Peyote Trade and Harvest Data, 1986 to 2016
Texas is the only place in the world with a licensed commercial peyote harvest, and its Department of Public Safety published the distributors’ annual totals for thirty-one years. Licensed distributors reported 1,913,212 buttons sold in 1986, a peak of 2,317,380 in 1997, and 867,674 in 2016, the last year the state required the figures. Over the same span the average price per thousand buttons rose from $78 to $378. At rarecactus.com we compiled every published Texas DPS peyote distributor figure from 1986 to 2016 into one dataset and set it beside the Cactus Conservation Institute’s regrowth study, because the two series explain each other and had never been charted together. Every chart below has its table beneath it, and every number traces to a cited page or paper.
How many peyote buttons has Texas reported selling, 1986 to 2016?
Between roughly 0.9 and 2.3 million buttons a year, with the count falling by more than half between the 1997 peak and 2016. The four charts track buttons sold, reported sales in dollars, the average price per thousand buttons, and the number of licensed distributors. Buttons and dollars move in opposite directions after the late 1990s: fewer plants left the ground while the trade earned more for them, which is what a shrinking wild supply looks like from the inside. The dashed lines mark the 1994 amendments to the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, which put the Native American Church exemption into federal statute, and the 2016 rule change that ended reporting.
| Year | Buttons sold | Sales (USD) | Price per 1,000 | Licensed distributors | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1986 | 1,913,212 | $149,308 | $78 | Provenance and cross-checksprice_per_1000 for 1986-2014 is the Trout table column 'Price per Thousand', which equals DPS total sales divided by buttons x 1000 (a derived annual average, not a quoted wholesale list price); no per-button consumer price is published by DPS; Trout's Notes DPS table: 1,913,212 buttons / $149307.52 / $78 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,913,212 buttons / $149307.52; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,913,212 buttons / $149307.52; distributors: no DPS count for this year; Texas Monthly (1988-07-01) says nine licensed Texans at time of writing; Feeney 2017 says 27 in the mid-1970s citing Morgan 1976 (https://cactusconservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Feeney_2017_Human-Organization_76_1_59-72_-Peyote-as-Commodity.pdf) | |
| 1987 | 1,766,409 | $137,046 | $78 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,766,409 buttons / $137046.30 / $78 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,766,409 buttons / $137046.30; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,766,409 buttons / $137046.30; distributors: no DPS count for this year; Texas Monthly (1988-07-01) says nine licensed Texans at time of writing; Feeney 2017 says 27 in the mid-1970s citing Morgan 1976 (https://cactusconservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Feeney_2017_Human-Organization_76_1_59-72_-Peyote-as-Commodity.pdf) | |
| 1988 | 1,575,766 | $129,051 | $82 | 9 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,575,766 buttons / $129051.01 / $82 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,575,766 buttons / $129051.01; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,575,766 buttons / $129051.01; Texas Monthly 'Button Pushers' (published 1988-07-01) quotes dealer prices: Lopez $80 per 1000 fresh and $100 per 1000 dried; Reyna family $75 fresh / $90 dried, pickers paid $45 per 1000; Reynas sell 500,000-600,000 buttons a year (https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/button-pushers/); distributors: Texas Monthly 1988-07-01 'Lopez is one of nine Texans ... licensed by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency and the Texas Department of Public Safety' (https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/button-pushers/); no Trout figure for this year |
| 1989 | 1,572,102 | $129,620 | $82 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,572,102 buttons / $129619.62 / $82 per 1000; AGREE: cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,572,102 buttons / $129618.72; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,572,102 buttons / $129618.72 (Trout value kept in cell); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1990 | 1,772,126 | $156,607 | $88 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,772,126 buttons / $156607.29 / $88 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,772,126 buttons / $156607.29; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,722,126 buttons / $156607.29 (Trout value kept in cell); Trout page prints the 1990 sales figure with a typo as $156.607.29; Trout also states resale price to consumers was 'around $0.09' per button in 1990 (consistent with 156607.29/1772126); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1991 | 1,859,189 | $182,544 | $97 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,859,189 buttons / $182544.02 / $97 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,859,189 buttons / $182544.02; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,859,189 buttons / $182544.02; distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1992 | 1,886,434 | $192,695 | $102 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,886,434 buttons / $192695.25 / $102 per 1000; AGREE: cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,886,434 buttons / $192695.25; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,866,434 buttons / $192695.25 (Trout value kept in cell); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1993 | 1,978,646 | $210,248 | $106 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,978,646 buttons / $210247.60 / $106 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,978,646 buttons / $210247.60; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,978,646 buttons / $210247.60; Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1994 | 2,184,739 | $246,633 | $113 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,184,739 buttons / $246632.94 / $113 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,184,739 buttons / $246632.94; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,184,739 buttons / $246632.94; Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1995 | 2,252,174 | $234,750 | $104 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,252,174 buttons / $234750.20 / $104 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,252,174 buttons / $234750.20; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,252,174 buttons / $234750.20; Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); Feeney 2017 cites Anderson 1995 for a market price of $170 per 1000 in 1995, DISAGREES with derived $104 (a quoted retail price vs an annual average); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1996 | 2,258,993 | $278,580 | $123 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,258,993 buttons / $278579.50 / $123 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,258,993 buttons / $278579.50; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,258,993 buttons / $278579.50; distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1997 | 2,317,380 | $274,501 | $118 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,317,380 buttons / $274500.62 / $118 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,317,380 buttons / $274500.62; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,317,380 buttons / $274500.62; peak year of the DPS series; Feeney 2017 'high of 2.3 million buttons in 1997' AGREES; Gossamer 'Button Down' '1997, when sales topped out at 2.3 million' AGREES; Vice/MAPS 2018 'peaked in 1998 at around 2.5 million' DISAGREES with DPS (https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-decline-of-american-peyote-v24n5/); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1998 | 2,076,167 | $277,120 | $133 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,076,167 buttons / $277119.71 / $133 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,076,167 buttons / $277119.71; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,076,167 buttons / $277119.71; Vice/MAPS 2018 claims this was the peak year at around 2.5 million buttons; DPS table shows 2,076,167 and the peak in 1997; Vice DISAGREES; distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 1999 | 2,093,335 | $335,823 | $160 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,093,335 buttons / $335823.02 / $160 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,093,335 buttons / $335823.02; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,093,335 buttons / $335823.02; distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 2000 | 2,057,020 | $310,722 | $151 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 2,057,020 buttons / $310722.10 / $151 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 2,057,020 buttons / $310722.10; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 2,057,020 buttons / $310722.10; Trout: resale price to consumers '$0.15' per button in 2000 (consistent with 310722.10/2057020); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 2001 | 1,934,600 | $360,676 | $186 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,934,600 buttons / $360676.00 / $186 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,934,600 buttons / $360676.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,934,600 buttons / $360676.00; distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 2002 | 1,703,914 | $404,860 | $237 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,703,914 buttons / $404859.50 / $237 per 1000; AGREE: cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,793,914 buttons / $404859.50; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,793,914 buttons / $404859.50 (Trout value kept in cell); Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); Trout also prints an earlier 2005 DPS response for 2002: 1,820,847 buttons / $422,289.50 / $232 per 1000 (three distinct button counts exist for 2002 across sources); distributors: no year-specific count published; Trout: 'Prior to [2003-2005] there were five and before that there were more' (years not stated) | |
