based on our original letter, which has since been amended, it has been claimed that CCI is a supporter of decriminalization. It has been our long-standing policy not to make political statements or to take political positions as neutrality best serves our interests and ability to engage in conservation of threatened and endangered cacti. Our comments on cultivation are the first exception. CCI takes no position on the aims or political goals of Decriminalize Nature and has no official stance on decriminalization for personal use.

Another misunderstanding has led to a claim that CCI intends to create or operate peyote greenhouses. CCI has no interest in engaging in cultivation, either through management, oversight, or any other manner. While we believe cultivation can be an important conservation tool and will continue to publish research related to cultivation, cultivation itself falls outside the purview of CCI’s mission and activities as a non-profit organization.

The circulation of this claim appears to be based on a misunderstanding of our paper exploring the logistics and production capacities of greenhouse cultivation. This paper was intended as an example to help people grasp what is involved with producing enough plants to satisfy current demand for ceremonial use and to help them visualize how many plants are involved for cultivation to be sustainable.  Without the proper context and details it can be difficult to grasp what it means to cultivate a million plants or what is involved in a rotating sustainable harvest of a million or even millions of plants.  We stand by these estimates.

The numbers presented in that paper are useful not just for examining a greenhouse scenario producing a million plants but for examining wild harvesting as well. The footprint can easily be increased from greenhouse spacing to an average spacing of a healthy wild population. This can give a nice estimate of how many square miles of habitat will be required for sustainable harvesting using good harvesting practices and a fully informed harvesting rotation. By the latter comment, we mean that the prior harvesting history of a given field is known to the harvester. This concept is invaluable; without knowing how many plants are needed to fulfill the needs of the Native American Church and without an ability to make plans accordingly, there is a risk of falling short.

It is also worth clarifying the who and what of CCI. We should first start with what CCI is not. CCI is not a government agency and is not involved in policy making or the creation or implementation of government regulations. CCI is a 501(c)(3) educational organization. CCI engages in research and shares its observations, research findings, thoughts and evidence-based suggestions with parties invested in the preservation of at-risk, threatened, and endangered cacti, including peyote, and does so at no charge.

CCI offers one voice and one view in a field where there are multiple. It is to be expected that in any field where multiple perspectives are held, or are possible, that disagreement will occur, particularly when there are cultural and ontological differences. There is also opportunity for discovering common ground and collaboration that draws on the expertise, views, and values of multiple stakeholders. As a conservation-based organization, CCI prioritizes its mission of conservation and believes that advocating for conservation is where the expertise and experience of CCI is best applied. 

For the sake of clarity, CCI would note that conservation of peyote does not imply that people should not have access to peyote for religious ceremonies. Rather, it requires that there be enough peyote to support both religious custom and the future vitality of the cactus in its native habitat. In this regard, discussions about sustainable wild harvesting and about the logistics of greenhouse production are important parts of CCI’s activities. The actual details of how peyote cultivation greenhouses are created and operated are not within CCI’s mission. Decisions and details relating to these activities are (and should be) entirely under the direction of the people doing so.

In closing, CCI would like to make clear that CCI supports the full autonomy of the Native American Church. Efforts towards cultivation by the Native American Church should be celebrated. Most importantly, the autonomy of the Native American Church as a religious organization arising from sovereign federally recognized tribes should be recognized and respected. America’s Indigenous peoples (those recognized and those not) must be allowed to chart their own course. 

We forward to future productive dialogue with those interested in the preservation of peyote and related cacti.

The post Important words of clarification appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.

