INTRODUCTION

AN INTERNATIONAL PEYOTE FIELD

Peyote is a cactus growing at ground level in semi-arid ecosystems; it is endemic to the Chihuahuan Desert. Peyote is classified as part of the Plantae kingdom, Embryophyta subkingdom, Angiosperm division, Dicotyledonous class, Dialipétalas subclass, Caryophyllales order, Cactaceae family, Echinocactus subfamily; its scientific name is Williamsii Lophophora. This globose plant is frequently flattened at the apex, measures from 2 to 6 cm in height and 4 to 11 cm in diameter, and is usually bluish-green, sometimes yellowish-green, and sometimes reddish in color. Almost always, it presents from 4 to 14 well-defined ribs of variable height, and it sometimes forms more or less tall tubers. Circular areolas measuring between 2 and 4 mm are placed between 0.9 and 4 mm apart. Its flowers measure from 1 to 2.4 cm in length and 1 to 2.2 cm in diameter. It bears perianth segments measuring from 2.5 to 4 mm in width; they are usually pink with a yellowish tint, and sometimes carmine-colored. Its pollen measures from 14.9 to 63 microns in diameter, and it consists of spheroidal, rarely polycolporate grains (0 to 18), seldom tricolporate or bicolporate ( ^{García Naranjo & Mandujano, 2010, p. 43} ; ^{Bravo-Hollis & Sánchez Mejorada, 1978} ).

Its distribution covers an extensive territory from southern Texas in the United States to the states of Coahuila, Nuevo León, Tamaulipas, Chihuahua, Durango, and San Luis Potosí, Aguascalientes, and Guanajuato in Mexico. The largest peyote populations are located within the Mexican territory, but also in the south of Texas, in the Mustang plains; a region that, incidentally, faces serious over-exploitation problems: The population of this plant is being depleted ( ^{Anderson, 1995} , ¹⁹⁹⁶ ; ^{Trout & Terry, 2016} ; ^{Feeney, 2016} ). Its psychoactive properties are mainly due to an alkaloid called mescaline, but according to laboratory analyses, some species contain more than 40 types of alkaloids whose properties and effects have not yet been fully studied.⁵

Its uses have been documented since the colonial period ( ^{Dawson, 2016} ); archaeological records and paleontological studies supported by radiocarbon dating suggest that different groups and cultures associated with the desert have been using the plant for millennia. References to its use among tribes in the United States suggest a series of loans between groups in northern Mexico and the southern United States. One of these refers to the use of Texas mountain laurel, also known as mescalbean (Sophora secundiflora), a seed borne with visionary properties, as the background for the introduction and use of peyote among different tribes north of the Rio Grande that discovered similar effects without the risks associated with the use of mescalbean ( ^{Howard, 1957} ). During the eighteenth century, the Lipan and Mescalero Apache peoples were reported to have established relationships with the Kiowas, the Comanches, and other Oklahoma groups—the peyote was part of the cultural interchange. One hundred years later, in 1870, a new syncretic religion emerged in this territory; Christian and native elements were combined with the use of peyote as a ritual sacrament ( ^{Barber, 1941, p. 673} ). In the following decade, ritual paraphernalia and doctrinal elements were largely standardized.

The Native American Church was formally created in 1918. Different churches, collectively known as NAC, emerged in the following years and throughout the twentieth century, but they were differentiated by their location or ethnic origin. Most of them are grouped under a body recognized as the Native Church of North America (NACNA), which includes mostly organizations from the United States, but also from Canada and Mexico. According to data from the Texas Department of Public Safety, there are more than 250 organizations and around 650 000 members ( ^{Walker, Walker, & Graves, 2015} ). Their meetings are recognized and allowed by the laws of the United States government, but the legalization issue refers to a long process of legal disputes, which are favorably resolved on the basis of arguments in favor of religious freedom and the preservation of cultural traditions ( ^{Arth, 1956} ; ^{Kimber & McDonald, 2004} ; ^{Soni, 2016} ; ^{Forren, 2016} ; ^{Feeney, 2016} ).

The first accounts of peyote in Canada date back to 1920, although ^{Weston La Barre (2002)} states that peyote dates back to 1890; its use became more common in the mid-1950s. The dissemination of peyote is associated with the presence of rights-deprived groups in the United States who crossed the border in search of greater liberty; these peoples established themselves in the Western Plains and the West Coast (Cree, Sioux, Blackfoot, and Stoney).

