Border Wall in the News

New Border Fences Cut Off Access To Border Monuments

2012-01-28T09:56:00.000-08:00

Fronteras
January 28, 2012
By Adrian Florido

SAN DIEGO — Before there was a fence, all that marked the border between Mexico and the United States were stone and steel monuments, 276 of them dotting the southwestern landscape. They were installed by Mexican and American surveyors starting in 1850, after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American War and the two countries agreed to define their shared border.

But as the U.S. Border Patrol has reinforced the boundary with a new fence, many of these bi-national monuments have been left entirely on the Mexican side of the barriers.

On the scenic stretch of coast where San Diego meets Tijuana, Mexico, the Border Patrol is making the border fence taller and thicker - impenetrable, it hopes, to drug smugglers and illegal crossers.

But peering through the new vertical bars and double mesh on a recent day, you could still make out a marble, pyramid-shaped monument on the other side.

It marks the precise point where Mexico and the U.S. meet, and visitors on opposite sides of the border were once able to approach the monument from both sides and talk through the fence.

But late last year, the Border Patrol moved its fence three feet to the north, fencing the monument out

This has been happening at monument sites across the Southwest. It began when border fencing started going up in the early 1990s and has continued since 2006, when Congress approved the construction of 700 miles of new fence.

In 2008, the Border Patrol signed an accord with the agency responsible for maintaining the monuments - the International Boundary and Water Commission – agreeing not to disturb the monuments during fence construction.

So, in many places along the border, like San Diego, the Border Patrol built the fence a few feet north of the actual international boundary.

“The fence itself is constructed inside the United States,” said Jerry Conlin, a Border Patrol spokesman. The agreement between the two agencies, he said: “is that any type of construction around a monument would be set back three feet.”

Sally Spener is a spokeswoman for the boundary and water commission, which reviews the Border Patrol’s plans to ensure the fence is not inadvertently built on Mexican territory. She said commission officials had been willing to work with the Border Patrol to maintain access to the monument in San Diego.

She would not say whether the agency responded, but in any case, bi-national access was eliminated.

Now San Diego activists are hoping to convince the Border Patrol to change its fence design to restore access to the monument from both sides.

“A border monument needs to be on the border, not just on one side or the other. It’s a shared marker between two nations,” said Jim Brown, a local architect and activist. “To have the fence jog around and have it be almost ownership by Mexico doesn’t make any emotional sense, it makes no physical sense, it makes no common sense.”

Brown is a member of the Friends of Friendship Park, a group of activists that takes its name after the area where loved ones used to chat through the border fence until access was blocked.

Brown said he’s come up with a relatively simple design change that would make the monument accessible from both sides again.

Conlin said the Border Patrol was willing to listen, but stressed that border security was the agency’s mandate and priority.

David Taylor, an art professor at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, has been photographing all 276 monuments since he realized the new fencing was going to make many of them inaccessible from the U.S.

He believes the monuments, once a symbol of bi-national cooperation, have become casualties of the push for greater border enforcement.

“It’s one of those very unfortunate situations where this thing that’s part of our shared heritage with Mexico isn’t easily accessible.”

On the other side, visitors have expressed their thoughts too.

An engraving on the monument warns vandals that defacing it is a crime punishable by Mexico or the United States. But someone recently used purple ink to cross out the words, United States

http://www.fronterasdesk.org/news/2012/jan/26/new-fences-block-access-us-mexico-border-monu/

Photographing the American Wall

2012-01-28T09:47:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles Times
January 28, 2012
by Liesl Bradner

An ominous barrier meanders through a remote landscape appearing to float across the desert sands, reminiscent of a stark, modern-day Great Wall of China. The structure is not filled with ancient wonder but rather conjures up the controversy and hostility associated with the Berlin Wall. This barricade is the American wall that divides the U.S.-Mexico border.

Since 2006, fine art photographer Maurice Sherif has spent sweltering days documenting the wall that hopscotches 2,000 miles from the Pacific Ocean in California to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas. His collection of 96 photos, along with essays from scholars, can be viewed in his giant two-volume book, "The American Wall" (MS Zephyr Publishing).

Sherif, who was born in France, attended the University of San Francisco. The recurring theme of silence and large spaces is evident in his work, which includes photographs of glaciers in Patagonia and architecture in Paris.
For some, Sherif's dreamy photos of the border fence are an eye-opener, illuminating a subject that was an abstract idea, a topic of political discourse. Published in December, the book was ranked by L.A.-based think tank Zócalo Public Square as among its top 10 best nonfiction of 2011.

The black-and-white minimalist photos reveal a fragmented wall in various stages, styles and materials. Eastward from San Diego, the structure snakes through a variety of landscapes, including rugged backcountry, populated towns and isolated backyards. No life forms are seen. Instead, the images show deterrents such as high-powered klieg lights, cameras, warning signs and X-shaped metal beams similar to those seen on the beaches of Normandy, France, on D-day.

Using Polaroid PN 55 film, Sheriff would venture out between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. to get more abrasive lighting that creates sharp-edged shadows.

In its fourth generation since 1969, the wall has gone through several transformations, including the addition of electric fencing, barbed wire, concrete and steel. The pictures are already obsolete, however, as a new, uniform upgrade is in the works.

A self-described social documentarian, Sherif believes the barrier is a misguided project driven by fear. "It's built like a prison," he noted.

Sherif believes that the billions spent on the wall could be put to better use. "I wanted to bring attention to people's consciousness what was going on," Sherif said of his motivation. On a visit to Albuquerque, New Mexico he was shocked to find everyone so detached to the situation.

"There's so much irony," said Sherif. "In the '80s, you have President Reagan telling Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev to 'tear down this wall'; at the same, time he's building one in his own country."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2012/01/photographing-the-american-wall.html

Military engineers dig in to support Border Patrol

2012-01-26T06:59:00.000-08:00

Nogales International
January 24, 2012
by Jonathan Clark

On Jan. 6, members of an Alaska-based Army airborne engineer brigade parachuted out of an Air Force plane at Fort Huachuca. Since then, they've been working to cut 0.7 miles of border access road through rugged terrain approximately three miles west of the Mariposa Port of Entry in Nogales.

Project organizers say the experience, from the parachute drop-in to the remote road-building and eventual departure on Feb. 27, mirrors the type of mission the 40 soldiers might conduct if they were deployed to a place like Afghanistan.

"This will prepare them for future deployments, especially in the areas of current contingency operations," said Armando Carrasco, spokesman for the Department of Defense's Joint Task Force North (JTF North), the agency that coordinated the mission.

Standing on a hilltop above the work site Friday as heavy machinery dug through a steep slope below her, mission commander Lt. Michelle Zak spoke of the difficulties of maneuvering large earth movers around the mountains, canyons and ravines of western Santa Cruz County.

"It's been challenging, but also a great opportunity for us to train," she said.This effort, along with other military road-building projects that have been conducted in the county in recent years, also provides a great opportunity for agents at the U.S. Border Patrol's Nogales Station to gain better access to some of their hardest-to-control areas.

"You've got to look at it as a win-win situation," said Agent Steven Passement, a spokesman for the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector.

"One, for the unit that's here and the units that will come, it's real-world training experience," he said. "And for us, we're getting infrastructure put in place that's going to be permanent.

"Those permanent roads, built with drainage culverts to keep them from washing out, helps agents responds faster to illegal activity in the area and provide aid more quickly to migrants in distress. What's more, Passement said, a better road surface means less wear-and-tear on Border Patrol vehicles, and therefore less expenditures on new tires, shock absorbers and struts.

Local residents and businesses are also benefiting from the arrangement. The current group of 40 engineers is staying at a local hotel and spending some of their pocket money at local establishments.

"I know a lot of the soldiers have been out on the town, and they've enjoyed the tacos that come from the trucks," Zak said.Rancher Dan Bell, who grazes cattle in the same section of Coronado National Forest lands where the road are being built, says he's seen an improvement in security in the area since the road-building began.

"Prior to these roads going in, there really wasn't any way to get to the border in a lot of these areas," Bell said. "It's allowed (Border Patrol) to actually get down to the border and patrol the actual border rather than a larger area that they'd have to hike or go into on horseback.

"The soldiers themselves are not engaged in any law enforcement activity while on the road-building projects, Carrasco said. That duty is left up to the Border Patrol.Environmental concernsSince the construction is taking place on National Forest land, the U.S. Forest Service has been included in the project planning, and an environmental monitor is on hand to make sure the project stays within the construction easement, said Maj. Chris Neels, mission planner for JTF North.

Even so, environmentalists like Jenny Neeley, conservation policy director at the Tucson-based Sky Island Alliance, say they are worried about the long-term effects of border-infrastructure projects that are conducted outside of federal environmental law. Since April 2008, the Department of Homeland Security has operated under a waiver that allows it to build border fencing and related infrastructure in the U.S. Southwest without having to adhere to more than 30 environmental regulations.

"We're extremely disappointed that none of it is subject to review under the National Environmental Policy Act because of the existing waiver along the border," Neeley said. "Those roads are being installed without any oversight whatsoever, in terms of regulatory oversight or having to follow best practices."

Neeley said she hadn't seen the particular roads being built west of Nogales, but she said there have been numerous projects carried out under the waiver that have later led to erosion and flooding. She cited an example from the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, where rainwater runoff collapsed a 40-foot stretch of new border fence in August 2010 due to faulty design.

A Department of Homeland Security-sponsored public forum in December 2010 laid out the technical details and environmental analysis that had gone into the planning of the agency's border road and fence projects in and around Nogales. Still, Greg Gephart, program manager for tactical infrastructure for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, acknowledged that the projects would be conducted under the environmental waiver."The waiver doesn't mean we're throwing out all environmental considerations," Gephart said at the time. "It's just a method that allows us to expedite the construction."

‘Good feeling'

The 40 Army engineers currently deployed to Nogales work six days a week, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Even so, due to the terrain, theirs is the first of three phases necessary to complete the 0.7 miles of roadway.

What's more, military units are scheduled to execute four additional engineering missions in the Nogales area in support of the Border Patrol during the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.

It's all organized by JTF North, based at Fort Bliss, Texas, which has been supporting federal law enforcement agencies along the Southwest border since 1989. Working as a liaison between law enforcement and all four branches of the military, JTF North has coordinated engineering missions that built and improved roads and installed border lighting, fencing and vehicle barriers in areas stretching from California to Texas.

The majority of the costs of the projects are paid for with Department of Defense counter-drug funds, JTF North says; the participating law enforcement agency covers only the cost of materials.

For example, Tucson-based Hertz Equipment Rental has been contracted to provide the heavy machinery for the current road effort, as well as training and maintenance. That's all covered by JTF North, Carrasco said.

As for the price tag for the 0.7-mile road project, Carrasco estimated $400,000 for Phases 1 and 2 and $350,000 for Phase 3 - a grand total of $1.15 million.Part of the expense includes the cost of housing the soldiers at an area hotel, which is also contracted to provide the team with a hot breakfast and dinner each day. (JTF North declined to name the hotel, citing security concerns.)"It also creates a good quality of life for them while they're deployed on this mission," he said. "Obviously they work very hard, so it's important that we also take care of them during their down time."

As for the military engineers, they say they are greatly appreciative of the good meals and soft beds - as well as the warm, sunny weather of Southern Arizona. After all, they left their home base in the middle of the frigid, snowy and daylight-deprived Alaska winter.

Specialist Nickalous Herd, a native of Atlanta, praised the "wonderful weather, wonderful people and wonderful state" as he stood at the worksite Friday under clear blue skies and 70-degree temperatures. And while the local terrain has been a challenge to work with, Herd said, he has also enjoyed its rugged beauty.

"It is beautiful, it is extremely beautiful here," he said.Sgt. Everell Gustave, a native of the Boston area, said the experience of coming to a new area and working under new conditions with new equipment has been an important skill-builder for his team, which, if deployed to Afghanistan, might parachute into a remote area to rebuild roads, supply routes and airstrips.

"It is definitely a good feeling for our guys. We are getting the training that we need to be successful anywhere around the world," Gustave said. "Helping out the Border Patrol is just a plus."

http://www.nogalesinternational.com/news/military-engineers-dig-in-to-support-border-patrol/article_9661a732-46a0-11e1-88a9-001871e3ce6c.html

Migrant deaths in Arizona fell in 2011

2012-01-08T11:28:00.000-08:00

The Arizona Republic
December 29, 2011
by Daniel Gonzalez

The Border Patrol says the remains of 192 illegal immigrants who died crossing the border were found in Arizona last year.

That is 23 percent fewer than the year before, a record year, when the remains of 250 migrants were found in Arizona by the Border Patrol.

Still, Arizona remains the deadliest state for illegal border crossings. Fifty-four percent of the 353 migrant deaths recorded along the entire Southwest border last year occurred in Arizona, down from 67 percent of the 373 total migrant deaths the year before, according to Border Patrol.

Of the 192 migrant deaths recorded in Arizona, 191 occurred in the Tucson Sector, which covers most of the state's border with Mexico.When it comes to illegal border crossings, the Tucson Sector is the busiest of the nine Border Patrol sectors that stretch from California to Texas.

Steven Passement, a supervisory Border Patrol agent, said migrant deaths fell last year because fewer people were crossing the border illegally. Border Patrol apprehensions, a measure of illegal-immigrant traffic, fell 41 percent in the Tucson Sector compared with the year before.The Tucson Sector also has more agents who are able to reach remote areas to rescue migrants in distress, he said.

He said the ability to reach remote areas may have been a factor in the spike in migrant deaths in 2010 since agents often find skeletal remains of migrants who died years earlier.

Juanita Molina, executive director of Humane Borders, a humanitarian group based in Tucson, said migrant deaths remain a major concern despite the decrease last year.

She said migrant deaths have not fallen at the same rate as the drop in illegal-immigrant traffic. Tighter border security has closed the corridors illegal immigrants used in the past. As a result, they are crossing through ever more remote and dangerous areas, she said."They are still dying at the same rate, and people are dying in more remote areas," she said.

In the Yuma Sector, deaths have dropped sharply from the record 40 deaths recorded in 2005. Last year, only one migrant was found dead.

Romney would veto potential Dream Act

2012-01-01T16:43:00.000-08:00

The Boston Globe
January 1, 2012
by Matt Viser

LE MARS, Iowa – Mitt Romney, coming to a family diner in this self-proclaimed “Ice Cream Capital of the World,” said this afternoon that if he were elected president he would veto legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship for certain illegal residents.

“The answer is yes,” Romney said to a voter who asked whether he would veto the Dream Act if it gets passed by Congress under his watch.

Although the former Massachusetts governor has been critical of the proposed legislation in the past, he hadn’t said so explicitly that he would veto it. The issue is likely to be a theme of the general election, particularly in states with high Hispanic populations such as Nevada, Colorado, and Florida.

The Dream Act, which some Democrats have pushed unsuccessfully in Congress, would create a path to legal residency for youths who arrived before they turned 16; have lived in the United States for five consecutive years; and have no criminal record. In order to become citizens, they would have to graduate from high school or obtain a GED, complete two years in college or the military, and be under 35 years old.

Romney today distinguished between components of the proposal, however, saying that he supports allowing immigrants who serve in the military to become permanent residents.

“I’m delighted with the idea that people who come to this country and wish to serve in the military can be given a path to become permanent residents of this country,” he said. “Those who serve in our military and fulfill those requirements, I respect and acknowledge that path.”

An aide said Romney opposes other portions of the Dream Act that provide a pathway to residency through education.

He also opposes granting in-state tuition, or other benefits, to illegal immigrants.

“If I’m the president of the United States, I want to end illegal immigration so that we can protect legal immigration,” Romney said. “I like legal immigration. And so I will secure the border with a fence, make sure we have enough border patrol agents to secure that fence, and I will also crack on employers that hire people who are here illegally.”

Romney flew back to Iowa today after a brief trip to New Hampshire, preparing for the final sprint before Tuesday’s caucus vote in Iowa. He was joined by his youngest son, Craig, who introduced his father by telling a story of how competitive Romney is in the family’s annual tradition of holding a triathlon.

“My wife had just had a baby,” Craig Romney said. “She just had her second child about a month or two previously and she decided to go for it and compete in the race. All the boys had finished at that point and it was down to my wife and my dad over here.”

“I tripped her, I tripped her,” Mitt Romney joked from the side.

“He gave it a good kick and he beat her in the end,” his son added. “And he did almost die trying, by the way, he passed out in the lawn chair and we didn’t see him the rest of the day.”

Craig Romney sought to make a connection between the dedication of completing the triathlon and the work he would do in the White House.

“I changed the nature of the triathlon after that,” Mitt Romney said. “I didn’t like this idea that these were only swimming, biking and running. We had to add some sports. So now we have log sawing, nail hammering. We added some things I excel at so I don’t come in last every year.”

On the way to the event, Romney said, they pulled the bus over so he could get rocky road ice cream at Blue Bunny ice cream.

When asked what he would be doing for New Year’s Eve, he said he would be spending it with his wife, Ann.

“I looked at the website to see what’s going on in Des Moines over New Year’s Eve and there’s a celebration of the music of the Doors at a place called the, is it the Brickyard?” Romney said. “So we’ll see if we go there or just hang out in the lobby of the hotel. Not sure yet.”

