{"id":50285,"date":"2021-10-02T07:44:47","date_gmt":"2021-10-02T15:44:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2021\/10\/02\/santa-cruz-removes-peyote-and-other-mescaline-containing-cacti-from-psychedelics-decriminalization-law\/"},"modified":"2021-10-02T13:45:52","modified_gmt":"2021-10-02T21:45:52","slug":"santa-cruz-removes-peyote-and-other-mescaline-containing-cacti-from-psychedelics-decriminalization-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/2021\/10\/02\/santa-cruz-removes-peyote-and-other-mescaline-containing-cacti-from-psychedelics-decriminalization-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Santa Cruz Removes Peyote And Other Mescaline-Containing Cacti From Psychedelics Decriminalization Law"},"content":{"rendered":"<\/p>\n

Nearly two years after Santa Cruz became the second California city\u2014and the third in the U.S.\u2014to decriminalize a broad range of psychedelic plants and fungi<\/a>, the City Council has rolled back the law\u2019s provision on peyote, effectively recriminalizing the cactus.<\/p>\n

Local lawmakers voted at a meeting last month to remove peyote and other mescaline-containing cacti from the municipality\u2019s decriminalization policy, citing pushback from Indigenous people who consider the plant sacred.<\/p>\n

Groups such as the National Council of Native American Churches, which uses peyote ceremonially, have been urging<\/a> activists and lawmakers not to include peyote on lists of allowed plants and fungi. The group said in a letter last year that the cactus should be \u201cpreserved for utilization by and for Indigenous peoples.\u201d<\/p>\n

Even Decriminalize Santa Cruz (DSC), which helped pass the original measure that included peyote, released a statement in which the group apologized \u201cfor our lack of cultural sensitivity surrounding the Peyote cacti (Lophophora williamsii) and discounting Indigenous consultation in the process of decriminalizing entheogenic plants and fungi.\u201d<\/p>\n

DSC said it originally included peyote on the list of decriminalized drugs because they copied verbatim an Oakland ordinance<\/a>\u00a0that was put forward by Decriminalize Nature Oakland (DNO). \u201cWe were insular in our activism and did not consider the harm we may cause to Indigenous communities who have been using this sacred plant for millennia,\u201d the group wrote.<\/p>\n

\u201cFundamentally, DSC\u2019s intention is to do no harm and to protect others from harm,\u201d members said in the\u00a0public letter<\/a>. \u201cWe recognize that the inclusion of the Peyote cacti in our resolution is dangerous because it may contribute to the ongoing Peyote crisis in the sacred gardens of South Texas for generations to come.\u201d<\/p>\n

Peyote matures slowly and is currently categorized by conservationists as \u201cvulnerable\u201d after an uptick in\u00a0illicit harvesting as use becomes more mainstream. The cactus, native to Mexico and parts of the American Southwest, has no federal protection in the U.S., while in Mexico it can be harvested legally only by Indigenous groups.<\/p>\n

The change in Santa Cruz removes peyote from the city\u2019s list of decriminalized substances along with \u201cother entheogenic cacti that contain phenethylamine compounds such as mescaline.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

Although the revisions<\/a> to the resolution were ultimately adopted<\/a> unanimously, not all members of the City Council were eager to push through the change. Councilmember Justin Cummings, who worked with advocates to help pass the original measure, suggested the Council wait on approving the change until more community members could weigh in.<\/p>\n

Councilmembers Shebreh Kalantari-Johnson and Martine Watkins replied that Indigenous groups had indicated to them that the change should be made sooner rather than later.<\/p>\n

\u201cI was reached out [to] by members in the community, and there was a request to move this forward urgently,\u201d Kalantari-Johnson said. \u201cThe Tribal community were really challenged with how the resolution was adopted in the past, and there was a sense of urgency to move this through pretty quickly.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThey\u2019ve provided extensive feedback,\u201d the councilmember added, \u201cand we\u2019ve taken that feedback into what you see before you.\u201d<\/p>\n

Councilmember Sandy Brown called for more input from stakeholders, but ultimately voted in favor of the change.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen I bring items similar to this, where I\u2019ve been working with community groups, I\u2019ve been told, \u2018Well, we didn\u2019t hear anything about it, and we need to learn more.’\u201d And this is a case where that is true to me\u2026 I think it\u2019s fair to ask for a continuation until our next meeting, at least, so we can have some of those conversations with folks in our community.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Council didn\u2019t wait, however, ultimately approving the change without considering proposed amendments from Cummings. \u201cWe already kind of did the legwork, essentially, to have some of the key folks have eyes on this,\u201d said Watkins.<\/p>\n

Cummings, who hesitantly supported the change when it finally came to a vote, said he was \u201cdisappointed we couldn\u2019t work together productively.\u201d<\/p>\n

Whether to include peyote in decriminalization policies is an ongoing controversy in the psychedelics community, dividing groups that once worked together on drug reform.<\/p>\n

Carlos Plazola, the chair of Decriminalize Nature National, criticized the change.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is unfortunate that the Santa Cruz City Council has taken a position to recriminalize not only peyote cultivation, but all cacti which contain mescaline,\u201d he told Marijuana Moment by email. The change, he argued, will \u201cincrease the likelihood of peyote going extinct in the endemic habitats, as well as increasing the potential of arrests for possessing common household plants such as San Pedro and Peruvian torch cacti.\u201d<\/p>\n

Larry Norris, who co-founded Decriminalize Nature with Plazola, explained that the Santa Cruz City Council\u2019s change seems to inadvertently criminalize other widely-grown cactus species in California, such as the San Pedro cactus, which also contains mescaline.\u00a0While growing San Pedro cactuses is generally allowed for ornamental purposes, it\u2019s illegal to cultivate for consumption.<\/p>\n

Plazola also told Marijuana Moment that Decriminalize Nature National intends to oppose a similar carveout in Seattle, where the City Council is set to consider a resolution on Monday that would decriminalize psychedelic plants and fungi<\/a> with the exception of peyote.<\/p>\n

\n

19-Year-Old New Hampshire Lawmaker Prepares Bills To Decriminalize Psilocybin And All Drugs<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

Photo courtesy of zapdelight<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

The post Santa Cruz Removes Peyote And Other Mescaline-Containing Cacti From Psychedelics Decriminalization Law<\/a> appeared first on Marijuana Moment<\/a>.<\/p>\n


\n
\nRead More: Santa Cruz Removes Peyote And Other Mescaline-Containing Cacti From Psychedelics Decriminalization Law<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Nearly two years after Santa Cruz became the second California city\u2014and the third in the U.S.\u2014to decriminalize a broad range of psychedelic plants and fungi, the City Council has rolled back the law\u2019s provision on peyote, effectively recriminalizing the cactus. Local lawmakers voted at a meeting last month to removeContinue Reading<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"false","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[81],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50285"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/24"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50285"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50285\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":50286,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50285\/revisions\/50286"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50285"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50285"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cannabiscultivatornews.com\/home\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50285"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}