17 May 2019; summary by Keeper Trout, Anya Ermakova & Martin Terry.

The last two visits to the study group (15 March 2018 and 1, 2 & 4 May 2019) have provided us with an unexpected opportunity to study the effects of harvesting even further than we had planned.
CCI’s original goal was to perform a four-year study on mortality and survival rates following a legal peyote harvesting event, occurring on 3 March 2008 using the best known practices. Even before we had completed that 4-yr study and published the results (see 2011 & 2012), we decided to continue to monitor the population for a longer period of time; dropping the frequency of our visits to every 2 years. One additional element involved evaluating the effect of harvesting performed on a two-year schedule similar to what we had been informed was then being done by collectors working for the licensed distributors (see 2014). This was done using a very limited number of plants due to our concerns that it would show increased mortality rates. It did of course but we were also amazed by the incredible resilience of the plants. We were however thinking that our 10-yr visit in 2018 might be our last visit as we felt that we had pulled as much data as we possibly could out of so few individuals.
Fate provided the unexpected opportunity that was referred to earlier. When we reached the site in 2018, we soon discovered that the entire first section of our research group, which included all of the re-harvested individuals, had been largely harvested by poachers or at least was only partially intact. Since our area of interest was studying the impact of harvesting, including plants harvested too frequently, being given a chance to directly examine such a harvest was an amazing windfall and we decided to continue our visits.
The chance of poaching occurring was certainly no surprise to any of us; we were, in fact, all rather pleasantly surprised that it had taken so many years to finally happen.

Our original hope was to be able to study commercial harvesting practices by following behind their collectors but we were unable to find anyone who was interested in our doing so. Instead, Blake was fortunate enough to meet Teodoso Herrera, a spiritual leader of one of the original indigenous peyote people of South Texas (the Tāp Pīlam Coahuiltecan Nation; which is recognized by the state of Texas but, sadly, not by the federal government). After discussing the benefits of this knowledge to both peyote and peyote people and obtaining his support, we were granted access to the population that Ted used for fulfilling his own small group’s Medicine requirements.
An area where he did not harvest was selected by Ted and, with permission both from him and from the land owner, it became the site chosen for this study.

One significant element affecting peyote survival is harvesting, especially poaching, so the harvesting was an interesting bit of serendipity. It might on the surface seem like poaching and harvesting involve the same physical operation. The mechanics are the same but poachers are more likely to be in a hurry AND are more likely to be unaware of the date the field was last visited by harvesters. Repeated harvests can and do easily occur with no knowledge as to the dates of previous harvests on that same parcel; this can be true even for a person harvesting under a lease agreement. The harvester can only gauge appropriate choices based on size and condition of what is visible. The size of a crown at the surface may not necessarily reflect the compromised state of its underground parts if those have been repeatedly harvested toward exhaustion. This is due to harvesting removing the ability of the plant to photosynthesize and requiring it to rely on the resources stored in the underground stem until new green tissue can be produced. Repeated harvests that are too close together result in diminished regrowth as will be seen in the images that follow.

The single most fortuitous element was the fact that we had records of not just where the plants in the study group were located. They also included how often they had been harvested and the date(s) of any time or times of being harvested during the previous decade of study. (The original individuals were chosen on the basis of never having been harvested.) 

While our efforts had attempted to minimize our impact on plants other than those seeing harvest, this unplanned harvesting by poachers provided a real-world look at the impact of a typical Tragedy-of-the-Commons peyote harvest. The harvesters did not simply harvest a few plants at the beginning of the study, they also removed almost all of the former abundance of peyote plants for some yards on either side of them leaving only a handful of plants. In doing so they also removed surprising amounts of the brush cover that protected the population, creating a few short trails that are clearly visible even from a satellite view.

That last image showed the site of some peyote plants that were growing adjacent to the study group. It is obviously difficult to visualize plants that are not present, so a couple of pictures of those former residents are below.

It has been 2 or so years now since the first of the harvests done by poachers occurred. With the exception of one intact plant (#103), we were unable to find any sign of life on any members of the study group until some distance farther into the brush. We also found only occasional individual plants outside of the study group had been missed in that entire area and did not see any apparent regrowth. 

The sizes of stems and regrowth that we found on #127 indicated that it had experienced two harvests in between our visits in March 2016 and March 2018.
When it was first harvested in March 2008, it had a single 8-ribbed crown (4.3 cm in diameter) that weighed 28 grams.