In 1954, a group of Cree founded the Native Church of Canada (NACC) as an NAC branch. There are no more than 100 members in this country, and the debates around the permission to celebrate rituals and take peyote is peculiar, since the plant does not grow in Canadian soil, so the ritual is imported in every way. ^{Erika Dick (2016)} states that the foundations of regulation in Canada are based on the debates and arguments presented by a group of pioneering scientists focused on psychedelics research. Based on her participation in these rituals, the author developed an interesting appreciation of the spiritual experience as a cure mechanism in such a way that scientific arguments about the positive attributes of this experience are, in essence, supported by Canadian constitutional reforms that guarantee religious freedom ( ^{Dick, 2016} ).

In Mexico, the Huichol, Cora, Raramuris, and Tepehuan peoples have carried out religious practices involving peyote since pre-Hispanic times, although current rites have been modified. Other groups, such as the Nahuas and, more recently, the Yaqui, use it more discreetly, adapting it to their ritual forms.⁶ In the repressive context of the colonial era, these practices remained limited to popular mestizo sectors, whose members could acquire the plant in public markets, given certain restrictions. Nowadays, it is possible to find it as an ingredient in ointments used to relieve bumps and sprains and as a muscular pain remedy for arthritis and rheumatism; it is often macerated in alcohol and combined with cannabis and toloache (Datura ferox) for certain homemade preparations.

Two important moments can be observed in the constitution of the phenomenon described here:

Previous and subsequent events open, so to speak, the cultural boundaries of native peoples throughout the continent and promote the translocation of rituals and ceremonies using sacred plants such as peyote, tobacco, ayahuasca, or magical mushrooms, among others. This generation, described by ^{Galinier and Molinié (2006)} as “Neoindian,” and by others simply as “New Age,” furthers the approach of the first generation to indigenous traditions and customs and initiates a much more intense process of resignifications and appropriations, sometimes carrying religious content that is still political in certain scenarios. In this sense, as a field of study, peyote represents a particular expression of the entheogenic field ( ^{Guzmán & Labate, 2018} ), whose modulation is given by the predominant role of Wirikuta, San Luis Potosí, Mexico, as the mecca of shamanic peyote tourism ( ^{Basset, 2011, p. 192} ), and two extremely interesting phenomena:⁷

1) We define Huicholization as a discursive construction process centered on the ecological and spiritual Indian and the art and rituals of the Wixaritari people (the Huichol), with which Mexican society has identified. This phenomenon has created an intercultural environment of loans and counter-loans, solidarity associations at various levels, advantages for the seekers of indigenous spirituality (both Mexican and foreigners), and strategies to resist and defend the indigenous territory and identity.

A number of ritual specialists known as marakate (plural of marakame, or shaman), have attempted to stimulate the creation of medical circles among non-indigenous people, not only in the Mexican cities of Cancún, Tijuana, Morelia, or San Luis Potosí, but also in cities in Spain, France, Finland, and Japan, among other countries. This is the origin of a whole series of cultural practices referenced in different elements of the Wixaritari cosmological universe: fire design, types of oblations, the five-year cycle, and the pilgrimage to Wirikuta, as well as diets, attitudes, and commitments acquired in the ritual space. For some marakate, the association with non-indigenous groups has become a resource to sustain the costly ritual cycle that they have put in place in their communities. Similarly, this knowledge transfer process has allowed for the emergence of neoshamans: peyote guides who tend to resignify themselves and innovate in accordance with the expectations and possibilities of their urban audiences.⁸

2) We refer to the “Native-Americanization” of peyote as a process that explains the emergence of chiefs and “roadmen,” the dissemination of tepee rituals where peyote is used as a sacrament, the search for visions, and the dance of the sun in the late 1980s. In Mexico, the presence of NAC leaders and groups began to increase in the late 1990s. In a preliminary record, we identified 20 tepee circles in the same number of states in the Mexican Republic, some of which have been operating for almost 20 years.

To date, no in-depth study has focused on this curious process, in which an indigenous and, at the same time, syncretic religious tradition is imported; moreover, the process takes hold in a territory where peyote-related traditions were already present, although the new actors are basically urban types. The role played by Chicano leaders, who have found a space in the NAC to reformulate their identities and missionary work, is clear, and it is also necessary to understand the harmony between Native American traditions and Mexican nativist ritual expressions, such as the conchero dance and the Aztec dance, and among the hundreds of disciples of Carlos Castaneda. Finally, despite a certain amount of conflict, rituals shared between Huichol and Native American Indians have begun to fade and give way to the integration of mestizo followers who are now allowed access to knowledge that was previously guarded with zeal, creating new configurations.