When asked if he was a fan of the Doors, he said, “I enjoy their music.”

As for his New Year’s resolution? “To be more thankful and appreciative of people who I owe appreciation to,” Romney said.

http://articles.boston.com/2012-01-01/politics/30575923_1_mitt-romney-craig-romney-romney-today

Wildlife: Border fences more effective against wildlife than illegal immigrants

2012-01-01T10:37:00.000-08:00

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
January 1, 2012
by Scott Shalaway

For better or worse, wildlife populations pay no attention to human political borders. State lines certainly make no difference to coyotes or white-tailed deer crossing back and forth between Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Along the U.S.-Mexico border, it's a different story.

Walls and fences that stretch intermittently along the nearly 2,000-mile international border are intended to keep illegal immigrants out of the United States. Based on news reports, they are not terribly effective. Long, sophisticated tunnels seem easy to build. And a 2009 government report revealed that there had been 3,363 breaches of the fence January through May of that year.

But under the heading of "unintended consequences," border fences are proving to be very effective at disrupting the movements of wildlife. The current issue of The Wildlife Professional, a publication of The Wildlife Society, reports that endangered species such as jaguars, ocelots, Sonoran pronghorn and many smaller, less glamorous species are being disturbed.

In the name of homeland security, we seem to be doing our best to destroy border wildlife populations. In 1996, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act required portions of the fence to be cleared of all vegetation within 50 feet of either side of the fence. So even if animals try to find a way through the fence, they must do so without any cover.

In 2005, the Real ID Act authorized the waiver of any laws that might delay construction of barriers along the California border.

Consequently, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act have all been ignored in the name of national security.

And since passage of the Secure Fence Act in 2006, more than 30 federal laws, including the Clean Water Act and the Wilderness Act, have been waived.

The impact of waivers of environmental laws is still being studied, but it is clear that border wildlife populations are suffering. In one study using cameras and radio collars, bobcats influenced by fences moved their territories and experienced more collisions with highway traffic.

Fences restrict movement and gene flow and induce stress. Biologists fear that species with dwindling U.S. populations will suffer as access to Mexican populations disappears. Long-term survival of U.S. populations of larger species such as jaguars and ocelots is in doubt.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12001/1200330-140.stm

New fencing doesn’t stop illegal crossings

2011-12-30T20:36:00.000-08:00

Washington Post
December 30, 2011
by Nick Miroff

CALEXICO, Calif. — A decade ago, when illegal immigration from Mexico was at an all-time high, this stretch of border was as good a place as any to sneak into the United States.

Migrants and smugglers could slip through the alfalfa fields outside town or plow their pickup trucks through the desert, where the biggest worries were stuck tires and getting safely across the irrigation canals.

But in the past five years, the international border here has become a harder, tougher, taller barrier — an American Great Wall. Miles of steel fencing now ride the desolate sand dunes west of Calexico, and to the east, giant jack-shaped “Normandy” barriers block off old smuggling routes, named for their resemblance to the defenses that once lined the beaches of northern France in World War II.

Overall, the United States has added 413 miles of new fencing to its southern boundary since 2006, raising to 649 miles the total length of border that has some form of man-made barrier to people or vehicles. The Rio Grande creates a natural partition along another 1,252 miles, and the government has been putting new fencing there, too.

Now the question is: How much more should be built?

Border Patrol officials say their current plans are to construct just one more mile of fence, in Texas. But as illegal immigration takes an increasingly central role in Republican campaign debates, several GOP candidates have renewed calls to fence the entire 1,969-mile boundary.

President Obama has made light of such proposals, saying fence advocates won’t be satisfied until the U.S. builds “a moat” stocked with “alligators.” But leading Republican candidates Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have vowed to barricade the entire U.S.-Mexico divide, with Gingrich signing a pledge to install a “double fence” while campaigning in Iowa earlier this month.

With such an endeavor projected to cost tens of billions of dollars, this stretch of California desert might be as good a place as any to assess how the existing border fence actually works.

The new barriers have been particularly effective at stopping vehicles from coming across, Border Patrol agents say. Along one stretch of desert here, the number of drive-through incursions plunged from 350 in 2007 to four so far this year.

But agents also say it is not the case that smugglers and illegal migrants on foot simply go to the place in the desert where the fence ends, and walk around it.

“Anywhere is a good place to sneak across if we’re not watching,” said Special Agent Jonathan Creiglow, a Border Patrol officer assigned to the agency’s El Centro sector here.

But there are also sections of 18-foot fencing right in the middle of downtown Calexico, opposite its sprawling sister city of Mexicali, where border jumpers can be up and over the wall in a matter of seconds, melting into shops and residential streets once they land on the other side.

At night, smugglers toss Hail Marys of pot-stuffed footballs and fling golf-ball-sized heroin nuggets over to waiting receivers. Stealthy ultra-light aircraft bomb the lettuce fields outside town with bundles of dope, then swoop back into Mexico, well below radar but high above the fence.

Then there are rugged sections in the desert where fencing is porous or nonexistent, but crossings rare. And those who do try to slip through are tracked by the Border Patrol’s growing array of sensors, high-powered night-vision cameras and surveillance drones.

In short, agents say, fencing is a tool and a first line of defense, but it does not bestow border security by its mere existence. “Without the fencing we wouldn’t have as much time, but nothing is going to stop them from going over or cutting through it,” explained Creiglow, who, at 26, is one of the many recent hires at the Border Patrol, which has doubled in size since 2002, with 18,500 of its 21,500 agents now deployed along the U.S.-Mexico frontier.

A costly barrier

Most of the barrier does not sit on the actual international boundary, but slightly north of it, allowing maintenance workers to access both sides without technically crossing into Mexico. Upkeep for the existing 649 miles of fencing is projected to cost $6.5 billion over the next 20 years, according to a 2009 report by the Government Accounting Office, and U.S. Homeland Security officials say the fence was breached 4,037 times in the government’s 2010 fiscal year, at an average cost of $1,800 per repair.

With most of the remaining unfenced stretch of border in Texas, the debate has shifted to the question of walling off the Rio Grande. Even in areas where the river can be shallow enough to wade across, putting a fence along the river’s sinuous levees is both costly and unpopular with local ranchers who want to preserve riparian access for thirsty cattle.

In Arizona, where Border Patrol agents catch more illegal migrants than anywhere else, lawmakers are soliciting public donations to put barriers along the remaining unfenced 82 miles of the state’s 370-mile boundary with Mexico. Such a structure would need to climb up and over steep mountain areas where construction costs are exorbitant and the deterrent value is questionable, enforcement experts say.

“I think the question is: What are you trying to achieve? Just to be able to say that you built a fence on top of a mountain?” said Thad Bingle, who was the Border Patrol’s chief of staff from 2007 to 2009. “If someone climbs 10,000 feet to the top of a mountain they aren’t going to be deterred by a 10-foot fence.”

Construction in rugged areas is made even more pricey because every stretch of new fence needs an accompanying road for maintenance and patrols, he added.

Fewer arrests

While the agency tallies the number of migrants it catches, it does not plot the locations of those apprehensions. But after hitting an all-time high of 1.6 million apprehensions in the government’s 2000 fiscal year, the number of arrests dropped to 327,577 in the 2011 period which ended Sept. 30, the lowest level since 1972.

Migration experts attribute the decline primarily to the weak U.S. job market — especially the lack of construction jobs — as well as growing fears of kidnapping gangs in northern Mexico. At the same time, average family sizes have fallen dramatically in Mexico, employment opportunities have improved, and the United States is letting more Mexicans in through the front door.

Mexican workers received 516,000 temporary work visas in 2010, “the highest number since the Bracero Program of the late 1950s,” said Douglas Massey, an expert on Mexican migration at Princeton University.

Tougher enforcement on the U.S. side has also been a factor, driving up the costs of getting across as well as the difficultly. But migrant smugglers on the Mexico side say the fence is hardly their biggest concern.

“There’s too much surveillance now,” said Luis, a husky guide-for-hire known as a pollero, standing in the Niños Heroes park in downtown Mexicali, where recent deportees and would-be border crossers gather. “The Migra [Border Patrol] has cameras everywhere,” he said.

Luis wouldn’t give his last name, but he said for $500 smugglers will get customers over the fence by creating elaborate diversions for the Border Patrol and deploying teams of helpers with roll-up ladders and ropes, even forming cheerleader-style human pyramids Better yet, Luis said, for $3,000 a guide will take you over the fence and through the desert at night, and $6,000 buys a legitimate U.S. visa rented from a look-alike with legal status.

“There’s always a way in,” he said with a wily grin.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/new-fencing-doesnt-stop-illegal-crossings/2011/11/28/gIQAbLdBQP_story.html

The Texans who live on the ‘Mexican side’ of the border fence: ‘Technically, we’re in the United States’

2011-12-27T20:13:00.000-08:00

Yahoo News
December 21, 2011
by Liz Goodwin

BROWNSVILLE, Texas—Pamela Taylor's living room has a Santa-hat-wearing stuffed dog atop a red doily on her coffee table, poinsettias near the couch, and, in the center of the room, an angel-topped Christmas tree with a few wrapped presents underneath.

Outside, the Christmas spirit is less visible, amid repeated warnings to KEEP OUT—though a "Merry Christmas!" sign hangs next to a warning to would-be trespassers that they're being filmed by a surveillance system. Written outside the front gate is the message: "Don't even think about parking here."

This will be Taylor's fourth Christmas living on what some Texans call the "Mexican side" of the U.S. border fence. Although she lives in Texas, her home is south of the 18-feet steel-and-concrete border wall erected by the American government. Taylor, who is 84, can see it from her front porch.

The wall was built to satisfy a law, passed in 2006 and 2008, that authorized 700 miles of fence on the southern border, 315 miles of it in Texas. President Bush said the fence would make the border safer and was "an important step toward immigration reform." Many of the 2012 Republican presidential candidates, with the exception of Texas Gov. Rick Perry, say they want to build a fence that spans the entire U.S. border. The Brownsville area shows just how complicated that project would be.

Because of a decades-old treaty with Mexico prohibiting building in the Rio Grande floodplain, the government built its border fence more than a mile north of the snaky river, trapping tens of thousands of acres of Texas--land in Cameron and Hidalgo counties--on the wrong side of the fence. The border wall is also riddled with miles-long gaps, seemingly placed at random. The U.S. Border Patrol says that illegal crossers are pushed to these gaps, where they are more easily apprehended.

Some Texans, like Taylor, live completely on the other side of the $6.2 million-a-mile wall. Others had their property split in half by the fence, after the government seized portions of their land. At least 200 people in Cameron County had some of their land seized for the fence.

'It's really done nothing for us'

Ten years ago, Taylor found a stranger sitting in her living room. "He had used my bathroom, he had shaved and cleaned himself off and he was watching the border patrol go by, sitting in that rocking chair," she said in an interview with Yahoo News. A few years later, she found 40 kilos of marijuana hidden in her bougainvilleas.

Taylor says she had to work hard to get her citizenship when she married an American soldier and moved to Texas from England after World War II. She doesn't think illegal immigrants should get a chance to become citizens. "If anything comes really easy, it's not appreciated," she said.

But the government's solution to the problem strikes her as ridiculous. "It's really done nothing for us because they're still coming across," Taylor says. Earlier this year, teenage illegal immigrants pounded on her front door in the middle of the night. She called the Border Patrol, which arrested them and a group of Hondurans they were trafficking, according to Taylor. She keeps a gun and a taser in her house, just in case.

'This is our property'

A few miles east of Taylor's house, Tim Loop's green two-story home, where he lives with his wife and two daughters, is also stuck behind the border wall. He agrees that the fence is not solving anything. Driving in his truck along the fence this week, he pointed out several places where scuffmarks suggested that people had recently climbed over. On one part of the fence not too far from his house, a torn shirt hung from the top of a pole.

Loop worries that the government will close the gaps in the fence. A complete wall wouldn't let him get to his house from the road, which is on the "American" side. The road also provides access to his farm, which grows sugar cane, grapefruit, corn, and other crops, for his eight employees.

Earlier this year, Homeland Security told landowners that it planned to close the gaps with 15-feet-wide gates that would have keypads on them. Each landowner would get a personal code to open the gate, and the government would be in charge of who else might be allowed to use each code.

"This is our property behind here," Loop said in an interview with Yahoo News. "We don't want somebody else to be the boss of our gate."

Taylor worries about a proposed highway whose path would require the government to move the fence closer to her house. "We will be more shut in than ever before," she said.

'We're in the United States'

Bob Lucio, the owner of a 165-acre golf course that lies entirely on the "Mexican" side of the fence, says the thought of Homeland Security using a secured gate to close the one entrance to the course keeps him up at night.

"If that happens, I don't think we can survive," he told Yahoo News during an interview in his office.

Lucio worked with Homeland Security to beautify the fence. Near the course, the wall is several feet shorter than elsewhere and is painted green. The wall is so subtle that some putters, many of them "winter Texans" from Canada and the Midwest, don't realize they're on the south side of the border wall, he says. A gate would change that.

"Technically, we're in the United States," Lucio said. But during a drug-cartel gun battle in June just across the Mexican border from his property, several Border Patrol agents lined up on the north side of the fence and didn't venture beyond it, he said. It gave him the impression that the Border Patrol was securing the fence line in times of trouble, instead of the actual border.

"The whole situation left me kind of numb," he said. "It's kind of like, 'You're on your own, buddy.'"

Rosalinda Huey, a spokeswoman for the Customs and Border Patrol, declined to comment on that episode but said agents patrol both sides of the fence.

'I couldn't sell my house now'

The landowners on the other side of the fence in Brownsville know their property isn't as valuable as it once was. "Would you want to buy a house behind the border wall?" Loop asked dryly.

The government didn't offer to buy the land it walled off from the rest of Texas, or to compensate people for the subsequent devaluation. It offered only to pay for the strips of land that were seized for the fence's path.

Eloisa Tamez, a nursing professor at the University of Texas at Brownsville and an outspoken opponent of the fence, refused to sell the government a quarter of an acre of her three-acre plot. She was initially offered $100 for the patch of land, which was used for the fence that now bisects her property.

Tamez's family has lived on her land since the 1700s. The family traditionally held an Easter party near the river, which is now on the other side of the wall. The only way Tamez can access the other part of her land is through a gap 1,200 feet away, which she can reach only by trespassing on her neighbors' land.

The government's offer eventually went up to $13,000, but she still didn't accept. She refused to sign the papers and is locked in a court battle with the government over the quarter acre it took from her.

"I couldn't sell my house now," she says.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/texas-americans-live-wrong-side-border-fence-christmas-183312787.html

Border fence becomes art medium

2011-12-27T20:10:00.000-08:00

Yuma Sun
December 26, 2011
by Cesar Neyoy

SAN LUIS RIO COLORADO, Son. — A group of Mexican artists have made a statement about border issues and world affairs in a series of mural they recently painted on the south side of the fence between this city and San Luis, Ariz.

And while the murals might serve to make the fence more attractive visually, they don't necessary portray it in the best light.

“The murals have different themes,” said Mauricio Villa, one of the Baja California artists who took part in the project. “The border fence is like a lost space. We wanted to portray a little of the sad aspect of the division that the fence signifies.”

The fence, he added, “reflects the lack of a fair immigration policy that divides family and has caused deaths.”

Villa and other members of the arts group named Arte Publico (Public Art) came to San Luis Rio Colorado on Dec. 10 to paint the murals on a 100-yard stretch of the fence on the city's east side.

Using aerosol cans, they created the murals on the original fence erected by the U.S. government in the early 1990s. In recent years, additional layers of fencing have been put up as part of efforts to further seal off the border at San Luis against smugglers or illegal immigrants.

Villa said the San Luis Rio Colorado officials were supportive of the group's plans to paint the mural.

“In places like Mexicali, (painting murals in public places) is considered visual contamination,” he said.

“We do it only for the satisfaction. We don't earn anything from it. All we do is promote awareness of this form of expression.”

The murals are located in the area of 26th Street, which runs perpendicular to the fence.

http://www.yumasun.com/news/fence-75501-murals-san.html

Border fence blocks access to important historical site

2011-12-21T21:15:00.000-08:00

San Diego City Beat
December 21, 2011
by Kinsee Morlan

Before fences marked the U.S.-Mexico border, a series of small obelisks dotted the landscape and identified the line separating the two countries. Fifty-two monuments were erected between 1849 and 1857, and then, due to population growth in the border region and questions about where the international border actually was, more than 200 more monuments were built from 1891 to 1894, bringing the total to 258.

One of the original 52 monuments, Border Monument 258, still stands inside Border Field State Park, just a few hundred feet from the Pacific Ocean. It was the first monument built after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American War and set the international boundary. Historian Charles W. Hughes is among those who believe that two time capsules are buried under Monument 258—one placed in 1840 when the temporary monument went up and one possibly placed in 1851 when the permanent structure was built.

Made of a block of polished marble, Monument 258 was a hotspot for tourists on their way to or back from Tijuana. Some visitors would even chip off a piece of the marble and take it with them as a souvenir.

“If you came to San Diego between the 1850s up into the early 1900s, it was one of the places to go,” said Hughes, who published an article on the history of the monument in Journal of San Diego History in 2007 and considers it to be one of the oldest and most important historical sites in San Diego. “It was like going out to Cabrillo National Monument.”