| 2003 | 1,781,170 | $416,727 | $234 | 4 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,781,170 buttons / $416727.00 / $234 per 1000; AGREE: cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,781,170 buttons / $416727.00; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,781,710 buttons / $416727.00 (Trout value kept in cell); Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); Trout also prints an earlier 2005 DPS response for 2003: 1,779,170 buttons / $416,727.00 / $234 per 1000; distributors: Trout 'Four licensed peyote dealers were still in operation in 2003-2005' |
| 2004 | 1,669,806 | $393,573 | $236 | 4 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,669,806 buttons / $393572.50 / $236 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,669,806 buttons / $393572.50; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,669,806 buttons / $393572.50; Trout row flagged 'data from DPS in 2011' (year was a gap when first obtained in 2005); distributors: Trout 'Four licensed peyote dealers were still in operation in 2003-2005' |
| 2005 | 1,565,534 | $407,790 | $260 | 4 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,565,534 buttons / $407789.50 / $260 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; DISAGREE (transcription-level): CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,563,534 buttons / $407789.50; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,563,534 buttons / $407789.50 (Trout value kept in cell); distributors: Trout 'Four licensed peyote dealers were still in operation in 2003-2005' |
| 2006 | 1,619,115 | $463,715 | $286 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,619,115 buttons / $463714.75 / $286 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,619,115 buttons / $463714.75; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,619,115 buttons / $463714.75; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2007 | 1,605,345 | $474,322 | $296 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,605,345 buttons / $474321.80 / $296 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,605,345 buttons / $474321.80; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,605,345 buttons / $474321.80; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2008 | 1,475,469 | $463,148 | $314 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,475,469 buttons / $463148.00 / $314 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,475,469 buttons / $463148.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,475,469 buttons / $463148.00; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2009 | 1,604,623 | $493,834 | $308 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,604,623 buttons / $493834.00 / $308 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,604,623 buttons / $493834.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,604,623 buttons / $493834.00; Trout text repeats the sales total for this year in prose as the combined take of the three remaining distributors; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2010 | 1,483,697 | $459,699 | $310 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,483,697 buttons / $459699.00 / $310 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,483,697 buttons / $459699.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,483,697 buttons / $459699.00; Trout text repeats the sales total for this year in prose as the combined take of the three remaining distributors; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2011 | 1,413,846 | $466,591 | $330 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,413,846 buttons / $466590.50 / $330 per 1000; AGREE: CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,413,846 buttons / $466590.50; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,413,846 buttons / $466590.50; Trout: resale price '$0.33 per button in 2011'; Terry et al. 2012 (Trout co-author) JBRIT 6(2):567-577: 'In 2011, the DPS-regulated peyote sales totaled slightly over 1.4 million buttons' AGREES; Trout text repeats the sales total for this year in prose as the combined take of the three remaining distributors; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2012 | 1,106,209 | $434,609 | $393 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,106,209 buttons / $434609.00 / $393 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,106,209 buttons / $434609.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,106,209 buttons / $434609.00; Trout text repeats the sales total for this year in prose as the combined take of the three remaining distributors; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2013 | 1,363,978 | $530,230 | $389 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,363,978 buttons / $530230.00 / $389 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,363,978 buttons / $530230.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,363,978 buttons / $530230.00; Trout text repeats the sales total for this year in prose as the combined take of the three remaining distributors; distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006'; Kalam et al. 2013 (Trout co-author) also says 'currently there are three'; Trout adds 'I have heard that a fourth has submitted his paperwork to DPS' (2014) |