We have thus far presented an overview of this history. In this context, we propose the concept of the “international field of peyote” to define and understand a phenomenon that has emerged over the past decades: a culturally diverse and scattered group of peyote users in Mexico and the United States, composed of indigenous and non-indigenous leaders who experience novel forms of interaction in a New Age, pan-Indian framework. In our opinion, the idea of a field is adequate to understand these mixture and hybridization processes taking place in a globalized arena and the migration of religious belief, where tradition or ancestral tradition is constantly resignified. This intercultural field reflects loans and exchanges as a dynamic phenomenon in the relationship among native cultures, and between these and the mestizo culture or dominant society (see also ^{Guzmán & Labate, 2018} ). It is a labile field, since its geographical contours are difficult to define, and there is a constant circulation of peyote, actors, beliefs, objects, affections, and values.

Besides its cultural dimension, this field has political and historical dimensions—its constitution is an expression of conflicts and tensions faced by indigenous groups in Mexico and the United States. These problems are, on the one hand, the legal peculiarities of each government and, on the other hand, the increasing scarcity of peyote. In other words, the international field of peyote and the political economy of peyote have to do with borders. Consumption is controlled in one country and forbidden in the other, a situation that disrupts the law of supply and demand and has ecological and cultural implications. Agreements and strategies to achieve the conservation of the species and ensure the continuity of its associated ritual expressions involve users and authorities in the United States and Mexico, where the cactus is endemic. Thus, while different groups and organizations in Mexico and the United States have made alliances and established exchanges related to peyote and territorial defense, conflict and dispute have also been present.

POLICY AND THE LEGAL STATUS OF PEYOTE

In Mexico, the current status of peyote is governed by three types of norms: sanitary (Article 245 of Chapter IV, General Health Law), criminal (articles 193 to 199, Federal Penal Code), and environmental (Official Mexican Norm 059, Environmental Protection-Native Mexican Flora and Fauna Species-Endangered categories threatened and subject to special risk protection; hereafter, NOM 059).

These norms, in turn, should be considered in connection with international conventions and normative frameworks signed by Mexico concerning psychoactive substances (Convention on Psychotropic Substances, Vienna, 1971), human rights, and the culture of traditional peoples (Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, International Labor Organization, hereinafter ILO 169). When viewed as a whole, these regulations show contradictions, ambiguities, and interpretation errors that confound a fair valuation of the issue and hinder the implementation of a positive regulatory system opposed to the prohibitionist stance that prevails today.

The General Health Law (article 245), created in 1984 and still in force in the country, considers peyote as a psychotropic substance with little or no therapeutic value, high addictive potential, and a public health risk. The Criminal Code, established in 1931, includes peyote under the heading of crimes against health. It establishes penalties from 10 to 25 years in prison for those who produce, transport, traffic, trade, or even supply or prescribe any of the narcotics in the banned list, among which is peyote (article 194). The penalty is four to seven years when the amount possessed cannot be connected to the activities listed above (article 195).

This code was adjusted in 2009 due to: 1) a reservation submitted by the Mexican government to make an exception in the case of substances used by indigenous groups as common usage; 2) constitutional reforms concerning the recognition of the multicultural composition of the nation; and 3) different ILO 169 articles that secure guarantees for the reproduction of native cultures and respect for their territories and their use of biodiversity. Thus, Article 195 underscores the need to respect and protect indigenous groups that use psychotropic substances—in this case, peyote—as part of their customs, rituals, and ceremonies.

Against this backdrop, the Penal Code is inadequate because it lacks judicial support sensitive to cultural practices and to the ignorance that preempts the idea of an illicit drug associated with crime that must be punished regardless of the therapeutic value of rituals involving the use of peyote.

The main instrument concerning wildlife protection and preservation in the Mexican legal system is NOM 059, which was published in 1994. The General Wildlife Law (2006) describes the framework used to create NOM 059. In this standard, peyote is classified as a species subject to special protection, which is the fourth and most lax category. This criterion indicates that peyote is neither endangered nor at risk or threatened, but simply “subject to special protection.”