Hughes said the U.S. military used Border Field State Park as a training ground and tested drones, or unmanned aircraft, just before World War II, which dramatically decreased visitations to the park. Since then, the park has remained largely underused, except by people separated by immigration status who continue to use the park as a way to meet up with family members and friends on the other side of the border. In 1971, First Lady Pat Nixon dedicated the land surrounding Monument 258 as Friendship Park, a symbol of the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico and recognizing the binational use of the land.

Last week on CityBeat’s Canvassed blog, we reported that a replacement fence had gone up at Border Field State Park, completely blocking access to Border Monument 258 from the U.S. side by three feet. The new fence, which was sited by the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), replaces the original border fence, which had bisected Monument 258, allowing access from both sides of the border.

Even in 2008, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) erected a double fence at Friendship Park, activists with Friends of Friendship Park made sure access to the monument was maintained, even if limited by a gateway that was locked outside of set hours. Members of Friends of Friendship Park said they were shocked and disappointed when they saw the new location of the fence last week.

“Those in the U.S. have a right to access the monument without having to get in their car, cross the border and drive to Las Playas,” said Nathan Trotter of Friends of Friendship Park. “I think it’s a crime for the IBWC or Border Patrol to deprive us of an object of such historical interest.”

Bruce Coons, executive director of Save Our Heritage Organisation, agreed. “First of all, it’s American territory, and it belongs to us,” Coons said. “It’s really asinine to put the monument on the other side of the fence.”

IBWC spokesperson Sally Spener said the commission has yet to receive any complaints about the location of the replacement fence, but if it does, she said IBWC might be willing to relocate the fence.

“In regards to Monument 258, we are certainly willing to work with the community if they have specific concerns because of the unique nature and the unique role that Monument 258 has played in border history,” she said.

Coons and Trotter said they weren’t aware the fence was going to be relocated until construction began last week, so they’ve just begun lodging complaints with IBWC and elected officials.

“No notifications went out, so nobody in the community knew about this,” Trotter said. “So, I guess it’s good to hear [IBWC] might be willing to negotiate with us in moving the fence and allowing access to the monument again.”

James Brown, an architect and Friends of Friendship Park volunteer, said that IBWC isn’t allowed to build anything within three feet of the monument. He said even with that requirement, there’s a design solution.

“I wish I would have known earlier about the decision to relocate the fence,” Brown said. “The solution is simple—they just need to put the posts three feet away, and they can surround the monument with all the mesh they want.”

http://www.sdcitybeat.com/sandiego/article-9964-border-fence-blocks-access-to-important-historical-site.html

Border Fence Blocks Bears in Migration, Study Finds

2011-12-21T21:11:00.000-08:00

New York Times
December 21, 2011
by Marc Lacey

GILA BEND, Ariz. — The much-ballyhooed border fence has not just made it more difficult for illegal immigrants to slip across from Mexico into the United States. It has also become an obstacle, researchers say, for migrating bears.

A study published in this month’s edition of Biological Conservation warns that the black bear population just north of the border in Arizona may be threatened by the increasingly impermeable barriers at the border. Also fragmenting the bear habitat are the growing urban sprawl in southern Arizona and the expanding highway systems that slice through rugged terrain, the study found.

Researchers used hair snags — pieces of barbed wire set up near bait to catch genetic samples of foraging bears — to track various bear populations in Arizona. They found significant genetic disparities between black bears in the east-central part of the state and the subpopulation just north of the border. The border bears, the study said, were more closely related to bears found in northern Mexico.

The population density of the border bears was substantially lower than the bears living farther north, which had a wider habitat that was less vulnerable to development, the study found. The border is a unique region, from a biological point of view, researchers say, with many North American species reaching the southern limit of their distribution there and many South American species extending not much farther north.

“We want people to be cognizant of the impact of human activities and how they are impacting wildlife populations,” said Dr. Jon P. Beckmann, a bear researcher with the New York-based Wildlife Conservation Society and co-author of the bear study.

The authors, who include Todd C. Atwood and Julie K. Young of the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Wildlife Research Center, intend to share their findings with the Department of Homeland Security and other state and federal agencies along the border. Dr. Beckmann said that the paper could be used to help generate innovative solutions that take bears and other large carnivores into consideration when border security was discussed.

As for the efficacy of border fencing in stymieing illegal immigrants, an issue that has come up in the Republican presidential primary contest, Mr. Beckmann said, “We’re not weighing into that debate.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/science/earth/border-fence-affecting-black-bears-too-study-says.html

US-Mexico immigration: Even oceans have borders

2011-12-17T05:30:00.000-08:00

BBC
December 16, 2011
By Valeria Perasso

The US government is erecting a fence in the ocean to divide California from Tijuana, Mexico. Immigration and environmental activists say it is a costly, dangerous endeavour that will do little to keep out unauthorised migrants.

On a sunny strip of beach south of San Diego, California, the US government is literally battling the tide of illegal immigration.

Border authorities are building a fence extending 300ft (91m) into the surf, in an effort to prevent would-be migrants from walking over the frontier from Mexico's Tijuana Beach to Imperial Beach, California, during low tide.

The US government's latest King Canute-like effort will make an existing fence longer, higher, tougher to scale and, officials say, more resilient to the tide.
'Operational need'

Border officials note that during November officers caught several undocumented migrants swimming in the Pacific Ocean or landing ashore in small fishing boats.

"There is a clear operational need for this development," says Michael Hance, field operation supervisor with the border patrol in the San Diego sector.

"The southern side of the border is densely populated and in the past many people found an easy way into the US through these beaches. We need physical infrastructure as well as border agents in the area."

But critics say the $4.3m (£2.79m) extension is unnecessary, noting that heavy surveillance near San Diego has driven most of the migrant flow eastward into the Arizona desert. And environmental activists fear the heavy metal barrier sunk into the ocean will harm marine life.

Meeting place

That physical infrastructure has interrupted the sandy landscape of the Tijuana and San Diego beaches since the early 1990s, when the first fence was built to run 22km inland from the Pacific shore.

On the beach, the fence is made of iron bars sunk into the sand, and further inland, the bars are replaced by graffiti-marred corrugated iron sheets, bent and torn by the marine wind.

The sections extending into the surf remain under construction, and today a visitor sees a pier constructed to allow heavy kit to pound support piles into the sand.

On the southern side of the wall, the Playa de Tijuana teems on weekends with families from the poor neighbourhoods along the border.

The beach is also a meeting place for friends and loved ones on either side of the border. Here, people chat and hug through the fence.

The latest $4.3m renovation, just under way, will extend the fence further into the ocean and increase its height to about 18ft (5.4m) from about 13ft, allowing it to protrude above the surface no matter the tide.

The steel poles holding up the wall will be treated with an anti-corrosion coating. The poles will also be given a slick coating to make them harder to climb.

The wall is scheduled to be completed in March and is expected to last 30 years.
'Symbolic move'

For all the expense and effort the government is throwing into fencing off the ocean, statistics show arrests in the area are already at an all-time low.

Border patrol agents detained 68,000 undocumented immigrants in 2010 in the San Diego sector, down from 630,000 in 1986, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency statistics.

Local immigration activists put the decline down to a steady increase in manned patrols and surveillance over the last six years.

"We don't understand why they are spending so much money here: it is just a symbolic move to say that they are actually doing something to prevent undocumented immigration," says Pedro Rios of the San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium.

"The new surf fence is being built in what is probably the area where the rate of border crossings has gone down most dramatically."
Wildlife affected

Furthermore, environmental organisations say the metal barrier in the water is an invasion of the ocean that will most certainly take its toll on the local fauna.

"The wall could block the circulation of species, especially surface marine species," says Matt Clark, spokesman for Defenders of Wildlife.

Dan Millis, borderlands team coordinator at the Sierra Club, says sections of the wall erected in the Arizona desert have had "a major effect on the migration patterns of desert species".

Architect Teddy Cruz of the University of California at San Diego predicts the fence will increase sedimentation and flooding in the Tijuana estuary.

"There are natural canyons in the region that cross the border without following political conventions," Mr Cruz says. "The effect will be worse for those http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifthat live in settlements on the Mexican side of the border, the waste from these settlements flows towards the estuary blocking water circulation."

The Border Patrol argues the surf fence's environmental impact will be minimal.

"Our experts have done environmental assessments and they did not find any evidence that the habitat will be damaged," says Mr Hance.

"We do what we have to do. And this project, both in terms of design and investment, is appropriate for the safety requirements in the San Diego area."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16164451

Survey again finds El Paso has lowest big-city crime rate

2011-12-11T07:52:00.000-08:00

El Paso Times
December 9, 2011
by Kayley Kappes

Surprising few in El Paso, the Sun City had the lowest crime rate ranking of cities with populations greater than 500,000 people for the second consecutive year, according to CQ Press.

The publishing company, which released the rankings Thursday in its annual City Crime Rankings reference book, used six categories -- murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft -- to calculate the crime rate rankings of cities and metropolitan areas.

Data used in the rankings are based on 2010 crime statistics reported to the FBI.

In 2010, El Paso had only five homicides.

El Paso has ranked among the top three cities with populations larger than 500,000 with the lowest crime rates every year since 1997, according to the El Paso Police Department.

Local officials said they had expected the distinction.

"I'm very pleased, and I'm not at all surprised," Mayor John Cook said. "We were pretty sure we had a good opportunity to be number one again because those statistics were for 2010. That was the year we only had five murders."

Detective Mike Baranyay, a Police Department spokesman, said police officials had expected to earn the lowest crime rate ranking for consecutive years because crime rates were lower in 2010 than in 2009, another year El Paso earned the lowest crime rate ranking of similar-size cities by CQ Press.

"Honestly we expect to remain there," Baranyay said.

The distinction will help the city market itself to attract new businesses and shows consistency in having low crime levels from year to year, Cook said.
It also shows that El Paso is a safe place in contrast to its border sister city, Juárez, Cook said.

Since 2008, Juárez has been engulfed in a drug cartel war in which more than 9,000 people have been killed.

A statement on the company's website acknowledged that some law enforcement officials nationwide view the rankings as controversial.

A representative of CQ Press could not be reached Thursday.

"The FBI, police and many criminologists caution against rankings according to crime rates," the statement said. "They correctly point out that crime levels are affected by many different factors. É Accordingly, crime rankings often are deemed simplistic or incomplete. However, this criticism is largely based on the fact that there are reasons for the differences in crime rates, not that the rates are incompatible."

Annual rankings allow for comparisons among states and cities and enable leaders to track their local crime trends from year to year, according to CQ Press.

El Paso police officials have previously said it's hard to pinpoint why violent crimes have remained low in the city.

Baranyay attributed El Paso's low crime rates to the department's community policing approach, which it adopted in the early 1990s.

"Nationwide, and probably worldwide, El Paso is assumed to be dangerous because we border Juárez," Baranyay said. "The reality is crime is low here in El Paso. We think it sheds a positive light on the work of residents and local government, which team with state and federal agencies on a daily basis to fight crime."

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_19503066

Questions emerge as donations to build a border fence trickle

2011-12-08T10:39:00.000-08:00

ABC 15
December 8, 2011
by Joe Ducey

There has been a lot of talk about building a border fence and some of it is coming from political candidates vying for your support.

Congresswoman Michele Bachman said, “I will build a double-walled fence.”

Former candidate Herman Cain said he would build an electrified fence, although later he claimed he was only joking.

Arizona Senator Steve Smith (R-Maricopa), is serious when he says he plans to raise enough money from private citizens to build a border fence.

“We will have a real fence,” Smith insists.

Senator Smith sponsored the bill to raise enough money from private sources to build a border fence.

So far Smith has raised roughly $273,000 in about six months from over 4000 donors.

Smith says most donations come in modest amounts, but some are as much as $2500.

The website, buildaborderfence.com, not only allows visitors to donate money with the click of a keystroke but also provides information about border security issues.

The ABC15 Investigators asked Senator Smith about where the money came from to build the website to raise money for a fence, but Smith said he had no idea how the website was built or who paid for it.

The website has lots of information, but does not provide any details about where the fence would be built or how.

Senator Smith admits there is no firm plan, yet, on where or how the fence will be built.

When we pressed for details he said, “I’d rather not say until it happens.”

Smith rejects any suggestions from his critics that the money being raised will never be enough to build a fence.

“Every penny will be put toward a fence,” Smith said.

He is passionate about the need for better border security and this project.

“I like this to Extreme Makeover: Border Security edition,” Smith said.

The young senator says he’s determined to get materials donated and he believes prisoners can be used as workers.

What will the fence look like?

“Whatever we get donated, well frankly, that's what we've got to use…that’s it,” Smith said.

He says he has some verbal agreements and commitments from people but when we pressed him for details, Smith is tight-lipped.

Smith told ABC15, “Right now we’re taking people at their word.”

The senator from Maricopa says he is comfortable with that for now even though he does not have any signed agreements or firm commitments, yet.

“We’d rather it just go up and then talk specifics,” Smith explained. “My intent is to get a border fence built one way or another. It’s that simple.”

But some might argue building a fence along the border is never simple.

Del Caudle is a safety engineer who helped build a border fence three years ago.

He told ABC15 it was anything but simple and there were major obstacles at every turn.

Caudle, a retired firefighter who lives in Casa Grande, worked with the Army Corps of Engineers when they embarked on a Department of Homeland Security project to put up a vehicle barrier fence along the border on tribal territory.

Caudle spent three months working to put in about 15 miles of fence on property owned by the Tohono O’odham Nation.

Caudle said, “We had problems with animals, we had problems with the labor force, we had problems with archeological sites.”

Caudle remembers that one obstacle stopped the project dead in its tracks. The U.S. Government had to negotiate with more than one district governor of the Tohono O’odham Tribe to get the project completed.

Del Caudle says the project cost about $1 million dollars a mile.

He showed ABC15 how smugglers could defeat the fence.

Some estimates by the federal government put the cost of building a border fence at around $3 million dollars a mile.

Whatever the cost, Senator Smith claims they may start building as early as next year south of Tucson, but he won’t say where.

He says he has enlisted the help of a public relations firm to launch a nationwide publicity campaign to get donations, but he won’t identify the firm or when that will start.

Smith is not deterred by his critics and he hopes the citizens of Arizona visit the website and make a donation.

Rep. Chad Campbell (D-Phoenix) says he has some advice for anybody who donated money to Senator Smith’s fund.

“I’d call and ask to get my money back,” Campbell said.

Campbell says he is just as concerned about border security as Senator Smith, but he wants a reasonable approach and he’s concerned citizens are getting ripped off.

“We're tricking Arizonans to donate their hard-earned money to a plan that's never going to see the light of day,” Campbell said.

He would prefer a plan that includes federal authorities working with the state to do a better job at border security with an intelligent plan.

Campbell raises questions about who will be accountable if Smith’s border fence fund is never sufficient to build any fencing.

Smith insists all the money donated will go toward construction.

The ABC15 Investigators found that his bill allows for members of the border
fence committee to be reimbursed for expenses.

“That’s just language in a bill…no one will be compensated for anything,” Smith said.

ABC15 will continue to follow the efforts to raise private funds to build a border fence and we’ll let you know what we learn.

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/Questions-emerge-as-donations-to-build-a-border-fence-trickle-in

Report: Feds wasted $69 million on border fence

2011-12-07T06:48:00.000-08:00

Orange County Register
December 6, 2011
by Cincy Carcamo

Border officials wasted $69 million of taxpayer money after they bought more steel than they needed to build the fence along United States and Mexico border, according to a report by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security.

Customs and Border Protection completed nearly 299 miles of fencing at a cost of $1.2 billion after The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the agency to put up a fence in areas along the southwest border in California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, according to the report released on Monday. The work was done beginning in 2006 and through the time of the federal audit, which ended in April, the report said.

However, the same report states that the agency purchased 27,557 tons – about $44 million worth – of extra steel it didn't need. The agency also incurred millions of dollars in extra storage costs because it failed to move the remaining steel to a government facility for more than two years after the original storage contract expired, the report said.

The agency purchased its steel based on an estimate before legally acquiring land or meeting international treaty obligations, the audit discovered. In March 2008, The agency instructed the prime contractor to purchase approximately 145,000 tons of steel before finalizing fence designs. The agency ended up paying for $9.8 million in additional storage costs.

Customs and Border Protection officials took issue with some of the report's findings, which they say were not supported by the documentation.

The agency was faced with strict time constraints and was urgently trying to get the program started and needed to obtain large quantities of steel, CBP officials said in a rebuttal in the auditor report.

"As a result, the selection of the subcontractor with a proven record to deliver the required large quantities of steel under tight time constraints was made in accordance to the "best value" criterion instead of a "lowest cost." CBP considers that the contractor made a valid management decision," according to the CBP rebuttal.

While the federal auditors said they recognized the constraints placed on the agency by The Secure Fence Act of 2006, they maintained that if the agency had legally acquired the land and met international treaty obligations before it purchased the steel, it would have reduced the cost to purchase and store the steel.

The audit – which took place between October 2010 and April – also details what officials described as the following mistakes:

The agency lacked effective contract oversight during the project and ended up paying invoices late and didn't reconcile invoices to receiving documents
Officials didn't perform a thorough review of the contractor's selection of a higher-priced subcontractor and failed to document the reasons for its approval of the subcontractor.

