Indigenous Traditions, Ethics and Conservation in Psychedelic Plant Use

Quick answer

Many plants and fungi now discussed as "psychedelics" are sacred medicines to specific Indigenous peoples. This page explains the history, why consent and reciprocity are central in current debates, and why peyote conservation is a particular concern. It does not describe ceremonies, preparation or other restricted knowledge, and it does not tell anyone how to take part in them. Where possible it uses statements written by Indigenous organizations, legal texts and regulators. Evidence labels apply to health claims elsewhere; this page is about history, law and ethics.

Indigenous traditions and historical uses

Some psychedelic drugs come from plants and fungi with a long history of use in many cultures. NIDA notes that some Native American tribes used peyote as long ago as 5,700 B.C. in religious ceremonies, that Aztec shamans used psilocybin in healing rituals, and that references to psychedelic use appear in ancient texts from India and Greece. [1] These are brief summaries. Each tradition has its own meaning, rules and community, which outsiders do not hold the right to explain or copy.

Two points for a respectful reading:

• Traditions are living, not "ancient history". Congress itself recorded that ceremonial peyote use has "for centuries been integral to a way of life" for many Indian people. [2]
• Terms such as "shaman" and "curandera" are not generic labels. Colorado's regulator tells licensed businesses not to use "curandera," "curandero" or "shaman" unless they are traditional healers from an Indigenous community. [3]

Ethnobotany and cultural context

Ethnobotany is the study of how particular peoples use plants. It becomes a problem when knowledge is taken without consent. The best-known example is the Mazatec healer María Sabina of Oaxaca, Mexico. Accounts say a village elder selected her to show a visiting outsider, R. Gordon Wasson, a mushroom ceremony, and that Wasson's later publications, including in Life magazine in 1957, brought crowds of outsiders to her village. [4][5] One account says she suffered legal backlash and was expelled from her own community. [4] Another says Wasson himself expressed regret. [5]

A Chacruna Institute essay criticizes how her story is often retold, placing her in a "noble savage" archetype, and notes she was only one of many well-regarded healers in her community. [4] Reading that source is useful, but it is an opinion essay from an organization that works on these issues, not a neutral history.

Law and Native American Church use of peyote

In the United States, federal law (42 U.S.C. 1996a) says the use, possession or transportation of peyote by an Indian for bona fide traditional ceremonial purposes in connection with a traditional Indian religion is lawful and shall not be prohibited by the United States or any State. [2] The law followed a 1990 Supreme Court decision, Employment Division v. Smith, which held that the First Amendment does not protect such use. [2] The law still allows DEA regulation of those who cultivate, harvest or distribute peyote, and Texas rules on those steps. [2]

The National Council of Native American Churches and the Indigenous Peyote Conservation Initiative said in 2020 that both federal and Texas law permit only Indian people who are members of federally recognized tribes to legally acquire, possess, use and transport peyote. [6] This is not legal advice, and laws change.

Conservation

The same 2020 statement says peyote grows naturally in the US only in a small area of southern Texas and that this limited habitat is a significant factor in a shortage for Native American Church practitioners. [6] The statement asks that decriminalization measures not name peyote in lists of plants and fungi, partly because it fears a false impression of legality could draw more non-Native people toward illegal and unsustainable sourcing. [6] For this reason this site does not give any practical information about obtaining or preparing peyote. See peyote, San Pedro and mescaline for the plant profile.

Conservation information for other species was not read for this page. Proper evidence not found here for them.

Ethics: consent, benefit-sharing and reciprocity

• Benefit-sharing. A Georgetown law journal article argues that Psilocybe mushrooms have sparked patent applications while the Mazatec community, whose members stewarded these mushrooms for centuries, has not benefited. It points to the Nagoya Protocol on sharing benefits from genetic resources and notes the US, Canada and Australia had not adopted it. [5] This is the authors' argument and legal position.
• Reciprocity. Chacruna's Indigenous Reciprocity Initiative of the Americas describes funding community-led projects designed and run by local people for their own priorities. [7] That information comes from the organization and its funder, so treat the results it reports as self-reported.
• Marketing. Colorado's rules forbid advertising that misappropriates Native tribes, Indigenous people or their culture or religions, and give examples such as using the word "native" without being from a federally recognized tribe or Indigenous community. [3]
• Wixarika and other peoples. We did not find a community-authored statement for peoples such as the Wixarika (Huichol) in the sources we could read. Their voices are therefore missing here, and that gap should not be filled by guesswork.

Questions to ask about any source or program

Who wrote it, and does the community concerned take part? Is consent described? Is anything sacred or restricted being shared or sold? Are benefits shared with the people whose knowledge is used? Do not accept claims that an ancient tradition proves a treatment works; see psychedelic clinical trials and research limits for the health evidence.

Related reading

What are natural psychedelics?, ayahuasca and Amazonian plants, psychedelic legal status by country.