| 2014 | 1,128,787 | $426,300 | $378 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksTrout's Notes DPS table: 1,128,787 buttons / $426300.00 / $378 per 1000; AGREE: sacredcacti.com mirror of the Trout page prints the same row; cactusconservation.org/CCI/pc copy of the Trout page prints the same row; CCI raw DPS spreadsheet: 1,128,787 buttons / $426300.00; CCI legacy DPS table PDF: 1,128,787 buttons / $426300.00; Feeney 2017 (citing TDPS 2015) 'just over 1.1 million in 2014' AGREES on buttons but gives '$385/1,000 by 2014' which DISAGREES with derived $378 (https://cactusconservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Feeney_2017_Human-Organization_76_1_59-72_-Peyote-as-Commodity.pdf); distributors: Trout (posted 2014-11-02) 'There are presently three peyote distributors and this has been true since 2006' |
| 2015 | 1,163,120 | $434,275 | $373 | 3 | Provenance and cross-checksNO TROUT FIGURE: Trout's Notes table (posted 2014-11-02) ends at 2014; no later Trout's Notes or sacredcacti page with DPS figures was found; Trout and Terry 2016 book chapter (Praeger) not readable online, its errata PDF lists no numeric corrections; Terry and Trout 2017 JBRIT 11(1):147-156 cites DPS unpublished data but prints no annual figures; cell from CCI raw DPS spreadsheet 'Total Peyote Buttons Sold: 1986-2016, Data Source: Texas Department of Public Safety': 1,163,120 buttons / $434274.50; AGREE: CCI legacy DPS table PDF 1,163,120 buttons / $434274.50; Muneta 2020, American Indian Law Journal 9(1) fn 106: 'from 1,163,120 buttons in 2015 to 867,674 in 2016' (https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=ailj); price_per_1000 = spreadsheet Avg Cost/Button 0.37337 x 1000 rounded (derived annual average, not a list price); distributors: Feeney 2017 (fieldwork 2012-2015, citing TDPS 2015) 'a current market low of three' (https://cactusconservation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Feeney_2017_Human-Organization_76_1_59-72_-Peyote-as-Commodity.pdf); consistent with Trout's 'three since 2006' |
| 2016 | 867,674 | $327,872 | $378 | Provenance and cross-checksNO TROUT FIGURE: Trout's Notes table (posted 2014-11-02) ends at 2014; no later Trout's Notes or sacredcacti page with DPS figures was found; Trout and Terry 2016 book chapter (Praeger) not readable online, its errata PDF lists no numeric corrections; Terry and Trout 2017 JBRIT 11(1):147-156 cites DPS unpublished data but prints no annual figures; cell from CCI raw DPS spreadsheet 'Total Peyote Buttons Sold: 1986-2016, Data Source: Texas Department of Public Safety': 867,674 buttons / $327872.00; AGREE: CCI legacy DPS table PDF 867,674 buttons / $327872.00; Muneta 2020, American Indian Law Journal 9(1) fn 106: 'from 1,163,120 buttons in 2015 to 867,674 in 2016' (https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1228&context=ailj); price_per_1000 = spreadsheet Avg Cost/Button 0.37787 x 1000 rounded (derived annual average, not a list price); distributors: no 2016-specific count read; Feeney 2017 says three (TDPS 2015); Vice and Texas Standard (Nov-Dec 2018) and Ermakova et al. 2020 bioRxiv say four; 2016 = last year of DPS sales reporting, VERIFIED: DPS email 2018-10-02 on MuckRock 'the amount of peyote sold and the total revenue ... are no longer required to be reported to the state, TAC 13.36' and 2018-10-05 'TAC 13.36 effective November 6, 2016' (https://www.muckrock.com/foi/texas-109/peyote-records-61890/); rule text read from the attached scan, Source Note 'adopted to be effective November 6, 2016, 41 TexReg 8620'; Gossamer 'Button Down': 'In 2016, for unknown reasons, the DPS stopped requiring peyote distributors to report their harvest and sales numbers' (https://gossamer.co/blogs/evergreen/button-down); CCI trade page: 'annual peyote sales data from 1986 to 2016 (when TDPS stopped collecting these data)' |
The price column is an annual average, reported sales divided by buttons sold, which is how Keeper Trout tabulates it in his 2014 compilation of the DPS reports. Where the three surviving transcriptions of the DPS tables disagree at the digit level, in 1989, 1990, 1992, 2002, 2003 and 2005, the table keeps Trout’s value and the note column records the others. Distributor counts exist only for the years a source states them: nine in 1988, four in 2003 to 2005, and three from 2006 onward. Nobody has published a count for 1989 to 2002, and the cells stay empty rather than guessed.
Why did Texas stop reporting peyote harvest data in 2016?
A DPS rule change took effect on 6 November 2016 and dropped the requirement that licensed distributors report sales and revenue, so the public series ends that year. The rule is 37 Texas Administrative Code section 13.36, adopted at 41 TexReg 8620. Distributors still hold state licences and federal DEA registration, and the state still records who is licensed, but the annual button and dollar totals that made the decline measurable are no longer collected. The 2016 row is therefore both the lowest button count in the series and the last one anyone will see unless the rule changes again. For the legal framework around the trade, and why only Texas has one, see is it legal to own peyote.
How much does wild peyote regrow after being harvested?