In September 2009, agency officials purchased 34 tons of steel for $23,000, even though it had significant quantities of the same steel already in storage.
The report stated that the combination of missteps resulted "in additional expenditures of about $69 million that could have been put to better use."

In response to the audit, CBP officials said they issued an alert to all their contractors, letting them know that they need to perform adequate subcontract reviews and provide appropriate data.

CBP ended up moving the remaining steel inventory to a government-owned site in Texas in late March, the audit report stated. The remaining structural steel is now being used for maintenance and some new construction work.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/steel-330219-agency-report.html

Jaguar-cam study along border irks Brewer

2011-12-05T07:39:00.000-08:00

Arizona Daily Star
December 5, 2011
By Tony Davis

A study of Southwestern jaguars paid for by the U.S. border protection agency has angered Gov. Jan Brewer and some conservative commentators.

On Brewer's public Facebook page, she called the new study, which will use remote cameras to look for endangered jaguars, a waste of taxpayers' money because it's being financed by the Department of Homeland Security. The department's money should be spent on border security, she wrote.

"Click 'like' if you agree with me and think this is outrageous!" Brewer posted shortly after an Arizona Daily Star article appeared on the study. "We need to secure our border."

But this research is justified because it will carry out an obligation set by Congress for federal agencies to protect endangered species that could be affected by their work, says the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The service is administering the study and will use information gained from it.

The DHS is paying $771,000 for University of Arizona researchers to put remote cameras in 120 sites - two cameras per site - from the Baboquivari Mountains in South-Central Arizona to the Animas Mountains in southwest New Mexico. The three-year study is to start early next year.

The study is part of a $6.8 million package of environmental projects the U.S. Interior Department will carry out over the next few years using Homeland Security money. The projects are intended to compensate for environmental damage done by illegal immigrants and border protection activities, including the border fence.

The remote camera study will help determine how many jaguars live in Arizona, if a resident jaguar population exists here, and how much of an impact the border fence, illegal immigrants and vehicles used to pursue immigrants have on the animal, UA researchers say.

There have been confirmed sightings of up to five jaguars in Arizona and New Mexico since 1996.

But since Brewer's posting a week ago, more than 19,000 people said they liked it or a follow-up post, and more than 1,700 commented on the two posts, most agreeing with her.

"I wonder what 'Homeland Security' has to do with tracking jaguars. Are jaguars tracking firearms or dope?" asked commenter Katie Koerbling.

"Absolutely ridiculous," commenter Faron Williamson wrote. "They can spend that much to track a cat but can't protect our borders or build proper fences?"

The website of the conservative magazine Town Hall also took aim at the study, with columnist Katie Pavlich saying, "Next time Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano tells us she doesn't have enough resources to secure the entire border, it's not that she doesn't have the resources; it's that she is spending them on extreme environmentalist projects courtesy of the taxpayer."

In response, the Fish and Wildlife Service's Steve Spangle said it's not uncommon for federal agencies to try to offset their impacts on threatened and endangered species with projects such as this one.

The jaguar has been listed as endangered in this country since 1997, and environmentalists have said this study is a long-overdue alternative to capturing a jaguar for research purposes.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act says that federal agencies shall use their authority for endangered species conservation, pointed out Spangle, field supervisor for the wildlife service's Arizona office.

"I respect the governor's opinion on the matter, but Congress has directed federal agencies to further conservation of listed species," Spangle said. "We commend the Department of Homeland Security for doing so."

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/jaguar-cam-study-along-border-irks-governor/article_fb664a6d-c7b7-537a-b41a-2cf7f37ef62c.html

Border arrests see big decline

2011-12-05T07:28:00.000-08:00

San Antonio Express News / Washington Post
December 4, 2011
By Nick Miroff and William Booth

MEXICALI, Mexico — Arrests of illegal immigrants trying to cross the southern U.S. border have plummeted to levels not seen since the early 1970s, according to tallies released by the Homeland Security Department last week, a historic shift that could reshape the debate over immigration reform.

The Border Patrol apprehended 327,577 illegal crossers along the U.S.-Mexico border in fiscal year 2011, which ended in September.

The total is a steep drop from the peak in 2000, when 1.6 million illegal immigrants were caught. More than 90 percent of the immigrants apprehended on the Southwest border are Mexican.

The number of illegal immigrants arrested at the border has been dropping over the past few years, but it appears to be down by more than 25 percent this year.

Coupled with census and labor data from both countries that show far fewer Mexicans coming to the United States and many returning home, it appears that the historic flood of Mexican migration north has slowed to a trickle.

“We have reached the point where the balance between Mexicans moving to the United States and those returning to Mexico is essentially zero,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center, whose conclusion was shared by many immigration experts.

Such a drop in illegal crossings gives supporters of immigration reform ammunition to argue that now is a good time to tackle the issue.

Republican presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney have been sparring over the estimated 11 million people living illegally in the U.S.

Gingrich says it would be heartless to kick out immigrants who have worked and raised families here for years. Romney blasted Gingrich for supporting “amnesty” for illegal residents, but he has not given a clear answer on what he would do.

In Congress, comprehensive immigration reform has been sidelined, stuck between those who would not allow illegal immigrants to remain and others who are pushing, like President Barack Obama, to create a “pathway” to legal status, but not necessarily citizenship.

The lower number of apprehensions supports the Obama administration's contention that the border is more secure than ever.

But those who say the border remains out of control point to the fact that hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants still try to make the crossing every year.

At the Casa Betania migrant shelter in a rough section of the sprawling city of Mexicali on the border with California, manager Jorge Verdugo has seen a sharp decline in the number of ragged men who arrive each afternoon looking for a meal, a shower and a safe place to sleep.

When he began five years ago, the shelter's 42 beds were always full, but on a recent afternoon, the place was mostly empty. At the other migrant shelter across town, for women and children, there was only one guest.

“The change has been drastic,” Verdugo said.

Most experts agree that Border Patrol apprehensions along the border are an imprecise but useful marker for estimating the total flow of illegal immigrants because the U.S. government has no idea how many are not caught.

But a number of recent surveys indicated that migration has been altered in the past few years.

Pew Center research shows the number of Mexicans moving to the U.S., both legally and illegally, has fallen steeply. About 150,000 Mexicans moved to the U.S. last year, compared with 750,000 in 2000.

For the first time, according to U.S. census data, the growth of the Hispanic population in the U.S. is being fueled more by births than by immigration.

Data from Mexican surveys show that the amount of money sent home from the U.S. has fallen, from a peak of $24 billion in 2007 to $21 billion last year, according to Mexico's Central Bank.

Immigration experts say the No. 1 cause of the drop in the number of illegal immigrants is the U.S. economy, which dipped into a recession in 2008 and continues sluggish growth.

“The arrests on the border are moving like the U.S. economic cycle,” said Juan Luis Ordaz, senior economist for the Bancomer Foundation.

Ordaz and colleagues say Mexican and U.S. data suggest that the number of Mexican migrants arriving each year in the U.S. has been cut in half since 2005 and that poverty rates for Mexican immigrants living in the U.S. have grown to 30 percent from 22 percent in 2007.

“Migration has decreased because employment opportunities in the United States are not good,” said German Vega of the College of the North in Tijuana. “Fewer migrants have full-time jobs. Hours are reduced. Wages are lower. The amount of money they send home is less. And another reason is organized crime.”

Many Mexicans say it has become much more difficult to cross illegally into the U.S.

“Some of these men try three, four or five times to get across, and then they give up,” Verdugo said. “It's much harder now because of all the surveillance.”

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/Border-arrests-see-big-decline-2344154.php

Republicans Want a Fence on the Border. Big Mistake.

2011-12-02T05:29:00.000-08:00

The Daily Beast
December 2, 2011
by Larry Kaplow

It’s become such a frequently voiced note by the Republican candidates for president that it’s almost party orthodoxy: to hold back Mexican drug violence supposedly about to engulf the United States, we should fence off Mexico and guard the line with aggression. Mitt Romney supports building a fence. Michele Bachmann promises a “double” fence. Rick Perry calls for a border “shut down” with sensors and “aviation.” And last month two two retired generals, including Barry McCaffrey, a former drug czar, added to the chorus, testifying before members of the House homeland security committee in a session titled “A Call to Action: Narco-Terrorism’s Threat to the Southern U.S. Border.” They presented the report (PDF) they wrote for Texas’s Republican Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples. It states that life in U.S. border counties is already “tantamount to living in a war zone in which civil authorities, law enforcement agencies as well as citizens are under attack around the clock.”

I was curious about this combat zone. I’ve covered conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other places, and so I was keen to take stock of America’s war zone. I chose Laredo, Texas. The city sits across the Rio Grande from Nuevo Laredo, one of Mexico’s most lawless cities, which is dominated by the vicious Zetas cartel. Zetas covet Laredo’s access to drug-running routes on highways to the east. An A&E reality series about the Laredo police drug squad called it “ground zero in the war on drugs.” It seemed like it might be a hot zone.

I flew into the Mexican side, to Nuevo Laredo, and a Mexican taxi driver with the commonly held border visa took me to the U.S., crossing one of the three bridges between the two cities. The two Laredos are inseparable. Their opposing downtowns resemble one unified city clustered around a hook in the river, with similar vintage brick buildings and drab storefronts.

But they are very different places. In the American Laredo, crime, it turned out, was down. And I saw no signs of battle. The sprawling Mall del Norte was packed with holiday shoppers. Families lingered over dinners at restaurants close to the river. Hotels were full with gas workers on an energy boom and Mexican families; the city has enormous stores where Mexican buses disgorge cross-border consumers. I arranged to meet a judge from the local drug court; he felt safe talking into the night at an outside table at Starbucks. “There’s no comparison,” between Laredo and Nuevo Laredo, said a Mexican businessman who moved north after a kidnapping and years of extortion. His big gripe was the cost of Laredo labor.

Most people in Laredo are of Mexican descent (Texas used to be Mexico, after all) and until a few years ago Nuevo Laredo was the place to eat and party. U.S.high schools held proms there. Economically, the city of about 236,000 depends on its Mexican neighbor, population maybe 380,000. At least 4,000 trucks a day roll over a bridge from Mexico, stopping at warehouse complexes to transfer their loads for delivery around the country. Drug-war refugees from Mexico are moving in with money and businesses. Despite high poverty rates, unemployment is lower in Laredo than in the rest of the country.

While McCaffrey’s report is alarmist and selective—local officials say he never consulted them—violence is indeed committed regularly here by cartels in the United States. Laredo police recently arrested a suspected Zeta for arranging three local murders. Houston police say Zeta operatives recently ambushed and killed the driver—secretly working with police—of a truck carrying marijuana to a deal.

There are many other cases but “spillover” violence has long fluctuated, not spiraled. In 2003, Laredo saw 29 murders amid a series of cartel killings. There have been only seven homicides this year, down from nine last year—below the national average. Overemphasizing the border could suck resources from other places they’re needed. Cartels supply Americans’ drug demand through local American gang franchises around the country and sometimes kill on U.S. soil.

But on the other side of the border, in Nuevo Laredo, there is a real war going on. That much was evident during a walk I took in the downtown area. The government removed the local police because of suspicions that they collaborate with the cartels. So instead of cops Mexican soldiers patrolled the plaza in pickup-truck convoys, manning mounted machine guns. Federal police drove tanklike armored cars. People did errands and relaxed in parks but many stores were shuttered, a result of the suffocating extortion rackets and an absence of American tourists. A business owner said you can spot Zeta lookouts by their crewcuts and radio phones. Another said it’s easier than that: “They brag about it.”

I may have walked around in Nuevo Laredo but I did those interviews in the American Laredo. In Nuevo Laredo people are scared to talk to reporters about crime, especially after a woman’s decapitated body was dumped on the Christopher Columbus monument in September. A handwritten sign said she was killed for reporting to a website where locals shared information on Zeta threats and movements. Local papers avoid crime news and are infiltrated by Zeta informants (as previous cartels have done before them). Shootouts between the army and criminals go uncovered, including one recently that, locals say, delayed a school opening while narco bodies were cleared. The government counted 115 murders there in 2010 and the Laredo Morning Times cited a state tally of 109 for the first half of 2011. Surely many others were not reported to authorities.

What prevents that carnage from spreading north is the strength of U.S. institutions compared with those in Mexico, which have been poor and corrupt forever. Laredo has a large and visible presence of local, state, and federal law-enforcement officials focused on the cartels and sharing information. The Zeta behind the three Laredo murders was reportedly detected first in federal wire taps passed to police. Police flagged the suspect to border agents who arrested the ringleader when he tried to cross a legal bridge entry.

With a $4.3 million federal grant last year, Laredo police added 22 officers to the approximately 400 it already had. Unable to afford its own helicopter, the department painted numbers on squad car roofs and shared its radio frequencies so state and federal chopper pilots can speak directly to cops. Chief Carlos R. Maldonado has police move in low-profile ways because Zetas study their tactics. He says he’s strengthened his internal-affairs staff to watch for corruption, an occasional problem among Laredo public officials.

What Maldonado says he does not need is a fence the length of the border. His view reflects the mood in the heavily Democratic, Latino community. “There is no physical barrier that will separate Mexico and the United States,” he says. Families, businesses and, yes, gangs are too intertwined. It reminds me of how some of the 9/11 hijackers were in the U.S. legally. Sure, you need controls. But it’s hard to see how lining the border with troops, fences, or sensors—at a cost of billions—would stop a few, or few dozen, Zetas from infiltrating Laredo or, say, Boston. The question is not whether we can keep them all out but: what do we let them get away with when they arrive?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/02/republicans-want-a-fence-on-the-border-big-mistake.html

Newt Gingrich signs border fence pledge during Iowa swing

2011-12-01T13:32:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles Times
December 1, 2011
by Paul West

Reporting from Des Moines— Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich, whose plan to give permanent residency to illegal immigrants has angered some conservatives, signed a pledge Thursday to build a double fence along the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of 2013.

The former House speaker is on a two-campaign visit to Iowa, which will open the voting in the 2012 GOP contest next month and where anti-immigrant sentiment is intense.

"We haven't been able to build a fence on the border because we have not been a serious country," said Gingrich, as he prepared to sign the pledge following a morning speech to employees at Nationwide Insurance in Des Moines.

Gingrich, who has jumped to the top of the polls here and nationally, said his decision to sign the pledge was in line with his determination to offer "serious leadership doing serious things" as president.

He becomes the second GOP presidential candidate, after Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, to sign the pledge, which is being promoted by a North Carolina group, Americans for Securing the Border.

"For too long, too many politicians have given only lip service to the war on our border," said Van D. Hipp Jr., a former South Carolina Republican Party chairman and Washington defense consultant, who heads the group. He said he did not have a cost estimate for the fence.

The pledge contains a significant loophole: It leaves it up to the U.S. Border Patrol or Department of Homeland Security to determine locations for the fence.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gingrich-fence-20111201,0,253023.story

Feds find 32 tons of pot in Calif. border tunnel

2011-11-30T12:29:00.000-08:00

Associated Press / MSNBC
November 30, 2011
by Elliot Spagat

The discovery of a cross-border tunnel equipped with electric rail cars, a hydraulic lift and end-to-end wood floors has ended in seizures of more than 32 tons of marijuana, one of the largest pot busts in U.S. history, authorities said Wednesday.

The 600-yard passage linking warehouses in San Diego and Tijuana included a wooden staircase, lighting and ventilation, said Derek Benner, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's special agent in charge of investigations in San Diego. It was tall and wide enough to move comfortably inside.

"This is an incredibly efficient tunnel designed to move a lot of narcotics," Benner told The Associated Press.

Authorities recovered nearly 17 tons of marijuana at the warehouse in San Diego's Otay Mesa area, nearly 12 tons inside a truck in Los Angeles and about 4 tons in Mexico, Benner said. Several arrests were made.

Tuesday's find was the latest in a spate of secret passages found to smuggle drugs underground from Mexico, a response to heightened enforcement on land. In an emerging seasonal trend, many are turning up shortly before the winter holidays in what authorities believe is an effort to take advantage of the Mexican harvest season.

Two weeks ago, authorities seized 17 tons of marijuana in connection with a tunnel linking warehouses in San Diego and Tijuana.

Raids last November on two tunnels linking warehouses in San Diego and Tijuana netted a combined 52 of marijuana on both sides of the border. Those secret passages were lined with rail tracks, and had lighting and ventilation.

Authorities believe the latest tunnel began operating recently but declined to provide details.

"I would say it's probably as sophisticated as any we've ever seen," William Sherman, acting special agent in charge of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in San Diego told the AP.

More than 70 tunnels have been found on the border since October 2008, surpassing the number of discoveries in the previous six years. Many are clustered around San Diego, California's Imperial Valley and Nogales, Ariz.

California is popular because its clay-like soil is easy to dig with shovels. In Nogales, smugglers tap into vast underground drainage canals.

San Diego's Otay Mesa area has the added draw of plenty of warehouses on both sides of the border to conceal trucks getting loaded with drugs. Its streets hum with semitrailers by day and fall silent on nights and weekends.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45496653/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

U.S. to extend border fence 300 feet into Pacific

2011-11-26T21:00:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles Times
November 25, 2011
by Richard Marosi

Reporting from Imperial Beach— Pounding surf and corrosive sea air have stymied efforts for years to erect a sturdy fence at the westernmost edge of the U.S.-Mexico border.