The perception of peyote as a plant deserving special attention and protection goes hand in hand with criteria adopted by the International Treaty on Endangered Species (CITES), assumed by Mexico, in which peyote is classified as “susceptible to becoming an endangered species.”⁹ In addition, the Red List of Threatened Species, updated by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), reclassified peyote in 2013, and its status was changed from low-concern to vulnerable ( ^{Labate & Feeney, 2016} ).

If methodological lines and particular cases are thoroughly discussed, the categories of “threatened,” “vulnerable,” “at risk,” or “subject to special protection” are questionable. However, from a normative perspective, both the specialized literature and empirical observation confirm that peyote is increasingly being consumed and—in view of the current trends—its reproduction rate as a species will not withstand the medium-and long-term demand.

The Mexican state has simulated a policy of respect towards indigenous groups, under which they are allowed to collect peyote freely and legally, but police harassment and recurring arrests debunk it ( ^{Labate & Feeney, 2016} ). Additionally, the combination of drug legislation and the NOM-059 environmental regulation have hindered initiatives to study the ecology of this cactus in any depth; these studies would shed light on the most favorable conditions for its development and help to create strategies to restore degraded habitats.

Finally, regardless of its status as a “species subject to special protection,” additional preservation measures must be put in place. The efforts to grow the plant in greenhouses or to restore its natural habitat are complicated due to the classification of peyote as a controlled drug. In this regard, it is important to discuss and find solutions to make conservation programs possible that will exceed the vision of privileged rights (for a minority), in order to reach models that facilitate the interaction between indigenous and non-indigenous people. A project in its initial phases seeks to develop conservation initiatives among the Wixarikatari with scientific support ( ^{Nájera, 2018} ). Therefore, it is important for new studies to accurately determine the level of danger that can be possibly expected from this species and propose concrete and proactive conservation solutions, and legislation efforts must consider the rights of minorities, the therapeutic benefits of the plant, and the efforts geared toward its conservation.

TRADE OR EXCHANGE OF A SACRED PLANT?

The aim of this section is to unravel the meaning and social value of peyote. Is it a ritual object, or is it only merchandise in the cultural context of the international field of peyote? The answer to this question should shed light on the issue of scarcity or relative abundance, which is closely associated with ecological considerations, conservation statutes, and regulations concerning cultural policy; that is, the tensions or controversies between legalization and prohibition and those related to ethnic or religious rights ( ^{Feeney, 2017} ).

As a plant species, peyote was originally abundant in its ecological environment and scarce or non-existent outside such environment. If we refer to chronicles and historical accounts, peyote was appreciated by both nomadic groups who roamed peyote’s semiarid habitat and sedentary groups settled in areas where it grows. Trade and exchange among these groups is the first reference to its value in a non-capitalist economy. There are no precise references, but pre-Hispanic poetic evocations suggest a link between these ancient forms and the meanings developed by contemporary indigenous groups.

Among the Wixaritari, peyote acquires multiple connotations: it is a cultural hero, the Big Brother, the Blue Deer Kauyumari, the link or bridge between living humans and their ancestors. Finally, its ontology can only be captured within the cosmological complex that, among other things, summarizes the economy of loans and counter-loans with life, nature, and the ancestors. Their pilgrimage is a sacrifice that, in present times, entails important economic expenses for transportation, food, and offerings in different sacred places, in addition to physical effort. Among the different ways of saying what peyote is in essence, the marakate use to say, “Peyote is your teacher; he is the guide because he shows you the truth of things, the heart of things... he tells you where you are at, and that is how he heals.”

Among all North American indigenous groups, peyote is a medicine that heals the spirit, a sacrament through which prayers can be raised to Great Creator as a plea for health, guidance along the way, and an understanding of the fundamentals of life. However, there is a fundamental difference between the Huichol, who have direct access via peregrinations (and interchange with other groups), and the Native Americans of the United States, who require the services of a commercial intermediary ( ^{Feeney, 2014} , ²⁰¹⁷ ).

Interestingly, the significance of peyote for both Huichol and Native American populations is never limited to an economic valuation, but to the type of valuations involved in their interchange processes. When we refer to these processes, we think about the meanings inscribed in their forms, uses, and trajectories ( ^{Appadurai, 2015, p. 23} ). However, users are hardly blind to the economic connotations of the interchange or the costs involved in harvesting peyote.

Still, we should stress that the entheogen is never only a commodity. As it is for the natives of the Solomon Islands, certain objects of interchange and ritual use are placed beyond the culturally demarcated dimension of trade ( ^{Appadurai, 2015, p. 48} ). These objects of aesthetic and sacred elaboration and purpose exist outside the commercial sphere.

