my graft is in danger?

[DieTer-Xz]

Only two I thought. Diffusa en williamsii.

[daiv]

I think in California you can claim to practice an Indian religion and keep the thing legally.

That's funny Tim if it is true. Expecially since Loph. grow 900 miles away in Texas. It wouldn't surprise me if they do have some sort of provision for that. Especially in light of all the other inaccuracies about what is sacred tradition and what isn't. A good example of this is all the "Cactus Rain Sticks" that plauge the gift shops of the Southwest U.S. These things are made out of cacti wood from Chilie.

I also remember reading somewhere about a brochure for the state of New Mexico where the artist who drew the picture for the cover featured Saguaro's which do not grow in that state.

I guess if tourists like Rain Sticks and if people are comfortable imagining the desert as depicted in a "Road Runner" cartoon, that is their business. When they start making laws based on these mis-perceptions, the importance of getting your facts straight becomes a bit more important.

(Sorry -I kind of went off on that one. )

But how many species of Lophophora are there that are currently accepted as valid?

According to Anderson's book there are two, williamsii and diffusa

[Mike]

All very interesting.

I was amused once, after I learned what this cactus was, that I got a popup on some cactus site where they were selling it. And it said sales were not permitted to California. That is where I got the thought other states said ok.

I also saw a grower here, to be unnamed, and he/she/it would not sell me one. That person said they had been aware of authorities seizing cacti at nurseries for selling it. What a wonderful use of our tax dollars when all the other problems in the world have been solved.

Mike

[Murph]

Just quickly, im a bit lost - how on earth can a cactus be illegal? U can't make drugs or something out of it can u?

[templegatejohn]

I could be wrong, but I think probably only two. Williamsii and diffusa, (but you get differing reports). The others are usually thought of by the taxonomists as forms.

John

[Buck Hemenway]

John,

Have you googled San Pedro Cactus (Echinopsis or Echocereus pachinoi) lately or looked it up on ebay? Hard to imagine that weed selling for $12 to $20 per foot as non-rooted cuttings. It sells for a reported $30 per foot on the campus of one famous California university.

We should all read the intro to Anderson's book regarding the ceremonial use of cacti in the Native American culture. The natives that lived in Mexico took annual pilgrimages to Texas (several weeks or months in duration) to harvest and use L. williamsii.

According to modern chemical analysis, L. williamsii has one active alkaloid which can produce mind altering events. E. pachanoi on the other hand has 50.

I am currently out of the country, so I don't have access to my copy of Anderson so this is from memory. In any case, Peyote has the reputation and San Pedro Cactus does not, so the less effective substance gets the legal attention.

Just a note - DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME. Anderson also reports that any of them will make the user violently ill and can cause serious problems if improperly used.

[templegatejohn]

Hi Murph, Yes the Lophophora has halucegenic properties. The plants are sliced horizontally and then dried. The dried disc is then chewed. It was used by the native indians in there ceremonies.

John

[Dominique]

Interesting comment, Buck. There are so many plants containing toxic substance, much more dangerous than Lophophora ! Regarding the use made by the natives of Mexico, it's interesting to read Carlos Castaneda's books. Now, no matter what, I am not interested in chewing my plants And I handle euphorbia with care...

[daiv]

One other sad result is that Lophophora is not exactly safe and sound in its native range. If it were allowed to be sold in nurseries it would be left alone in the wild more so.