Now, the U.S. Border Patrol is trying again, with a $4.3-million project that would extend a nearly quarter-mile barrier 300 feet into the Pacific Ocean and remake one of the more scenic spots on the border.

When completed early next year, a steel fence 18 feet tall will replace a teetering, gap-riddled barrier that did little to discourage people from crossing back and forth on a wide beach linking Tijuana and Imperial Beach.

The "Surf Fence Project" comes as the federal government winds down barrier-building projects that have fortified about 670 miles of the frontier in recent years. Fences have been built atop sand dunes and mountain slopes, through remote deserts and urban streetscapes.

Fortifying the border where it plunges into the Pacific, however, presents unique logistical challenges. Before construction even begins, a government contractor must build a long pier to hold a crane, which will pound the fence posts into the sand. On a recent day, people on the Tijuana side of the beach marveled at the temporary structure, which is under construction, mistakenly believing it would be used for fishing or for docking boats.

Though border fencing efforts have long drawn criticism, no significant opposition has emerged for the surf project, mainly because one kind of barrier or another has existed here since the early 1990s. A fence is necessary, border officials said, to block a gap that opens when the waters recede at low tide.

In the late 1980s and early '90s, hundreds of illegal immigrants would cross at a time and head toward the distant San Diego skyline. More recently, the beach became a popular spot for demonstrators protesting illegal immigration policies. Last year, a group of deported immigrants walked across the line in the sand at the border, in a symbolic protest march. Some of them threw rocks and bottles, said U.S. authorities.

"It still has the potential to be very dangerous, as beautiful as it is," said Assistant Chief Patrol Agent Bruce Parks.

Previous fences couldn't withstand the tidal battering. A barrier constructed of oil-drilling pipes in the early 1990s quickly corroded. Waves washed away some of the steel posts, and others broke off. In 2006, U.S. Marine divers tried to erect a fence made of train rails by maneuvering the rails in the water so they could be pounded in by a pile driver.

It was difficult and dangerous because the rails would swing around at the end of the crane boom as the divers tried to manually place them next to one another in the surf.

For the latest effort, U.S. authorities have turned to a private contractor, Granite Construction Co., which recently built fencing at the base of Otay Mountain east of San Diego. The material used this time will be sturdier: 6-inch steel piping, coated with rust-proof material. The work, Parks said, comes with a 30-year warranty.

Longtime beachgoers think the agency better keep the warranty paperwork. Netza Tapia, 40, said he remembers the days when he would slip through the corroded section of the fence to continue his family walks on the Imperial Beach side of the beach. Jonathan Parra and his friends used to breach the wave-battered gaps regularly to play soccer on Imperial Beach's relatively empty stretch of sand.

The sea, Parra said, doesn't recognize borders. "The strength of the ocean will eventually knock the fence down," Parra said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-border-fence-20111124,0,6662761.story

Border Fence Upends a Valley Farmer’s Life

2011-11-26T20:57:00.000-08:00

Texas Monthly / New York Times
November 26, 2011
by Oscar Casares

BROWNSVILLE — One of the obvious advantages of living within a gated community is the sense of security. But what if you live on the wrong side of the gate?

Consider the plight of Tim Loop, 47, who lives on his family farm in Brownsville, at the southernmost point along the United States-Mexico border.

Not so long ago, the Loop farm was a pastoral vision, with its bountiful mesquite and cotton fields and orange groves. Today, imposing sections of 15- to-18-foot-high rust-colored steel bars, some less than 400 feet from Mr. Loop’s front porch, are more likely to catch the eye.

In 2009 the Department of Homeland Security informed Mr. Loop and other landowners along the northern bank of the Rio Grande that the new border fence, which in some areas stands more than a mile from the river, would be cutting through their properties. (A water treaty with Mexico that restricts building within the flood plain prevented the department from simply hugging the north bank.) The three-bedroom home where Mr. Loop lives with his wife and two children ended up on the south side of the fence, inside what essentially became a no-man’s land.

Many gaps remain along the fence line. But now, to seal off these openings, the Homeland Security Department plans to install motorized gates and keypads. Like a handful of other border dwellers in the same situation, Mr. Loop and his family will be required to use a secret code to reach their home — and to re-enter the rest of his country.

“I’ll have to ask permission from the government to live my life,” Mr. Loop said.

It’s an awkward situation that Mr. Loop’s forebears could never have imagined. His grandfather settled this tract of land in the early 1900s, part of the southern migration of farmers who followed the expanding railway and the promise of an Edenic life to the Rio Grande Valley. Since then, the family has grown cotton, soybeans, wheat, cabbage, corn, sorghum and sugar cane. They have endured the merciless heat, the yearly threat of hurricane season and the occasional hard freeze that can easily wipe out a citrus crop.

But although life along the Rio Grande has always demanded ingenuity and resilience, it is doubtful that Mr. Loop’s grandfather ever figured on an enormous steel fence slicing through his land.

In fact, most local residents in this remote, rural and poor corner of the country are accustomed to being virtually forgotten by Washington. That, however, has changed dramatically in the past 10 years. Today the area seems like a cauldron of the nation’s deepest anxieties, a place where concerns about illegal immigration, fears of terrorism and, more recently, nervousness about spillover violence from Mexico’s drug war have boiled into repeated calls for a more secure border.

Mr. Loop seems to consider this a mixed blessing. He credits the initial boots-on-the-ground strategy with a decrease in the number of illegal crossings, but this only makes him question the need for more sections of fence.

“The fence is not doing what it’s supposed to be doing,” he said.

There is no doubt that the new gates and the keypads, the first round of which is scheduled to be completed by spring, will complicate his life. Mr. Loop will be issued a personal pass code, but he will have to provide the Homeland Security Department with the names of everyone who has regular access to it.

According to the “Landowner Reference Guide,” a pamphlet distributed by the Border Patrol, the gates will stay open for a certain part of every day, though the Border Patrol will have discretion over this. Emergency personnel will have access through the gates (which are designed to unlock in the event of a power failure), but the possibility of being caught on the wrong side of the fence weighs heavily on families like the Loops.

There are other worries, too. Mr. Loop wonders if possessing a secret pass code could make him a target for anyone desperate to gain access to the other side. This is, after all, a familiar area to desperate travelers.

The gates and keypads will affect a handful of other properties in the area. Ultimately, that list may include the Lennox Foundation Southmost Preserve, a large tract belonging to the Nature Conservancy, which fought the border fence.

Maxwell Pons, an irascible preserve manager who, like Mr. Loop, lives in a house south of the border fence, has little faith that the government will handle the gate and keypad project any better than the fence.

“They tore down hundred-year-old trees to put up a fence,” Mr. Pons said. “You think they care about how using a keypad is going to affect us?”

Then there is the question of whether motorized gates controlled by secret pass codes will be able to secure a fence that was not all that secure to begin with.

Recently, Mr. Loop noticed what from a distance might have looked like dozens of ants scampering up the south side of the 18-foot-high steel bars. Getting closer, he realized that these were scuff marks — from shoes, boots, sneakers, bare feet; there was no telling for sure — and that whoever left the marks had made it to the top, and over, undeterred.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/us/border-fence-upends-a-rio-grande-valley-farmers-life.html

Crying wolf: The Republicans are fretting about a disappearing problem

2011-11-23T07:12:00.000-08:00

The Economist
November 19, 2011

ASK any Republican presidential candidate, and they will tell you without hesitation: America’s border with Mexico is as leaky as a sieve. Mitt Romney thinks all 1,969 miles (3,169km) of it must be fenced. Michele Bachmann wants a double fence. Rick Perry was pilloried for suggesting that in some rugged areas, more “aviation assets in the ground” might be better than fencing. Bemused by such talk, Barack Obama joked earlier this year that Republicans would not be happy until there was a moat full of alligators to keep illegal immigrants at bay. A few months later Herman Cain said there should be an electrified fence, with a charge strong enough to kill. He later explained that he too was joking, but would never apologise for standing up for America.

At the border itself, all this talk seems otherworldly. At a “processing centre” in El Paso, where the fingerprints of those caught crossing from Mexico illegally are taken and checked against various databases, there is precious little processing going on. Of the 20-odd workstations, only two are manned. The Border Patrol agents sitting at them chat idly to themselves. Just two detainees, their paperwork complete, sit timidly in the corner of an enormous holding cell. An adjacent cell for women stands empty. Next door, three more agents scan 25 screens relaying footage from video cameras along the border, looking for possible incursions. In some of the grainy pictures, scrubby and deserted patches of creosote and mesquite sway in a gentle wind; in others, herons peck at fish in the shallow trickle of the Rio Grande. Asked whether anything is going on, an agent replies, “it’s really quiet today.”

It’s quiet most days in the El Paso sector, as the Border Patrol dubs this 268-mile slice of the border. Back in 1993, agents arrested 285,781 people trying to enter America illegally. In those days, the holding cells in the processing centre, explains Scott Hayes, a Border Patrol agent, were full to bursting. In 2010, however, agents picked up only 12,251 illegal immigrants in the area—a 96% decline. Much the same is true of the border as a whole: last year’s tally, of 447,731 arrests, is barely a quarter that of the peak year, 2000, when 1,643,679 people were intercepted. This year’s figure will be under 350,000; a fifth of the peak.

The drop in arrests reflects not laxer enforcement, but stronger. There are over 17,000 Border Patrol agents on the border with Mexico, a fivefold increase over 1993. They patrol in cars and all-terrain vehicles, on bicycles and horses, in boats, planes and helicopters. When there are no agents around, cameras, reconnaissance drones and three different types of sensors—seismic, magnetic and infra-red—keep tabs on things. A third of the border is fenced, and most of the rest is in areas so remote or rugged as to make fences pointless or impractical. Some parts of the fence are 17 feet high, with metal plates extending ten feet below ground to prevent tunnelling.

Along a two-mile stretch of the border just outside El Paso, five Border Patrol vehicles wait, ready to give chase should anyone manage to get past the fence. In the centre of town, where it is easiest for people to dash across from Ciudad Juárez on the other side and disappear in the busy streets, the entire border is floodlit. Elsewhere, agents have access to mobile lighting units, as well as hand-held infra-red cameras akin to night-vision goggles. There is even a special unit to chase hapless migrants through the city’s storm drains. If anyone makes it past all these obstacles, there are checkpoints at the bus station, at railroad yards and on the main roads out of town, complete with dogs to sniff out stowaways. And there is more manpower and clever kit on the way. The budget for border enforcement and immigration has quadrupled over the past decade; the Border Patrol is still hiring.

Agents used to be so outnumbered by the crowds flooding across that they could not give chase to all of them. They would return to their posts after arresting one group to find the tracks of several others who had crossed while they were away, Mr Hayes says. Nowadays plenty of agents respond to each breach. Those caught are not simply sent back across the border as they used to be: 90% suffer some sort of punishment—typically a few weeks in jail. What is more, the government has quietly started handing out more temporary visas for Mexican farm workers and the like, making it easier to enter legally. America’s weak economy, and the falling birth rate in Mexico further reduce the incentives to cross. The Border Patrol will never manage to apprehend every last suspect, says Mr Hayes, but it is not that far off.

Yet as Mr Obama suggested, the Republicans who have been bleating about the border are far from satisfied. They have hauled officials charged with policing it before Congress to berate their efforts. In states such as Arizona and Alabama, they have passed laws cracking down on illegal immigrants, on the grounds that the federal government has abdicated responsibility in that area. They refuse to discuss policies aimed at resolving the status of the 11m-odd illegal immigrants already in the country until they deem the border secure.

Mr Obama himself has succumbed to this mindset to a great extent. He has repeatedly requested increases in spending on Customs and Border Protection, which includes the Border Patrol, even as he has suggested cutting the budgets of other agencies. He has prolonged the deployment of some 1,200 National Guard troops along the border, to provide backup for the Border Patrol. The administration has boasted of deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants.

Yet there are some who question the entire premise of attempting to seal the border. Historically, says Doug Massey of Princeton University, the number of illegal immigrants from Mexico correlates most closely with economic growth in America and with the number of visas handed out, not with increased policing of the border. The whole thing is a colossal waste of money, he complains.

http://www.economist.com/node/21538750

Third tunnel in a week found under U.S.-Mexico border

2011-11-22T20:02:00.000-08:00

Reuters
November 22, 2011
by Tim Gaynor

Border police in Nogales, Arizona, uncovered a drug smuggling tunnel from Mexico, the latest in a spate of illicit passageways found under the border in recent days.

The U.S. Border Patrol said the 319-foot long tunnel was discovered on Monday. It measured three feet wide by two feet tall, and ran for 100 feet into Mexico at a depth of about 20 feet.

It was chiseled through solid rock and was equipped with electricity, lighting, water pumps, and held up by support beams and plywood shoring, the Border Patrol's Tucson sector said in a news release.

While securing the tunnel, agents also found 26 bundles of marijuana weighing more than 430 pounds. One suspect was arrested by authorities in Mexico, Border Patrol agent Colleen Agle said.

The tunnel was the third discovered running under the porous U.S.-Mexico border in less than a week, and the 21st illicit passageway found beneath the streets of Nogales in the past two years.

Last Wednesday Authorities in California announced the find of an underground passageway that stretched 400 yards to an industrial park south of San Diego from Tijuana, Mexico. They seized more than 17 tons of marijuana and arrested two men.

The same day, authorities in Nogales found another smaller passageway beneath the porch of a house that ran 70 feet from a drain in Nogales in Mexico.

Agle said Mexican smugglers are increasingly turning to tunneling in a bid to beat beefed-up border security in the city, where a tall, new steel border fence was completed earlier this year.

"As we have been putting more resources along the border in this area, we are really taking away a lot of the traditional avenues for smuggling contraband and illegal aliens," Agle told Reuters.

She added that the majority of illicit passageways found under the city keyed into the extensive storm drain system that runs under the two Nogales, and contributes to making them such a hotspot for tunnelers.

"One of the things that (smugglers) are doing is exploiting the legitimate drainage system down here, and attempting to create illicit tunnels," she added.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/23/us-usa-mexico-tunnel-idUSTRE7AL2TS20111123

Arizona hunter spots rare U.S.-Mexico borderlands jaguar

2011-11-21T19:34:00.000-08:00

Reuters
November 21, 2011
by David Schwatrz and Tim Gaynor

An Arizona hunter has made a rare confirmed sighting of a wild jaguar close to the Mexico border in southeastern Arizona, the Arizona Game and Fish Department said on Monday.

Jaguars' habitat ranges from Argentina to the rugged borderlands of Arizona and New Mexico. There have only been a handful of sightings by hunters in Arizona, and no jaguars are believed to breed in the United States.

The report was received on Saturday morning from an experienced hunter using dogs to track mountain lions in Cochise County, in southeast Arizona, the department said.

The large cat was driven up a mesquite tree, where the hunter was able to take photographs and video. The footage was subsequently viewed by the department, which classified the sighting as "verifiable or highly probable."

"It's very exciting ... we know that jaguars use southern Arizona as part of their northern habitat ... Although confirmed sightings are fairly rare," Lynda Lambert, a spokeswoman with the department, told Reuters.

Lambert said the hunter declined to be named, and did not release the photographs or video footage for publication.

After photographing the cat, the hunter left the area with his dogs and watched from a distance. The jaguar remained treed for approximately 15 minutes and then headed south.

Jaguars are the only cats in North America that roar. They prey on a variety of mammals, fish, birds and reptiles.

There were thought to have vanished from United States until two confirmed sightings in 1996. Only a handful have been spotted since then, and very little is known about their habits.

Based on the images, biologists believe the jaguar is an adult male that appeared in good health and weighed approximately 200 pounds.

The department said it hoped to compare the photographs and video shot by the hunter to images of other jaguars taken in Arizona in the past.

They will try to use comparisons between a jaguar's unique spots, known as rosettes, to determine if the animal has been previously identified.

In recent years, concern over the well-being of the U.S. jaguar population has intensified as a program to build some 700 miles of security fence along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico has gathered pace.

Some conservationists feared that the fencing would prevent the powerful, solitary hunters from roaming up from Mexico.

In 2010, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced it would designate critical habitat for endangered jaguars in the United States and develop a jaguar recovery plan.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/21/us-arizona-jaguar-idUSTRE7AK2OG20111121

Bill giving Homeland Security reign on federal lands heats up Senate race

2011-11-20T06:06:00.000-08:00

Great Falls Tribune
November 19, 2011
by John S. Adams

HELENA — Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., and Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., continue to cast political stones over a controversial measure that would give the Department of Homeland Security "operational control" over federal lands along the United States' borders.

Tester and Rehberg are locked in what many political observers predict will be one of the toughest U.S. Senate races in the nation, and the so-called "border bill" has become one of the biggest issues of the campaign to date.

Tester believes Rehberg's co-sponsorship of House Resolution 1505 won't sit well with Montana voters who value public lands.

The measure would give U.S. Customs and Border Protection the authority to circumvent 36 federal environmental and wilderness laws in order to give the agency operational control over all federally owned lands within 100 miles of U.S. borders.

Supporters of the measure, including Rehberg, say it is a simple bill designed to break the bureaucratic gridlock and turf war between Customs and Border Protection and the federal agencies that manage public lands along the border. They say the measure gives Customs and Border Protection agents the tools necessary to track down and stop invaders, drug smugglers and other threats without getting mired in the red tape of environmental reviews and public comments.