However, when referring to the international field of peyote, we must acknowledge the overflowing of ethnic boundaries, the resignifications, the expansion of consumption among non-indigenous people, and the internationalization of peyote as so many elements of its double valuation as a commodity and as a sacrament. Estimating the dimensions of trade and interchange involving peyote from an international perspective is beyond the scope of the present paper; in any case, the illegal status of the plant and the prohibitionist policy around it has resulted in the absence of harvest inventories and information on its destination. However, one way to approach this issue is through the consumption pattern in the United States and Canada in the context of NAC institutionalized rituals involving the cactus; there is a record of these events, that is, a historical sequence ( ^{Feeney, 2014} , ²⁰¹⁷ ). Given that the plant grows naturally only in the United States and Mexico, the depletion of the resource in the former country has become a critical issue, with regard to both the continued expansion of the NAC in the United States and the Native-Americanization phenomenon in Mexico, especially in connection with the economy and ecological policy of the plant.

In the United States, the Texas Department of Public Security (DPS) introduced regulations in this regard as early as the 1960s. By the mid-1970s, there were 27 authorized dealers who harvested and sold the plant directly to indigenous users. At present, only three of them continue in business, and they now face the problem of meeting growing demand in a more problematic and uncertain context. According to records from this department, peak harvest occurred in 1997, at 2.3 million peyote buttons, which decreased to 1.5 million the following year. However, according to direct and indirect empirical research carried out using accounts from secondary sources, illegal harvest and sale are common in the United States and Mexico in the form of fresh specimens and as dried and ground buttons.

It is true that the demand has continued to grow. Some authors estimate that consumption in the United States by NAC members could be around five to 10 million peyote buttons per year. Shortages have resulted in a higher price per specimen since 2000. DPS data report the sale of 700,000 peyote heads only in the first four months of 2012 and the decreased size of the specimens, which are often harvested before full maturity; these reports are an evidence of the conspicuous overexploitation of the cactus ( ^{Feeney, 2016} ; ^{Feeney, 2017} ; ^{Anderson, 1995} , ¹⁹⁹⁶ ).

A confidential study commissioned by the NAC to a group of researchers points out that the number of peyote ceremonies has increased in recent years relative to the past. Nowadays, ceremonies are performed to heal oneself, to thank for healing, to pray for guidance into the military service or school, to celebrate births and anniversaries, or to bless someone in particular who is going through a problem. In a survey conducted as part of this project, 67 percent of interviewees reported that they participate in at least three peyote ceremonies per month; 24.84 percent participate in four to seven ceremonies, and 3.09 percent in 8 to 12 in the same period ( ^{Walker, Walker, & Graves, 2015} ).

The increased demand is associated with incorrect peyote cutting, and other socio-environmental factors have put the conservation of this species at a critical level of risk in the South Texas region, the only formal source of peyote for people in the United States and Canada ( ^{Terry, 2008} ).

Given the increasingly close links between religious leaders and Mexican citizens, we know that the transportation and illegal trade of Mexican peyote in the rest of North America is working. The characteristics of this type of commerce are difficult to estimate; apart from empirical observations, which are unreliable and useless for quantitative estimations, the media has published stories on Mexican or American citizens who have been arrested due to possession of peyote in their luggage.

THE MEXICAN NATIVE AMERICAN CHURCH: PARADOXES OF THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE CULT OF PEYOTE IN MEXICO

Before discussing the legal process proposed by the INAM to the Directorate of Religious Cults, we will present a brief description of the tepee ceremonies. The basic meaning— even though peyote consumption is involved in all cases—is the action of “raising a prayer” to the Great Spirit (Wanka Tanka in Lakota). These prayers are raised with two main types of intention: to express gratitude for the Spirit’s favor in the past or petitions for the future, or to plea for guidance toward one’s goals in life. Peyote, tobacco, sage, cedar, water, musical instruments, and songs are all elements of this prayer; however, each of these elements plays a different role. For example, the main smoke (tobacco) is assumed to be the foundation of the prayer; speech is given through it, and among all plants and medicines, it is considered the oldest, the wise one, the grandfather.

For its part, peyote represents a spirit that provides a communication channel with the Great Spirit (Jesus Christ in syncretic forms of the ritual) and with the rest of the elements involved in the ceremony. Consumption involves the presence of a chief peyote, that is, a sizeable dry specimen whose age at harvest can be around 100 years. It is kept in a specially decorated box, and it is role is to be the “ruler” in the different ceremonies carried out by a specific roadman. During the ceremony, which begins at dusk and ends in the morning, fresh peyote circulates among participants, sometimes macerated in water or dried and shredded into powder, at least four times or depending on each occasion.