Earlier views of #127

Specimen #129 nicely illustrates the adverse impact of repeated harvesting on the ability of the stem to produce new regrowth.
When #129 was first harvested in March 2008, it had a single 10-ribbed crown (5.3 cm in diameter) that weighed 34 grams.
Following that first harvest, four new crowns had appeared within the first eight months although no photographic record exists for that visit in November 2008. They can however clearly be seen in the image from March 2009 farther below.
It is very easy to see the effect of that most recent harvest by comparing the 2019 images to those of the original regrowth during 2009–2016.

At least one harvest of a plant with large crowns (#106) included the roots. (If this was a common practice employed by the poachers, it might help to explain what appears to a poor recovery of the plants that were not in the study group.)
Only a desiccating crown from a smaller plant that had been nearby was still detectable at the site of #106 in March 2018.

In May of 2019, all that still remained was a bit of peyote stem bark that was discovered when digging to locate a root or a carcass. These can persist in soil for up to several years before decomposing.

The next image is what healthy peyote populations can look like if given the right location and a chance. It is easy to appreciate why this part of Texas has been referred to as the Peyote Gardens.

It is perfectly reasonable to believe that good management practices and fully-informed, conscious harvesting could enable this resource to continue to exist for future generations.
The common harvesting practices that are presently at play (the broad acceptance of poached plants, harvesting through trespassing, harvesting small plants, harvesting so many plants as to compromise local seed production, and harvesting individuals too frequently) will continue to work against that being a possibility.

Additional reading online:

A look at peyote harvesting & the peyote trade.

A closer look at peyote growing in the wild can be found in an article at Erowid.

 The Peyote Crisis & some Suggestions. Revisited. 2014

Related PDFs of potential interest:

Kevin Feeney. 2017. Peyote as Commodity: An Examination of Market Actors and Access Mechanisms. Human Organization 76(1): 59–72.   [1.5 mb PDF]

Garrett Hardin 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162(3859): 1243—1248. [free PDF at publisher] 

M. Abul Kalam, Molly T. Klein, Diana Hulsey, Keeper Trout, Paul Daley & Martin Terry. 2013. A preliminary report of mescaline concentrations in small regrowth crowns vs. mature crowns of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae); cultural, economic, and conservation implications. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, 7 (1): 435–440.
   [~1.8 Mb PDF]

 Molly T. Klein, M. Kalam, Keeper Trout, Norma Fowler & Martin Terry. 2015. Mescaline concentrations in three principal tissues of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae): Implications for sustainable harvesting practices.  Haseltonia 20: 34–42.    [~4 Mb PDF] 

Peyote Sales. 1986–2016. Peyote sales reported to Texas DPS by the licensed distributors.  [PDF]

Martin Terry & James D. Mauseth. 2006. Root-shoot anatomy and post-harvest vegetative clonal development in Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae: Cactaeae): implications for conservation. Sida, 22: 565–592.
    [~ 3.02 Mb PDF] 

Martin Terry, Teodoso Herrera, Keeper Trout, Bennie Williams & Norma Fowler. 2011. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) I. Regrowth and survivorship two years post harvest in a South Texas population. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, 5 (2): 661–675. 
  [~8.7 Mb PDF]

Martin Terry, Teodoso Herrera, Keeper Trout, Bennie Williams & Norma Fowler. 2012. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) II. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals in a South Texas population. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, 6 (2): 567–577. 
  [~1.5 Mb PDF] 

Martin Terry, Teodoso Herrera, Keeper Trout, Bennie Williams & Norma Fowler. 2014. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) III. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals for six years in a South Texas population. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas, 8 (2): 541–550. 
   [1.9 Mb PDF]

The post Lophophora williamsii harvesting; regrowth & mortality. appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.

Kevin Feeney, PhD., JD., is educated and trained in the fields of law and cultural anthropology, areas of expertise he has combined in his study of the South Texas peyote trade and on religious peyote use by the Native American Church. 

Kevin is currently a Program Director and Lecturer in Interdisciplinary Studies – Social Sciences at Central Washington University. His research has been published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, Human Organization, Curare, and the Cactus & Succulent Journal.

The post Say hello to our newest board member appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.