The bill specifically authorizes Customs and Border Protection to engage in the following activities in remote areas — such as wilderness and national parks — where such activities currently are prohibited:

•Build and maintain roads

•Build fences

•Use motorized vehicles to patrol

•Install and operate surveillance equipment and sensors

•Use aircraft

•Build temporary tactical infrastructure, including forward operating bases.

Opponents of the measure, including a hunting-and-angling group with ties to Tester, are attacking Rehberg in television ads and on the Internet, calling HR1505 "a federal land grab of the highest order." Critics of the bill say it threatens the health of protected ecosystems and wildlife, and could be used to lock the public out of federal lands without public input.

Rehberg's supporters say such criticism is politically motivated hogwash designed to scare voters.

They also accuse Tester of being a hypocrite on the issue, since he didn't oppose a 2009 Senate amendment that contained nearly identical language to the language at the core of HR1505.

The Senate in 2009 passed by unanimous consent an amendment to the 2010 Interior appropriations bills containing the following language:

"None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to impede, prohibit, or restrict activities of the Secretary of Homeland Security on public lands to achieve operational control (as defined in section 2(b) of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (8 U.S.C. 1701 note; Public Law 109-367)) over the international land and maritime borders of the United States."

Rehberg's bill, as amended by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, contains this language:

"The Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture shall not impede, prohibit, or restrict activities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection on land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture to achieve operational control (as defined in section 2(b) of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (8 U.S.C. 1701 note; Public Law 109—15 367)) over the international land borders of the United States."

Rehberg spokesman Jed Link said the 2009 amendment gives even broader, more sweeping authority to the Department of Homeland Security to do almost anything it wants. He said Rehberg's bill is an attempt to build on the work the Senate began in 2009, but that it specifically details what activities Customs and Border Protection is allowed to undertake in order to obtain "operational control."

"At the end of the day, we're still trying to do what the Senate was trying to do in 2009. We've learned a lot in the last few years and have a better idea about what works and what doesn't work, so the details of the legislation aren't exactly the same," Link said.

While the 2009 amendment prohibited the Department of the Interior from impeding, prohibiting or restricting Department of Homeland Security activities, it did not waive the agency's requirement to follow federal environmental laws when undertaking those activities.

Tester spokesman Aaron Murphy said the 2009 amendment was part of a one-year appropriations bill, and was aimed at addressing a specific, short-term problem.

Murphy said Congress concurred in 2009 that agreements between various federal land management agencies and Customs and Border Protection were not working, causing construction on a southern border fence to stall.

"The bill that passed the Senate was a short-term response to address a specific problem on the southern border back in 2009," Murphy said. "Congressman Rehberg's bill is a one-size-fits-all solution in search of a problem. His plan completely overhauls border security by giving one department total control over public land in Montana."

"The fact is, in 2009, Senator Tester agreed with Denny that this was a problem that needed to be solved," Link said. "Jon Tester is the only one who has changed his mind. This is about national security and keeping Montana families safe — the stakes are too high for political games."

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20111120/NEWS01/111200303

14 Tons of Marijuana Seized After Border Tunnel Is Found

2011-11-17T04:35:00.000-08:00

Associated Press / New York Times
November 17, 2011

SAN DIEGO (AP) — An estimated 14 tons of marijuana was seized after the discovery of a tunnel that the authorities said on Wednesday was one of the most significant drug smuggling passages ever found on the United States-Mexico border.

The tunnel stretched about 400 yards and linked warehouses in San Diego and Tijuana, Mexico, the authorities said.

The authorities in the United States seized 9 to 10 tons of marijuana on Tuesday inside a truck and at the warehouse in San Diego’s Otay Mesa area, said Derek Benner, Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s special agent in charge of investigations in San Diego. Mexican authorities recovered about five tons.

Photos taken by the Mexican authorities show an entry blocked by bundles that were most likely stuffed with marijuana, said Paul Beeson, chief of the Border Patrol’s San Diego sector. Wooden supports lined the walls, and power cords led to the Mexican entrance, suggesting lighting and ventilation systems.

The depth and the width of the tunnel were unknown. Several arrests were made. Mr. Benner declined to give details.

As the United States intensifies enforcement on land, more than 70 tunnels have been found on the border since October 2008, surpassing the number of discoveries in the previous six years.

Many are clustered in San Diego, California’s Imperial Valley and Nogales, Ariz. California is popular because its claylike soil is easy to dig. In Nogales, smugglers tap into vast underground drainage canals.

Raids last November on two tunnels linking San Diego and Tijuana netted a combined 50 tons of marijuana on both sides of the border, two of the largest such seizures in United States history. Those secret passages were lined with rail tracks, lighting and ventilation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/us/us-mexico-tunnel-leads-to-tons-of-marijuana.html

Environmental law waiver faces northern skeptics

2011-11-14T19:45:00.000-08:00

Associated Press
November 13, 2011
by MATT GOURAS

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — No one can recall the last time an illegal immigrant hiked into the rugged and remote wilderness of Glacier National Park in an attempt to slip into the U.S. But that isn't stopping some in Congress from proposing to give border agents control over environmental laws in protected areas such as the popular tourist attraction in Montana, Washington's North Cascades National Park and all federal land within 100 miles of the U.S. border.

Associated Press interviews with northern border local sheriffs, federal officials, land managers, advocacy groups and others find that border threats in places such as the mountainous peaks of Glacier National Park are far more infrequent than in the deserts of Texas or Arizona — where illegal immigration arrests in one Border Patrol sector can run 1,000 times greater than a sector on the Canadian border.

The proposal would let the Border Patrol circumvent dozens of environmental laws from the Clean Water Act to the Endangered Species Act in areas those laws were created for: the nation's most-protected wilderness areas that fall within the 100-mile border zone with both Mexico and Canada. Supporters of the measure argue it is needed to cut through a bureaucratic gridlock where border agents have difficulty dealing with environmental laws and roadless rules.

But It has left critics wondering if the one-size-fits all approach to reshape border protection makes sense, and whether it's worth potentially marring wilderness areas that have been protected for a century or more.

Montana has become a flashpoint for the debate partly because much of the state's border with Canada is on federal land. And the dispute recently became a top issue in one of the nation's most competitive U.S. Senate races.

Rep. Denny Rehberg of Montana, a Republican co-sponsor of the House bill who is in the midst of a fierce campaign to unseat freshman Democratic Sen. Jon Tester in 2012, has argued environmental rules should not get in the way of border protection.

Tester has joined some hunters and conservationists who argue the bill is a heavy-handed fix that allows unchecked development in places they cherish.

It's not exactly clear what the Border Patrol would do with that new authority. The bill, which has 32 co-sponsors in the U.S. House, suggests the agency could build new roads, keep current roads open, establish bases or even use motorized equipment in the backcountry of the national parks to shore up border protection.

But critics and conservationists ask if the actual border threat is worth taking those measures. Unlike the border with Mexico, where illegal activity is a daily problem, the proposed law has so far met with more skepticism on the northern border where proof is scant that the likes of human traffickers are using the wilderness reaches of Montana, Idaho and Washington.

"Compared to the southern border it is an infinitesimally small number. It is like one in a year, not thousands," said North Cascades National Park superintendent Chip Jenkins, who believes the current laws are fine for his area of Washington state. "So far it has been working. Part of it is that the geography works to our advantage. It is incredibly rugged terrain, and very difficult to navigate."

About 14 years ago, a would-be terrorist tried to sneak into the country through North Cascades National Park, and in what the park service considers a success the man was caught by rangers. Gazi Ibrahim Abu Mezer later was caught again elsewhere by immigration officials, and after ignoring orders to leave the country, was arrested in Brooklyn, N.Y. with a pipe bomb.

Police and agents do report more smuggling activity in the national forests, compared to the parks, but sheriffs in northwestern Montana consider the problem to be rare.

"I would think it is occurring randomly. I don't think it is a continual problem," said Flathead County Sheriff Chuck Curry. "Most of our border area is relatively rugged and relatively inaccessible."

But Curry notes there is the potential for people to use the area as a crossing point, and there have been cases where electronic surveillance has been tripped at an abandoned port of entry just west of Glacier National Park in the Flathead National Forest.

"Somebody with the will and resources certainly could get across the border if they chose to," said Curry. "It certainly is not at the top of my list, but it is a concern, especially as it pertains to the flow of drugs across the border."

The Border Patrol in eastern Washington reports more active crossing in the national forests of that region. Spokesman James Frackelton notes several multimillion dollar seizures of drugs in recent years that were brought overland on foot. He said the British Columbia marijuana industry often sends product down south in exchange for cocaine headed north on public land smuggling routes that have been used as far back as prohibition when booze flowed south from Canada.

Frackleton said that designated wilderness areas that prevent motorized access are a frustration for border agents, and pointed out his agency views access differently than the Forest Service or Park Service.

"They are protecting natural resources and our mission is to protect the U.S. from terrorists, terrorist weapons and other threats," he said.

In the plains of Montana most of the border land is owned by private landowners or perhaps local governments— more similar to ownership patterns predominant in Midwestern or northeastern states — and not the federal government. In that portion of rural Montana, border agents and local sheriffs report a few incidents of smuggling though rural farm fields. However, the proposal in Congress targets border patrol access to federal land — not private farms.

Republican Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah is carrying the bill that eases the restrictions and recently passed the House Natural Resources Committee along party lines. But it is one of the many GOP co-sponsors, Rehberg of Montana, who has been taking heat.

Recently, in a development potentially even more troublesome for the Republican supporters of the bill, some conservative writers have begun speaking out against it. In places like Montana where many libertarian-minded gun owners are wary of potential federal government intrusions, the idea of granting border agents new authority in the name of increased security is raising some hackles.

Chuck Baldwin, a former Constitution Party presidential candidate who is now active in Montana conservative circles, criticized Rehberg's support for the bill and recently wrote that the proposal gives "more power and authority to the federal government's emerging police state."

Rehberg, who has already worked to change the bill to ensure that border agents could not restrict hunting or other public access to land, made it clear through a spokesman that his continued support for the measure is not certain. Rehberg, in an obvious effort to appease his conservative base, has suggested the bill could be improved by requiring the border patrol first get the permission of the local sheriff before exercising the powers granted.

"The bill is still not perfect. And he is working to make it better," spokesman Jed Link said. "But at the end of the day, if this thing is not good for Montana, Denny is not going to support it."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jJ7zK__fCbpi_cnSVOBfFFZj8ubw?docId=30b802da92994c7bb07abbf3fdb7a4c8

Border bill pits security against the environment

2011-11-14T17:08:00.000-08:00

Minneapolis Star Tribune
November 14, 2011
by PAM LOUWAGIE

The Border Patrol would gain unprecedented authority over Minnesota's environmental landmarks on our northern border, including the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Voyageurs National Park, under legislation winding through Congress.

More than 30 environmental laws would be waived and the Department of Homeland Security would be allowed to build roads, erect fences, set up monitoring equipment and use vehicles to patrol public lands within 100 miles of the Mexican and Canadian borders, according to proposed legislation in the House.

Public land managers in the departments of Interior and Agriculture would not be allowed to "impede, prohibit or restrict" the patrol from controlling the border, under the Republican-sponsored legislation. Homeland Security could disregard landmark environmental laws, including the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

The bill, authored by Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, and a similar measure by Rep. Ben Quayle, R-Ariz., were written primarily to address human and drug smuggling on the southern border, but both include the northern border, too. A Senate version does not.

The proposals have residents in northern Minnesota bristling, saying the area has few people crossing illegally and the Border Patrol would be wiser to engage more locals in reporting suspicious activity.

"All those illegal walleyes that are coming across? I mean, good God," quipped Ted Young, co-owner of Poplar Creek Guesthouse and Boundary Country Trekking, about 3 miles from the Canadian border on the Gunflint Trail. "We don't want fences, we don't want roads. ... Don't create problems that are not there."

Sue Prom, who with her husband owns Voyageur Canoe Outfitters about 5 miles from the Canadian border, said she's frustrated the northern border has been lumped in with problems to the south: "We don't have people swimming from Canada into the United States," she said.

But the legislation is also about potential terrorists, said Bishop spokeswoman Melissa Subbotin. "We know that there have been efforts by others wishing to do harm to our country to enter through both the north and the southern borders," she said.

Working together locally

If passed, the legislation would mark a significant change in the balance of power among the federal departments, now governed by a five-year-old agreement requiring them to collaborate for minimal environmental impact.

Leaders of federal agencies in the region say they have been working well together under that agreement, both watching the border and protecting the environment.

"We're not aware of any situations where either of us are hampering one another's missions," said Mike Ward, superintendent of Voyageurs National Park.

The departments back each other up on law enforcement missions, sometimes share equipment and often share information, officials said.

"We haven't had this need, specifically, for any legislation," said Border Patrol spokesman Stacy Forbes, based in Grand Forks, N.D.

The current agreement allows Border Patrol agents to patrol areas on foot or horseback without asking, as well as use motorized vehicles in emergency situations, Forbes said his agency typically notifies local wilderness managers, because they know the area best.

"They're the experts," Forbes said. "They would know if there's any type of movement."

Jim Sanders, forest supervisor of the 3.2 million-acre Superior National Forest, which contains the Boundary Waters, said his staff acts as "eyes and ears" for Border Patrol, too.

"It's working well," he said. "Some of their folks were helping us during the Pagami fire."

But in other areas of the country, some former Border Patrol agents complain the agreement in place now -- a memorandum of understanding -- gives an upper hand to park and wilderness land managers. It amounts to the Border Patrol making requests, one former agent said.

"It's a mother-may-I thing, and a request to get in there may take months," said Kent Lundgren, chairman of the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers. "They allow hot pursuit. That's good, but that does not allow patrol, and patrol is how you find things out."

Agents like to be outside, Lundgren said, and naturally act as environmental stewards.

Subbotin, of Bishop's office, said they expect agents will use increased access only for what's essential to their mission. "To argue otherwise would be to challenge their judgment."

The bill's goals are in lockstep with the Pledge to America, a 48-page policy agenda set forth by House Republicans in 2010. That document contains language to "prohibit the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from interfering with Border Patrol enforcement activities on federal lands."

Jane Danowitz, director of the U.S. public lands program at the Pew Environment Group, said Homeland Security officials didn't ask for the legislation and she thinks that's significant.

"We're talking about legislation that would basically, under the guise of national security, undo environmental laws that have been on the books for decades," Danowitz said. "These are popular protections."

U.S. Rep. Chip Cravaack, R-Minn., whose district includes the state's northeast border, said in a statement that international security often conflicts with other priorities such as environmental preservation. He looks forward to examining "a proper balance between international security and Minnesota's pristine wilderness."

No big plans for sector

U.S. Customs and Border Protection's Grand Forks Sector, which covers 861 miles of border in North Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin, increased the number of agents from 28 in 1992 to 213 last year.

In fiscal year 2010, those agents apprehended 543 illegal immigrants, 388 of whom originally came from Mexico. In fiscal year 2008, 78 people illegally crossed from Canada into the sector, Forbes said. More recent data wasn't available.

Forbes said the Grand Forks Sector, which stretches south to Kansas and Missouri, has no plans to build roads, fences or other major infrastructure, though an environmental assessment along the entire northern border is being completed to expedite such plans if needed in the future.

Dyke Williams, who for 25 years has owned a cabin on the end of the Gunflint Trail, less than a mile from the border, said it doesn't matter if there are no plans at the moment. "Pass that puppy and you're going to have plans all over the place," he said.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/133781373.html?page=1&c=y

If you build it, they'll still come: Border fence can't stem tide .

2011-11-14T07:37:00.000-08:00

KENS Channel 5 San Antonio
November 13, 2011
by Angela Kocherga

The border fence is a hot topic on the Republican presidential campaign trail.

Herman Cain wants to electrify the fence.

Michelle Bachmann wants a double fence and Mitt Romney wants to extend the fence along the entire southwest border.

There are 649 miles of fence along the U.S./Mexico border. The tallest point is 30 feet high, and the longest stretch 300 miles in Douglas, Arizona.

The fence is a patchwork of materials that serves as a timeline showing the evolution of the barrier.

"Every time we implement any new type of fencing we learn from the limitations of the last fencing that we had in place," says U.S. Border Patrol agent Colleen Agle.

In Douglas construction crews are replacing the oldest fencing.

"The first generation was a lot shorter so people did have a lot easier time climbing over it, and it was also just sheet metal so it was very thin," Agle explains.

Over time smuggling organizations have figured out ways to go over, under and even through the fence.

"These bollards that were cut last night, they attempted to bring a vehicle north," says Agle.

That vehicle filled with drugs ended up turning back when border patrol agents arrived at the fence after spotting the smugglers.

"This high ground here will give me the advantage and get other agents to get on the traffic as they come north" says Border Patrol agent Jaime Leos.

The oldest barrier along a particular stretch of border is known as a "picket fence" because of the white bars. Mesh was added later because people used to stick their hands through the bars, using them to climb over the fence, and then it would take just a few minutes to make it into town.

"We know that over time they’re going to defeat this fencing, this brand new fencing as well. But as of right now this is the best stuff we’ve got and it’s doing a much better job for us," says Agle.