The beginning of the different phases of the teepee ceremony is marked by tobacco: the main smoke, the smoke of the midnight water, the smoke of the morning water. There are variations and modulations of the ritual that depend on the tribes and the ways in which knowledge and practices were transmitted and adapted ( ^{Anderson, 1996} ). We should now stress the figure of the roadman, usually a middle-aged man over 50 who has been authorized by an older roadman to lead the ritual because his merits, wisdom, and ability allow him to take care of all of the aspects of the ritual. However, ceremonies are usually carried out at the request of somebody; this person is the sponsor, and they must cover transportation expenses for all the people in the road man’s support team (e.g., singers), including gifts, as well as firewood and other supplies. At this point, we will address the arrival of tepee ceremonies in Mexico.

In the 1980s, relationships between leaders of the Aztec dance tradition and leaders of the NAC began to take shape, joined by Mexican-American citizens who had access to tepee, Sun Dance, and vision quest ceremonies, in addition to the temazcal, or sweat lodge. These contacts led to invitations to celebrate ceremonies on Mexican soil. It should also be mentioned that the broader distribution and abundance of peyote, and its relatively easier access in Mexico despite the prohibitionist policy, encouraged the relocation of several roadmen, who began to weave alliances and interchange relationships with the contacts that they established in their journeys. After several years, many of these Mexicans were given the “authorization” to open and guide ceremonies with an audience consisting basically of dancers and neo-Indians ( ^{Arias, 2012} ).

Thus, an important movement has emerged in Mexico after almost 30 years of interchange among groups and influence from Native American ritual forms. Based on experience in the field and a preliminary survey, we estimate that more than 20 groups have been identified with peyote tepee ceremonies. The ritual takes different forms in the United States; there are different lines, schools, or traditions that can be linked to the NAC, but others are independent and constitute different religious tribal associations.

Groups in Mexico have been influenced by these different traditions or lines; as a result, they are fragmented, and an organizational basis to include all of them has not yet been established. This is combined with the differences among Mexican urban groups and their forms of neo-Mexican spirituality.

FINAL REFLECTIONS

After a long period of dormancy, the issue of peyote consumption has reemerged in the context of the discussion around drug policy, especially concerning human and religious rights, and it must be viewed from an international perspective. As discussed in the present paper, the issue becomes particularly complex when approached from a cross-border perspective as a result of the progressive scarcity of the cactus; moreover, its resolution calls for agreements addressing the ecological, legal, and cultural dimensions.

The cultural policy of peyote refers to the intercultural dimension involved in the creation, expansion, and innovation of new forms of use and users ( ^{Guzmán, 2017} ). This extensive process is rooted in the countercultural environment of the 1960s, which has been constantly updating and, over the past three decades, has acquired new contours that can be defined as the Huicholization and Native-Americanization of the rituals and ceremonies involving peyote in Mexico.

The case of the INAM is significant not because its strategy is effective (in any case, it entails the risks of reinventing the traditions described in previous sections), but because of its categorical attempt to enforce the rights of a religious minority whose ritual opposes and defies the international prohibitionist policy currently in force in Mexico. An interesting aspect of this legitimation process is its foundation on a pan-Indianist outlook; that is, an ideology that gravitates toward the indigenous but is nonetheless a cultural construction of non-indigenous groups. Therefore, it represents a curious case of cultural hybridization. By all appearances, this point of view can be expected to grow in the following years. In fact, the INAM attempt is the second of its kind, the first of which was made in 1994 by Aurelio Díaz Tepancalli ( ^{Diario Oficial de la Federación, 1994} ). This process failed to produce favorable legal results.

Effective peyote regulation requires that the government and Mexican indigenous and non-indigenous representatives establish communication and include conservation and health scientists in the discussion. The unprecedented model of legal, religious use of ayahuasca in Brazil ( ^{Labate & Feeney, 2012} ) could be a model for collective parameters that all social actors could accept and commit to.

However, the ecological aspects of this cactus are more complicated than those of ayahuasca due to its slow growth rate, increasing scarcity, and issues derived from the transnational border. Therefore, given its complexity, discussing the expansion and regulation of peyote is an excellent laboratory for ideas concerning drug regulation policy.