Reflections and transitions

The end of the year — after the last cactus flower  has folded its petals inward (in West Texas that would have to be Ariocarpus fissuratus),  and many weeks before the first spring bloomers (like Echinocereus spp.)  will surprise us with their spring bursts of incredible colors —  we pause momentarily, at the “still point of the turning world”,  to contemplate where we have been and where we are going.

Blake Williams, our cactus brother-in-arms and Board Member of Cactus Conservation Institute since its inception, recently passed away after a long bout with cancer.  We especially miss Blake’s dry sense of humor.  Among the last things he said to Martin on the phone was,”You know, dying sure is boring.”

We were blessed and feel honored to have had the opportunity to work with Blake and have him in our lives as a true compadre. And we were especially privileged to have his participation not just as part of Cactus Conservation Institute but as one of the founders. It is a notable point that the three founders all met each other independently
and began discussing the pressing need for peyote conservation efforts. Once we discovered that all three of us knew each other and had been carrying out parallel conversations, the creation of Cactus Conservation Institute in 2004 was an inevitable outcome.
Blake was a retired attorney who took care of our paperwork and legal research but he also had a deep love of the Texas brush country and a real knack at finding wild peyote plants when the annual hunt began for our research group.

He was an important creative force for Cactus Conservation Institute in a myriad of ways. Among Blake’s many contributions were his skills as a jeweler. It was his idea to create molds from living peyote plants in order to create realistic peyote jewelry that caused no harm to the plant. He worked quite hard to develop a patina and wax coating on the bronze versions which looked realistic. These were never sold commercially and were included as incentives for significant level donors. Those are now unique collectables that are possessed by a fortunate few.
They will no longer be produced but, as a tribute to our friend the artist, we will maintain the pages showcasing them.
Blake will be greatly missed by us all — and by anyone else who had the good fortune to know him.

While no one can replace Blake in life, we have already found an excellent new board member. Watch for our forthcoming announcement.

The post To our friends and supporters appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.

The post Progress! appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.

Conducting and publishing good scientific research on the cactus species which are experiencing human pressure is our passion. To perform field work involving those cacti commonly requires the willingness to brave thorny vegetation and the ability to tolerate intense sun, high heat, and wind-blown dust that can be extreme enough to interfere with the functioning of cameras, computers and other electronics. These working conditions frequently impose some challenges for botanists, not simply from those discomforts, but also due to the sometimes lengthy road travel that is required to get to and from a research site.

Imagine the benefits of a research station that was located in typical Chihuahuan Desert cactus habitat. With the area immediately around the site being capable of and suitable for providing long-term and short-term study opportunities for many types of cacti and desert plants. AND with an added advantage of bringing the researcher closer to many other sites in the area containing threatened or endangered species — adding hours of productive time to their days. We are envisioning the CCI Research Station to be that resource in Presidio County, Texas.

We are creating a space that can accommodate a very small number of botanists at one time. Not in luxurious conditions but someplace providing shelter from the sun and elements, with basic camp facilities for preparing a simple meal, a composting toilet and a pad for a bedroll.  This can be accomplished off-the-grid using rainwater collection for water, with solar panels and possibly a small wind turbine for electricity.  Finding a suitable spot for such a research station and then acquiring the property could be a daunting task but fate has provided us with a one-acre donation of land to use as the permanent site for this facility. We have already broken ground by clearing the site — with the pouring of a concrete slab scheduled for later this month (i.e. September 2018 — construction delays have pushed this into January 2019).

We will be posting updates of our progress throughout the process of its construction.

Cactus Conservation Institute will be funding the majority of the costs involved in creating this valuable resource, but additional help from the public is welcomed.  Cactus Conservation Institute is a 501(c)3 educational organization, so all donations are tax-deductible. Substantial donors of $5000 or more should contact us directly; we are quite happy to discuss the plans in more detail. For all other levels of interest, there is a PayPal donation button conveniently located on this page. No amount of support is too small. A thousand dollars is only fifty $20 donations. Thank you for your interest and for your support of this exciting project.

The post An exciting development appeared first on Cactus Conservation Institute.