It's doing a better job of slowing down illegal border crossers, giving agents more time to catch those who are not deterred by the fence.

http://www.kens5.com/news/Border-fence-evolves-but-how-long-before--133781888.html

Mass unites Mexicans, Americans separated by border fence

2011-11-03T20:46:00.000-07:00

Catholic News Service
November 3, 2011
by Joseph Kolb

ANAPRA, Mexico (CNS) -- The Mexican bishop often exchanged glances with his American counterpart as they celebrated the All Souls' Day Mass. But instead of embracing at the kiss of peace, they touched palms -- though the chain-link fence.

Hundreds of Mexicans and Americans joined their bishops for the Mass, enduring dusty wind that created a brown haze. On the Mexican side of the border, on a lot surrounded by trash, wandering dogs, and food vendors, a handful of the 200 attendees paid little attention to the Mass but clung to the fence and stared longingly at the congregation on the U.S. side.

Bishop Armando X. Ochoa of El Paso, Texas, Bishop Ricardo Ramirez of Las Cruces, New Mexico, and Bishop Renato Ascencio Leon of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, concelebrated the annual border Mass on either side of the fence. The theme for this year's Mass was Remembering Our Dead; Celebrating Life; Working for Justice.

Betty Hernandez, 30, a mother of three and a youth minister at Corpus Christi Church in Anapra, said the Mass helps unify El Paso and Ciudad Juarez in a common cause of remembering those who have died in the drug violence as well as those who died in the nearby deserts, hoping to immigrate to the United States. Making this Mass even more poignant for Hernandez was the death of her neighbor, who was gunned down at a nearby burrito stand the previous week.

"Where there is an abundance of pain and death is God's glory for us to hope," she said.

As a youth minister in Anapra, which has seen more than its share of the violence, Hernandez tries to keep the teens involved in church activities, from the band and singers for Masses to ushers wearing their red smocks as a deterrent to the temptation of the easy money and violence associated with drug cartels. Many of these teens sat on the outskirts of the celebration amid the trash and wood-pallet fences that surrounded some of the nearby homes.

Behind Bishop Ascencio on the altar were seminarians from Seminario Conciliar in Ciudad Juarez. Father Hector Villa, rector, said their presence underscores much of what they are learning for their future ministries.

"This Mass is a sign of solidarity, especially for immigrants who try to cross the border and encounter so many troubles to reach their goal," Father Villa said. "We're asking the authorities in the U.S. to be more just with the people who want a dignified life through work, and this is also a subtle sign for Mexico that they are responsible for providing work for these people."

Father Villa said he would like his 94 seminarians to be more exposed to real-life issues -- such as violence and immigration -- sooner rather than later.

"The church can definitely help more by being more organized and active in this moment where immigrants are seen as enemies," he said. "These people give so much to the U.S. in terms of work, culture, and money."

During the Mass, Bishop Ascencio accepted symbols of the migrants' journey to the United States: flags from Latin American countries of origin, a portrait of Our Lady of Guadalupe, a gallon jug of water, a backpack and tennis shoes.

When the Mass was initiated in 1999 it was at the height of the infamous murders of Daughters of Juarez, female factory workers who disappeared and were later found to be sexually assaulted and murdered. Some were buried in shallow graves not far from where the Mass was celebrated. The number of these victims has been projected as high as 400.

Since 2006, Ciudad Juarez has seen about 8,500 murders as a result of a brutal drug war. And amid the death and sorrow are issues with immigration and human rights that include a redefinition of immigration from those not only seeking gainful employment in the United States, but those fleeing the violence of Ciudad Juarez. It is estimated that more than 200,000 people have fled the once vibrant city since 2006.

Before the Mass, Mexican children ran along the border fence some 50 yards behind the makeshift altar. The group quickly grew in size as a U.S. Border Patrol agent went back and forth between his unit and the fence.

Upon closer examination he was found distributing Halloween candy through the fence to the children. Asked about his covert act of generosity, he just smiled and said, "It's no big deal."

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1104321.htm

Border Fence Into Pacific Ocean To Be Rebuilt

2011-11-03T20:42:00.000-07:00

KPBS
November 3, 2011
By Ruxandra Guidi

SAN DIEGO — The "surf fence" runs 300-feet into the Pacific Ocean. It was originally built between 1993 and 1994 as a barrier to illegal border crossers and smugglers.

The new fence will look essentially the same: Metal pipes, 6-inches in diameter, rising out of the sand, with 4-inches in between. But it is designed to stay in good shape for as long as 30 years.

"The fencing is just another tool that we have," said Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Michael Jimenez, referring to its design. "It helps to slow down the entry of these people to give our agents a chance to make an arrest. Because a fence alone isn't going to stop people from coming in."

But the fence is designed to be wide enough for fish and other wildlife to make it back and forth across the border.

Rebuilding efforts in this and other parts of the Southwestern border fence have been delayed over the years, due to environmental impact assessments for things like land use, geology, and protected species.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/nov/03/mexico-illegal-immigration-tijuana-san-diego/

Environment key in border bill

2011-11-01T14:09:00.000-07:00

San Antoanio Express-News
October 31, 2011
by Jason Buch

Both sides of a debate over a proposed law giving the Border Patrol more access to protected lands say they're trying to do what's right for the environment.

The National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act would waive laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Air Act on federal lands within 100 miles of the border, affecting protected areas such as Big Bend National Park.

Environmentalists say the law could contribute to the decline of habitat for animals such as the endangered ocelot and jaguarundi, small wildcats whose range extends into South Texas. Proponents of the bill say restricting Border Patrol activity in federally protected borderlands just creates lanes for smugglers, who have no regard for the environment.

The act moved out of a House committee last month. Similar legislation has been introduced in the Senate.

The bill by U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, allows the Border Patrol to build roads and other infrastructure on federally protected lands by waiving more than two dozen environmental and historical regulations. Agents are inhibited in some places by not being able to move freely through federal lands, said Shawn Moran, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council, a union representing agents.

“The amount of trash and damage illegals are causing far outweighs any damage that Border Patrol agents would do,” Moran said. “Our position is, if federal agencies or state agencies say the Border Patrol can't go through a certain area, then the cartels or the smugglers are going to find out about that and exploit it, and it's going to do more damage to that area.”

Rosalinda Huey, a spokeswoman for the Border Patrol in the Rio Grande Valley, said the agency regularly works with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, ensuring that it has access to protected lands.

In South Texas, the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge and the Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge would be affected. Those are important stopovers for migratory birds, said Scott Nicol, co-chairman of the Sierra Club's Borderland Team.

It's also important that the limited habitat left for the ocelot and jaguarundi be protected, he said. The cats rely on small strips of vegetation along the river to travel between larger pieces of habitat.

“The big issue is just that (the Border Patrol) should be operating within the rule of law,” Nicol said. “It's kind of absurd to say that to enforce immigration laws ... they can violate any other law they want to.”

Nicol said he sees the bill more as an attempt to erode environmental regulations than to secure the border.

“These bills are not even about border security, because these are things the Border Patrol has not even asked for,” he said. “These are more generalized attacks on environmental regulation. They're basically just using border security as a convenient excuse because the average person says, ‘Do whatever you want to secure the border.'”

But Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, said the bill was amended to only affect federal lands, limiting its impact on environmental regulations.

“By stopping the illegal activity along the border, we will protect American lives and preserve wilderness areas for future generations to enjoy,” Smith said in a statement.

Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, a Democrat from Mercedes whose district includes some of the areas affected, said he'd need to see more evidence that the bill was needed before voting for it.

“I think we can allow the Border Patrol to do its work and at the same time protect our environment and our rare animals such as the jaguarundi, the ocelot and our migrating birds in deep South Texas,” Hinojosa said in a statement.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Environment-key-in-border-bill-2245425.php#ixzz1cSpbGBzI

Lawmakers seek waiver for border lands

2011-10-28T18:21:00.000-07:00

Helena Independent Record
October 28, 2011
by Mike Dennison

As a fight brews in Washington, D.C., over a bill giving the U.S. Border Patrol unfettered access on federal lands near international borders, the issue also has become a political football in the campaign between U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., and his Republican challenger, U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg.

Rehberg is a co-sponsor of the House bill, which says the Department of Homeland Security shall have access to “any public land managed by the federal government” for activities to secure the border.

The bill also enables the department to “waive” a whole host of environmental protection laws, such as the Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Wilderness Act and more than two dozen others.

Rehberg says the bill is no big deal, and merely attempts to resolve a “turf battle” between Homeland Security and the departments of Interior and Agriculture, so the Border Patrol can have access to national forest, national park and other federal lands without having to ask permission.

“We’ve got pretty good access to the border on state and private lands, but face serious challenges on federal lands,” he says. “So, guess where the criminals set up their operations? On federal lands.”

Tester, as well as other Montana Democrats and Democratic groups, have roundly criticized the bill and Rehberg’s sponsorship, saying the measure gives too much power to Homeland Security, allowing the agency to use federal lands any way it chooses, with no public input or recourse.

“Rehberg’s proposal has very little to do with border security and everything to do with allowing the government to trample on rights, nullify existing laws and ignore public accountability in order to meet its own definition of homeland security,” says Aaron Murphy, a spokesman for Tester.

Murphy notes that the three agencies — Interior, Agriculture and Homeland Security — have had a “memorandum of understanding” in place since 2006, on cooperative security efforts on federal lands near the border. It’s working well and the bill isn’t needed, he says.

Rehberg and supporters of the bill, including groups that represent current and former Border Patrol agents, insist the bill is not an Orwellian takeover of public land, and say they don’t understand why Tester — a vocal proponent of border security — is taking a hard line against it.

They also say the U.S. Senate in 2009, with unanimous consent, supported a similar amendment that prohibited Interior Department funds from restricting Homeland Security’s enforcement of border laws or construction of a border fence.

Tester says the comparison isn’t accurate, because the 2009 amendment did not waive environmental laws, prevent public input or give Homeland Security a blank check to do whatever it wanted on public lands.

“If Homeland Security wanted to stop sales on Forest Service land, challenge tribal sovereignty, build watch-towers in Glacier Park or build roads across the Bob Marshall Wilderness, (Rehberg’s) bill allows it,” Murphy said.

Rehberg says these claims are overblown, and that he supported an amendment to the bill that would prevent Homeland Security from stopping approved uses of public land, such as grazing and recreation.

“Despite the hyperbole from environmental obstructionists, the Border Patrol is not empowered to strip-mine Glacier National Park or build eight-lane freeways through the wilderness,” he said. “We can strike a reasonable balance that acknowledges it’s better to allow access to law enforcement than leave our public lands and public safety at the mercy of criminals.”

http://helenair.com/news/state-and-regional/lawmakers-seek-waiver-for-border-lands/article_4f2d2b0e-012a-11e1-ae7b-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1c6qyG5Hk

Lawmakers say environmental laws should be waived for Border Patrol operations

2011-10-27T14:51:00.000-07:00

Los Angeles Times / Associated Press
October 27, 2011

WASHINGTON — Federal agents trying to patrol the U.S.-Mexico border say they’re hampered by laws that keep them from driving vehicles on huge swaths of land because it falls under U.S. environmental protection, leaving it to wildlife — and illegal immigrants and smugglers who can walk through the territory undisturbed.

A growing number of lawmakers are saying such restrictions have turned wilderness areas into highways for criminals. In recent weeks, three congressional panels, including two in the GOP-controlled House and one in the Democratic-controlled Senate, have moved to give the Border Patrol unfettered access to all federally managed lands within 100 miles of the border with Mexico.

Two of the panels expanded the legislation’s reach to include the border with Canada.

The votes signal a brewing battle in Congress that will determine whether border agents can disregard environmental protections as they do their job.

Dozens of environmental laws were waived for the building of the border fence, and activists say this is just another conservative attempt to find an excuse to do away with environmental protections.

But agents who have worked along the border say the laws crimp their power to secure the border.

Zack Taylor, a retired Border Patrol agent who lives about nine miles from the Arizona-Mexico border, said smugglers soon learn the areas that agents are least likely to frequent.

“The (smuggling) route stays on public lands from the border to Maricopa County,” Taylor said, referring to the state’s most populous county. “The smugglers have free rein. It has become a lawless area.”

Environmental groups said lawmakers lining up to support the legislation have routinely opposed the Endangered Species Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and dozens of other laws, and they accused the lawmakers of using illegal immigration as the latest excuse to gut protections.

“For every problem that’s out there in society, there’s some extremists in Congress who say the solution is, ‘Well, let’s roll back the environmental laws, let’s open up the public lands,’” said Paul Spitler, spokesman for the Wilderness Society. “It doesn’t comport to reality, but it fits their mindset that it’s simply the environmental regulations that are holding back America.”

Nearly 40 percent of the land on the U.S.-Mexico border and about a quarter of the land on the U.S.-Canadian border is public land, including Big Bend National Park in Texas and Glacier National Park in Montana. Driving is prohibited on those parts of the land that are designated wilderness areas.

Wildlife officials say vehicle use can be particularly hazardous in the desert. Water gathers in the tire tracks instead of in natural pools and evaporates more quickly, leading to less vegetation and less available food. Some areas, such as Big Bend and the desert farther west, are deadly to traverse in certain months and immigrants and smugglers avoid them.

The wilderness areas also have other restrictions on development. Border patrol agents, for example, must get permission from other federal agencies before maintaining roads and installing surveillance equipment. Federal auditors found it can take months to get that permission.

“What the Border Patrol says they really need down there is not necessarily more manpower or money,” said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, whose bill easing the restrictions passed the House Natural Resources Committee along party lines. “They need more east-west access on those public lands.”

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., sponsored an amendment that requires the Agriculture and Interior departments to give Border Patrol personnel immediate access to federal lands on the southern border for security activities, including for routine motorized patrols. The amendment passed a Senate committee with the support of five Democrats and eight Republicans.

McCain told colleagues that up to 100 people sit on mountaintops near the border serving as lookouts for smugglers, suggesting that improved law enforcement access on those mountains would deter the lookouts.

“What he says is absolutely true,” said Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who visited Arizona with McCain. “For the life of me, I can’t understand the hesitancy on the part of Interior or Agriculture to provide access to border security guards.”

Rep. Ben Quayle, R-Ariz., sponsored a similar amendment that extends the law to the Canadian border as well, and it passed by a voice vote, which is usually reserved for noncontroversial legislation.

During a House subcommittee hearing in April, Ron Vitiello, deputy chief of the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, said he had “no complaints” about environmental laws.

But George McCubbin, president of the union that represents about 17,000 Border Patrol agents and support staff, likened current policy to telling city police officers they can’t patrol a particular neighborhood.

“If they want to get serious about this problem on the border, they can’t be restricting areas we go in,” said McCubbin, who works in Casa Grande, Ariz. “Don’t let us there and you have nothing but the bad element going through that area.”

The Government Accountability Office, Congress’ investigative arm, reported that supervisors at 17 of 26 Border Patrol stations along the Mexican border said access to federal lands had been limited because of environmental restrictions. Yet, the vast majority of the agents in charge also said that they were generally able to adjust their patrols without sacrificing effectiveness.

Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups cite the GAO’s findings in arguing against giving the Border Patrol authority to operate as it sees fit on federal lands.

“The record is clear. The problem this bill claims to be solving does not exist,” said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz. “So, if this is not about border security, what is it about? It’s about undermining fundamental environmental protections for millions of Americans.”

Bishop said federal agents would be better stewards of sensitive lands than illegal immigrants and smugglers.

“What is so ironic is that the environmental degradation is not being done by the Border Patrol,” Bishop said. “It’s being done by the illegals who are coming across.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-government/lawmakers-say-environmental-laws-should-be-waived-for-border-patrol-operations/2011/10/27/gIQAcu4ALM_story.html

How to Build a Deadly Electric Border Fence

2011-10-24T19:12:00.000-07:00

Mother Jones
October 24, 2011
Tim Murphy

Two Saturdays ago, Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain floated an idea to dramatically curb illegal immigration: build an electrified fence along the US-Mexico border that could kill people who try to cross it. The next day, he told NBC's David Gregory that he was joking. That Monday, he reverted to his original proposal after a summit with Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio. On Tuesday, at the GOP presidential debate in Las Vegas, Cain reiterated that he had been joking, but he refused to dismiss the idea of constructing an electrified barrier across the length of the border.

So could the United States really build an electrified fence along the entire length of the Mexican border? And how much would it cost?

First off, you'd have to build lots of fences. Dale Stoutenburg, mechanical technician with Gallagher Security—a multinational fence manufacturer that provides electrified barriers for ports, corrections facilities, and ranches—says the company is capable of building fences up to 75 miles long. If nothing else, they're pretty easy to power—given that the southern border is a desert, solar panels would provide a self-sufficient energy source. Stoutenburg says a panel the size of a big-screen TV could power a 50-mile stretch of 3,000-volt fence.

But from there, things quickly get complicated. Generally speaking, electrified security fences aren't designed to provide a lethal shock. "We refer to it as a 'safe but memorable' pulse; you don't want to attempt to climb it, but it's safe," says Nathan Leaphart, CFO of Electric Guard Dog, a South Carolina-based company that makes perimeter electric security fences. "Really, the lethal electric fence market is extremely small. To my understanding it's only for like maximum security prison-type situations. Occasionally, will see it on the local news, but frankly no one's ever asked me to build one."