A single correct harvest leaves about nine plants in ten alive after two years, but the plants that survive are much smaller and, if harvested again on a two-year cycle, shrink at every cut. The Cactus Conservation Institute tagged plants in south Texas in 2008 and followed them for six years. Two years after one harvest, 90 percent of harvested plants were alive against 98 percent of controls, and their above-ground volume was still 80 percent below what it had been. Plants harvested every two years lost 44 percent of harvestable crown mass between the first and second cut and a further 32 percent between the second and third. Over the 2012 to 2014 interval, 77 percent of the repeatedly harvested plants survived, against 98 percent of controls. Regrown crowns also carry less of the alkaloid the trade values: 2.01 grams of mescaline per 100 grams of dry tissue in small regrowth crowns against 3.8 in mature unharvested ones, a 47 percent drop.
| Series | Treatment | Metric | Value | n | Years observed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| survivorship | control (unharvested) | survival rate, 2 years post first harvest | 98 percent | 50 | 2008-2010 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2011. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) I. Regrowth and survivorship two years post harvest in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 5(2): 661-675. abstract: 'the once-harvested group had a 90% survival rate and the unharvested control group had a 98% survival rate, a difference that was not statistically significant'; 50 control plants at start, 2 later excluded as hog-dug |
| survivorship | harvested-once | survival rate, 2 years post first harvest | 90 percent | 50 | 2008-2010 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2011. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) I. Regrowth and survivorship two years post harvest in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 5(2): 661-675. abstract; 50 plants harvested March 2008, 42 survivors at 2 years were split into reharvest (n=20) and no-reharvest (n=22) subgroups |
| survivorship | control (unharvested) | survival rate, 4 years (census 1 to census 3) | 94 percent | 48 | 2008-2012 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2012. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) II. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 6(2): 567-577. results: '94% [45/48] versus 73% [35/48]'; denominators are 48 per group after 2 hog-dug plants per group were excluded |
| survivorship | harvested (all plants harvested in 2008; once and every-2-years pooled) | survival rate, 4 years (census 1 to census 3) | 73 percent | 48 | 2008-2012 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2012. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) II. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 6(2): 567-577. abstract: 'survival rate was significantly greater in the unharvested control plants (94%) than in the harvested plants (73%)'; the 2012 paper pools once-harvested and multiple-harvest plants for this rate; CCI regrowth page repeats 94 / 73 at 4 years |
| survivorship | control (unharvested) | survival rate over 2012-2014 interval (years 5-6 of study) | 98 percent | 50 | 2012-2014 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. 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 (U.S.A.) population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 8(2): 541-550. abstract: 'the survival rate was significantly lower (77%) in the plants harvested every two years than in the once-harvested plants (100%) and the unharvested control plants (98%)'; n is the initial group allocation (50 control / 25 once / 25 every two years) stated in Methods |
| survivorship | harvested-once | survival rate over 2012-2014 interval (years 5-6 of study) | 100 percent | 25 | 2012-2014 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. 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 (U.S.A.) population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 8(2): 541-550. abstract; n = initial allocation of 25 once-harvested plants |
| survivorship | harvested-every-2-years | survival rate over 2012-2014 interval (years 5-6 of study) | 77 percent | 25 | 2012-2014 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. 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 (U.S.A.) population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 8(2): 541-550. abstract; n = initial allocation of 25 plants harvested 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014; CCI regrowth page summarises the same figures as 98 / 100 / 77 at 6 years; CCI harvesting-technique page: '6 years is not enough for the plants to re-generate', recommends 8 years |
| crown mass | harvested-every-2-years | change in average harvested fresh mass per plant, first harvest (2008) to second harvest (2010) | -44 percent | 20 | 2008-2010 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2012. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) II. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 6(2): 567-577. abstract: 'Average harvested mass of fresh tissue per plant decreased significantly (by 44%) between the first and second harvests'; n=20 is the subgroup reharvested in 2010 per Terry et al. 2011; CCI regrowth page repeats 44% |
| crown mass | harvested-every-2-years | change in average harvested fresh mass per plant, second harvest (2010) to third harvest (2012) | -32 percent | 2010-2012 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2012. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) II. Effects of repeated harvesting at two-year intervals in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 6(2): 567-577. abstract: 'then further decreased significantly (by 32%) between the second and third harvests'; n for the 2012 harvest not stated in the sentence read; CCI regrowth page repeats 32% | |
| crown mass | harvested-once | change in above-ground plant volume, 2 years after single harvest, relative to pre-harvest | -80 percent | 50 | 2008-2010 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. Fowler. 2011. Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae) I. Regrowth and survivorship two years post harvest in a South Texas population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 5(2): 661-675. abstract: 'The net effect of a single harvesting was a reduction of plant above-ground volume by almost 80% after two years of regrowth'; value is 'almost 80%' |
| crown mass | harvested-once vs control | difference in average crown volume per plant at year 6 | -27 percent | 25 | 2008-2014 | Terry, M., K. Trout, B. Williams, T. Herrera and N. 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 (U.S.A.) population. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 8(2): 541-550. abstract: 'The average volume of once-harvested plants was 27% lower than that of the controls, although this latter difference was not statistically significant'; results give control mean 48 cm3 vs once-harvested 35 cm3 in 2014 |
| alkaloid | mature unharvested crowns | mescaline concentration, pooled crown tissue, dry-weight basis | 3.80 g per 100 g dry tissue | 10 | Kalam, M.A., M.T. Klein, D. Hulsey, K. Trout, P. Daley and M. Terry. 2013. A preliminary report of mescaline concentrations in small regrowth crowns vs. mature crowns of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae): cultural, economic, and conservation implications. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 7(1): 435-440. results: 'Mescaline concentrations were 3.80 g/100g tissue in the Mature group and 2.01 g/100 g tissue in the Small Regrowth group, based on tissue samples >= 2 g fresh weight from 10 individuals in the Mature group and 14 individuals in the Small Regrowth group'; group values are pooled physical averages, not statistical means; sampling year not stated in the text read | |
| alkaloid | small regrowth crowns | mescaline concentration, pooled crown tissue, dry-weight basis | 2.01 g per 100 g dry tissue | 14 | Kalam, M.A., M.T. Klein, D. Hulsey, K. Trout, P. Daley and M. Terry. 2013. A preliminary report of mescaline concentrations in small regrowth crowns vs. mature crowns of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae): cultural, economic, and conservation implications. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 7(1): 435-440. same sentence as mature row; regrowth crowns were whole small crowns of 2-4 g each from the same South Texas population | |
| alkaloid | small regrowth crowns vs mature unharvested crowns | relative difference in mescaline concentration | -47 percent | 10 mature + 14 regrowth | Kalam, M.A., M.T. Klein, D. Hulsey, K. Trout, P. Daley and M. Terry. 2013. A preliminary report of mescaline concentrations in small regrowth crowns vs. mature crowns of Lophophora williamsii (Cactaceae): cultural, economic, and conservation implications. J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 7(1): 435-440. results: 'The difference between these levels amounted to a 47% reduction in mescaline concentration in the Small Regrowth group compared to the Mature group'; abstract phrases it as 'about half as much'; CCI lophophora page repeats 'about half as much' | |
| survivorship | harvested (2008 harvest group, hog deaths excluded) | non-hog mortality, 2 years post harvest | 10.40 percent | 48 | 2008-2010 | Trout, K. and B. Norton. 2011. Peyote Regrowth Following Proper Harvesting Practices. Erowid Extracts 20: 8-11. Trout and Norton 2011: 'Harvested plants showed five non-hog-related deaths (10.4%) compared to one non-hog-related death in the control group (2.1%)'; complements the 90% survival in Terry et al. 2011 |
| survivorship | control (unharvested, hog deaths excluded) | non-hog mortality, 2 years post harvest | 2.10 percent | 48 | 2008-2010 | Trout, K. and B. Norton. 2011. Peyote Regrowth Following Proper Harvesting Practices. Erowid Extracts 20: 8-11. Trout and Norton 2011, same sentence; complements the 98% survival in Terry et al. 2011 |
Read the survival chart interval by interval, not as one cumulative curve. The 2011 paper reports the first two years, the 2012 paper pools once-harvested and repeatedly harvested plants over four years, and the 2014 paper reports the 2012 to 2014 interval only, after the harvested group was split. Sample sizes are in the table. The consequence for the trade is the part that matters: smaller, weaker buttons mean more of them are consumed per ceremony, so harvest pressure feeds itself. That is the mechanism behind the falling button counts above, and it is the argument for seed grown nursery plants over wild harvest that runs through every Lophophora page on this site, including the peyote conservation research overview.
How many licensed peyote distributors remain in Texas?
Three for every year from 2006 to 2015, down from nine in 1988 and roughly twenty-seven in the mid-1970s. Reporting from 2018 to 2020 gives four, so the number moves by one as licences lapse and renew. All of them work the same few counties along the Rio Grande, Starr, Jim Hogg, Webb and Zapata, which is also where the wild range of Lophophora williamsii reaches into the United States. The coarse range map on where peyote grows in the wild shows those counties beside the Mexican states that hold the rest of the species, and the peyote field-number records list every documented wild collection in our database.
Download and cite the data
The trade series, the regrowth figures and the range and elevation bins are free to download as CSV under a CC BY 4.0 licence, and the full bundle is available as JSON. The dataset carries schema.org Dataset markup so it is discoverable in dataset search, and a versioned Zenodo record will be added once the deposit is published. If you use the figures, cite the primary sources listed at the foot of this page and this compilation. For the species themselves, the Lophophora species comparison puts all four accepted taxa side by side, and the Lophophora genus hub holds the rest of the reference material.
- Texas DPS peyote trade series 1986 to 2016 (CSV)
- CCI regrowth study figures (CSV)
- Coarse range markers and elevation bins (CSV)
- Full data bundle (JSON)
Licensed CC BY 4.0. Cite as: rarecactus.com, Lophophora Data Bundle: peyote trade, harvest impact, range and species reference. Figures are transcribed from the cited primary sources; the compilation, elevation bins and coarse range markers are ours.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many peyote buttons does Texas report selling each year?
Between roughly 0.9 and 2.3 million buttons a year across the 1986 to 2016 reporting period, with a peak of 2,317,380 in 1997 and a final reported figure of 867,674 in 2016, as reported by licensed distributors to the Texas Department of Public Safety.
Why did Texas stop publishing peyote distributor data in 2016?
A Texas DPS rule change, 37 Texas Administrative Code section 13.36, took effect on 6 November 2016 and removed the requirement that licensed distributors report sales and revenue, so 2016 is the last year with published totals.
Does peyote regrow after its crown is harvested?
Yes, if the cut is made correctly above the subterranean stem, but slowly: two years after a single harvest 90 percent of plants were alive and their above-ground volume was still 80 percent below the pre-harvest level, according to the Cactus Conservation Institute study.
How much mescaline is in a regrown peyote crown compared with an unharvested one?
About 47 percent less: 2.01 grams of mescaline per 100 grams of dry tissue in small regrowth crowns against 3.8 grams in mature unharvested crowns, which is why repeated harvest weakens the supply as well as shrinking it.
How many licensed peyote distributors are left in Texas?
Three for every year from 2006 to 2015, with reporting from 2018 to 2020 giving four, down from nine in 1988 and about twenty-seven in the mid-1970s.
Trout, K., Edwards, C. & Terry, M. (2014), Peyote crisis revisited, Trout’s Notes (DPS table 1986 to 2014) · Texas Department of Public Safety distributor totals 1986 to 2016 as republished by the Cactus Conservation Institute · 37 Texas Administrative Code section 13.36, adopted 41 TexReg 8620, effective 6 November 2016 · Terry, M., Trout, K., Williams, B., Herrera, T. & Fowler, N. (2011, 2012, 2014), Limitations to natural production of Lophophora williamsii I to III, J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas · Kalam, M.A., Klein, M.T., Hulsey, D., Trout, K., Daley, P. & Terry, M. (2013), J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 7(1): 435-440 · Trout, K. & Norton, B. (2011), Peyote regrowth following proper harvesting practices · Terry, M. & Trout, K. (2017), J. Bot. Res. Inst. Texas 11(1): 147-156 · Feeney, K. (2017), Peyote as commodity, Human Organization 76(1): 59-72 · Muneta, J.D. (2020), Peyote crisis confronting modern Indigenous peoples, American Indian Law Journal 9(1) · Texas Monthly, Button pushers (1988)