Killing someone with an electric fence takes a good deal of engineering. It has a lot less to do with voltage than the force of the current. If the current isn't strong enough, the shockee might just keep on climbing—and if the current is too strong, the chances of it being lethal start to go back down. At 200 milliamps of current you might end up with third degree burns and be knocked unconscious for a bit, but on the upside, you'll be thrown off the fence almost immediately.

So if you really want a lethal fence, you'll need a sustained current (as opposed to a pulse, which switches on and off every couple of seconds) that's low enough so that the shockee will essentially be paralyzed and unable to release his or her grip, thereby staying on the fence long enough to killed. That kind of killer shock happens from time to time with livestock, which become entangled in electrified fences and die from the extended electrocution. Cain's proposed fence also calls for barbed wire on the top, which is not recommended for electric fences because of the risk that animals or people will become trapped on the fence. But in this case, since lethality is the goal, it would actually be a benefit.

If President Cain decided to go ahead with the construction of an entirely new fence the length of the border, he would run into another fairly significant hurdle: water. The Rio Grande doubles as the international border from El Paso to the Gulf of Mexico. It's anything but an unmovable line in the sand: In 2008, it rose 27 feet in some places and left parts of the Big Bend region in West Texas underwater. If an electrified fence is submerged, it could be rendered functionally useless.

"The fence would still try to power through the water to get through that, but it'd be bogged down so hard the shock value wouldn't be worth nothing," Stoutenburg says. Also, he says, "The real problem is moving water and what it carries with it." A downed power line or any large object in the floodwaters could function as a battering ram against the fence. Another problem is that a fence along the river could turn into a dam when the river spills over, potentially altering the course of the Rio Grande—and the border itself. "That would be very hard to control and unengineer and fix, and would be in violation of treaties with Mexico," says Matt Clark, of Defenders of Wildlife in Arizona, which monitors environmental issues in the Southwest.

So how much would this electrified border fence cost? First, you'd need to build a new fence from scratch; you couldn't simply run a wire through the existing stretches of fence. "We really can't electrify an existing fence," Leaphart says. "Just the way these electrical pulses work, you can't make it operate in something that's built in the manner that a chain link fence is built. It's an independent fence and you have to have isolated wires that are kept off of holes to keep them from [wearing] out. It really does have to be built separately."

Cain, along with Rep. Michele Bachmann, has specified that the fence should extend across the entire southern border and should be contiguous (as opposed to the "virtual fence" of surveillance cameras and drones the feds use in some parts). The border with Mexico is about 2,000 miles long, stretching from Brownsville, Texas, on the Gulf of Mexico to San Diego on the Pacific. But the per-mile cost of building a fence can fluctuate significantly—anywhere from $2 million to $70 million per mile depending on the terrain and the style of fence. It's relatively easy to get construction equipment and laborers to operate it in San Diego; it's a lot harder to get it into the middle of Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona. And no one's even tried to come up with a cost estimate for a fence through Big Bend National Park, which hugs 244 miles of the border in Texas. Much of that route is inaccessible to vehicle traffic, and a lot of it is inaccessible even by foot. Especially the part of the border that's a giant canyon

From the Border Patrol's perspective, there is no need for a fence in these kinds of inaccessible or inhospitable areas; the unrelenting desert is a sufficient obstacle. The agency maintains that only 652 miles of the southern border actually need a man-made physical deterrent; 649 miles of barriers and fences have already been installed.

So what's the bottom line? A 2006 Congressional Research Service report (PDF) found that the total cost of building and maintaining a fence along 700 miles of the border could be as high as $50 billion. The New York Times pegged it at about $22.4 billion to complete a contiguous border fence for the other 1,400 miles—and that's not including the cost of purchasing land. Those two calculations are a bit imprecise and based on different sets of assumptions—Cain himself might say they're "apples and oranges"—but they're at least a starting point. You might realistically peg the cost of a second fence, this one with a near-continuous electric pulse capable of killing a human, at certainly no less than $75 billion. And unlike the Great Wall of China, which Cain has previously floated as a model, the fence he's talking about building is only expected to last 20 to 25 years.

On the plus side, that makes the money spent on warning signs look like lunch money. As Cain noted, the electric border fence would have to have "a sign on the other side that says, 'It can kill you!'" But for liability purposes, you would want signs on both sides of the border, since the fence wouldn't discriminate between unlucky American citizens and foreigners. Leaphart's company recommends placing a warning sign every 50 to 100 feet. For the entire length of the border, that adds up to about 106,000 signs per side. Using the conservative assumption that the signs would cost $100 apiece, they'd cost $21.2 million. It's also considered standard practice to construct a barrier such as a nonelectric chain-link fence in front of the electrified fence, to prevent accidents.

To Cain's credit, there are precedents for constructing an electrified fence along the length of an international border. North Korea maintains its 151-mile demilitarized zone with South Korea through a combination of deadly electrified fences and land mines. India has built hundreds of miles of electrified fences through Kashmir to stop militants from smuggling weapons (though the project took 15 years). And ironically, Uzbekistan, which Cain recently referred to dismissively as "Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan," has built a 380-volt electrified fence along its 130-mile border with Afghanistan.

Update: Here's one last challenge, which applies to all border fences, but especially electric ones given the effe: how to deal with the Rio Grande's tributaries? The Pecos River, for instance, flows for 926 miles, before emptying into the Rio Grande.

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/10/herman-cain-border-electric-fence

Republican bill would allow Border Patrol to ignore environmental laws

2011-10-24T07:11:00.000-07:00

McClatchy Newspapers / Kansas City Star
October 23, 2011
By ROB HOTAKAINEN

WASHINGTON -House Republicans want to give the U.S. Border Patrol unprecedented authority to ignore 36 environmental laws on federal land in a 100-mile zone along the Canadian and Mexican borders.

If the legislation is approved, the Border Patrol would not have to comply with the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act and 32 other federal laws in such popular places as Olympic National Park, Glacier Park, the Great Lakes and the Boundary Waters Wilderness Area.

Under the GOP plan, the Border Patrol would have free rein to do such things as build roads and offices, put up fences, set up surveillance equipment and sensors, and use aircraft and vehicles to patrol in all national parks, forests and federal land in the zone.

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, said the Border Patrol "has become encumbered with layers of environmental regulations," making it difficult to deal with drug smugglers, human traffickers and other criminals who are targeting public lands along the U.S. borders.

The committee passed the plan on a 26-17 party-line vote this month.

A vote by the full House is expected soon, though no date has been set, and similar legislation has been introduced in the Senate.

In Washington state, where the zone would include nearly half the state, Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire is questioning why such a law is needed. She noted that the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Border Patrol, has not asked for the change.

"The current approach, partnering with sister agencies - Interior and USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) - seems a reasonable approach," Gregoire said.

Environmental groups say they're alarmed by the proposal.

Jane Danowitz, the Pew Environment Group's director of public lands, called the plan a sweeping waiver of environmental laws that would allow a single federal agency to destroy wildlife habitat and wetlands and hurt water quality.

"We're talking about waiving laws that protect habitat and clean air and clean water in national parks and other beloved places that Americans really cherish - and that belong to all of us," she said.

Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee's subcommittee on forests and public lands Subcommittee and the bill's chief sponsor, said the legislation is needed because the Border Patrol does not have sufficient access to millions of acres of federally controlled land.

"The policies of the United States unfortunately and unwittingly make it easier for illegals to come across public lands," he said.

While the Border Patrol has access to federal lands, it must follow procedures set up by other agencies. The bill would change that by giving the Border Patrol immediate access to any federal land. And it would specifically bar the U.S. Department of Interior and the USDA from "impeding, prohibiting or restricting" any work done by the Border Patrol in the 100-mile zone. The law would expire in five years.

At a hearing of Bishop's subcommittee in July, the Obama administration said it the legislation is unnecessary.

Kim Thorsen, a deputy assistant secretary with the Department of Interior, said a better way to protect the border would be to use "the current approach of collaborating among departments and using the best expertise in each to solve problems."

"We also believe that these two objectives - securing our borders and conserving our federal lands - are not mutually exclusive," she said. "We are not faced with a choice between the two. Instead, we can - and should - do both."

John Leshy, a professor at the U.C. Hastings College of the Law, told the subcommittee that he questions whether such a law would be constitutional, calling the bill "the most breathtakingly extreme legislative proposal of its kind I have ever seen."

"I firmly believe this legislation goes way, way beyond what is necessary and proper, in our constitutional system, to enforce the immigration laws," Leshy said.

Rep Edward Markey, D-Mass., the ranking minority member the Natural Resources Committee, called the bill shortsighted and "just nonsense."

"Expert after expert has explained to House Republicans that waiving all environmental protections affecting the air, water and entire ecosystems within 100 miles of our borders is not the answer to border security challenges, but they turned a deaf ear with this misguided legislation," Markey said.

Supporters of the legislation have enlisted support from a wide variety of groups, including the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, United Four-Wheel Drive Associations, the National Association of Police Organizations and the Motorcycle Industry Council. The motorcycle group said an unsecured border "that allows terrorists or other lawbreakers to roam our public lands represents a real threat to riders who wish to responsibly recreate near these lands."

At first, backers wanted to create a 100-mile zone that would extend around the entire nation. But as a compromise, they scaled back the proposal, dropping off federal land that borders the West and East coasts.

As a result, the zone would stretch from Washington to Maine in the north, and from California to Texas in the south.

The bill, which the GOP calls the National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act, is part of the 2010 "Pledge to America," in which Republicans vowed to give the Border Patrol more "tools and authorities to establish operational control" along the U.S. borders.

Hastings called it an attempt "to prioritize national security over bureaucratic red tape."

Danowitz said House Republicans are trying to use national security as a reason to weaken clean air and water laws, knowing that such proposals would never pass on their own. And she called the bill part of a GOP trend, representing one of many pieces of anti-environmental legislation moving in Hastings' committee and the GOP-led House.

"The number of proposals to roll back key environmental protections is so large that almost anything can happen," Danowitz said. "And this is largely going on without real public awareness. That combination is not a good one."

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/23/3224702/republican-bill-would-allow-border.html#ixzz1bhneiMNH

Judge: Arizona has no right to sue feds on border

2011-10-22T09:42:00.000-07:00

Arizona Daily Star
October 22, 2011

PHOENIX - Arizona has no legal right to sue the federal government for failing to secure the border, a federal judge ruled Friday.

Judge Susan Bolton acknowledged federal law directs the Department of Homeland Security to achieve "operational control" of the border. A separate law requires construction of at least 700 miles of fencing.

But the judge said those are only goals, and Congress set no deadline for when the fence needs to be completed. Bolton said that means Arizona cannot seek - and she cannot grant - an order for the federal government to do something.

Bolton also rejected the state's claim the federal government, in failing to secure the border, was somehow hijacking state funds. That is based on the state's contention it is forced to spend money to educate, provide medical care for and in some cases incarcerate illegal immigrants.

The judge said, though, nothing the federal government is or is not doing requires the state to take any action. "The complained-of expenditures arise entirely from Arizona's own policy choices and independent constitutional obligations and are not incurred as a result of any federal mandate," Bolton wrote.

And Bolton made quick work of some of the state's other claims, including one contending the government is violating the federal Constitution by failing to protect the country from "an invasion of undocumented aliens."

She pointed out a federal appellate court rejected precisely the same arguments more than a decade ago and spurned arguments by Attorney General Tom Horne that the border situation has gotten worse since then, allowing Arizona to renew its bid.

Horne said Bolton's ruling comes as no surprise, particularly with Bolton, as a trial judge, powerless to overturn the earlier appellate ruling.

Horne vowed to take the issue back to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to try to persuade the judges to reconsider their 1995 ruling and allow the state to force the government to do more to keep out those crossing the border illegally.

That will be the state's second appeal of a Bolton decision on the issue.

Arizona's legal bid is actually a counterclaim to the lawsuit filed last year by the Obama administration challenging the legality of SB 1070.

The counterclaim is based on Horne's contention that Congress gave the Department of Homeland Security a specific order to "achieve and maintain operational control for the Arizona-Mexico border."

Bolton, in Friday's ruling, said that is true. But she also said that does not give Arizona any right to sue.

"The act creates an objective and leaves the DHS and the (homeland security) secretary with a great deal of discretion in deciding how to achieve it," she wrote.

Nor was Bolton convinced that Arizona could demand she order fencing.

"No deadline mandates completion of the fencing and infrastructure development or any required discrete action by a specific time," the judge wrote of that federal law. And Bolton said the law gives Homeland Security "substantial discretion in determining where to build fencing, where to use alternative infrastructure improvements rather than fencing, and how best to develop a comprehensive program to prevent illegal immigration."

Bolton also rejected a separate claim that the Department of Justice owes hundreds of millions of dollars to Arizona to pay for the cost of incarcerating illegal immigrants who have violated state laws.

She said the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program does allow the federal government to reimburse the states for their costs. But she also pointed out that Congress has not appropriated enough to fully cover the cost of the program for years, leaving it up to the Department of Justice to decide how to divide the available cash. Bolton said that decision is "explicitly committed" to the discretion of Attorney General Eric Holder.

Gov. Jan Brewer issued a statement of her disappointment:

"It is but the latest chapter in a story that Arizonans know all too well: The federal government ignores its constitutional and statutory duty to secure the border. Federal courts avert their eyes. American citizens pay the price."

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/judge-arizona-has-no-right-to-sue-feds-on-border/article_13dbf548-fb03-5650-87d6-086a7153600e.html

Some Cheer Border Fence as Others Ponder the Cost

2011-10-20T21:00:00.000-07:00

New York Times
October 19, 2011
by Julia Preston

In the debate over immigration among the Republican presidential candidates, Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota signed a pledge last week to build double-fencing the entire length of the 2,000-mile border with Mexico.

Herman Cain called for an electrified border fence, 20 feet high with barbed wire.

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, claiming superior experience as the leader of the state with 1,200 miles of the border, advocated a more complex strategy, combining fencing and surveillance technology with “a lot of boots on the ground.” Mr. Perry said that building a border-length fence would take “10 to 15 years and $30 billion” and would not be cost-effective.

Proposals for an imposing border fence have drawn cheers at Republican rallies. Border security appears to be an area where some Republican candidates are ready to set aside their priority on fiscal discipline, since security analysts say very little research is available on how much a border-length fence would cost.

Based on what studies do exist, the analysts say that building and maintaining a fence through the remote or hostile terrain along the border would run into billions of dollars, with no documented impact on diminishing illegal crossings.

So far border authorities have built 650 miles of hard fence along the southwest border, including about 299 miles of vehicle barriers.

In 2009, the Congressional Search Service reported that the Department of Homeland Security had spent roughly up to $21 million per mile to build a primary fence near San Diego. The cost had ballooned as the fence extended into hills and gullies along the line.

The same year, Customs and Border Protection estimated costs of building an additional 3.5 miles of fence near San Diego at $16 million per mile. Even this lower figure would yield a rough projection of $22.4 billion for a single fence across the 1,400 miles remaining today.

These estimates do not include the costs of acquiring land, nor the expense of maintaining a fence that is exposed to constant efforts by illegal crossers to bore through it or under it or to bring it down. In March, Customs and Border Protection estimated it would cost $6.5 billion “to deploy, operate and maintain” the existing border fencing over an expected maximum lifetime of 20 years. The agency reported repairing 4,037 breaches in 2010 alone.

Border Patrol officials have not been eager to extend the fence beyond its current length. In testimony in the House of Representatives on Oct. 4, Michael J. Fisher, the Border Patrol chief, said the existing fence covered the ground “where Border Patrol field commanders determined it was operationally required.”

The Border Patrol has welcomed fences in urban areas or at heavily traveled crossing points, where they slow illegal crossers, giving agents time to detain them. But border authorities have focused instead on flying unmanned drones to more accurately scan the length of the border and building forward stations so that agents can be posted closer to the line.

Richard F. Cortez, the mayor of the Texas border town of McAllen, noted that much of the state’s border is defined by rivers. “It is a winding river,” Mr. Cortez, a political independent, said in an interview on Wednesday. “Where in the world are you going to put fencing? To propose that suggests ignorance of the border and the terrain.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/us/politics/border-fence-raises-cost-questions.html

Texas border fence stars in presidential campaign

2011-10-18T22:08:00.000-07:00

Fort Worth Star Telegram
October 17, 2011
by Dave Montgomery

PEÑITAS -- For more than a half-century, Leonardo and Anita Ramirez could look out the back of their small frame home at the sloping landscape leading down to the Rio Grande.

That changed about two years ago, when the federal government stretched a massive $6.2 million-a-mile barrier through the rural land where they have made their home since 1950.

Their backyard view now consists of aesthetically challenged square metal poles that reach at least 18 feet high and impair their once-easy access to the river.

The towering barrier that divides the Ramirezes' land near the small community of Peñitas, in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, is part of nearly 650 miles of fencing that Congress authorized in 2006 in response to a public outcry over illegal immigration and potential violence from Mexico.

Of that total, 112 miles are in Texas, stretching from Brownsville through the populous metropolitan region that includes Edinburg, McAllen and Mission.

Construction of the fencing followed contentious public debate that included lawsuits, environmental challenges and homeowner protests. Now, presidential politics is kindling a new showdown over the worthiness of border barriers.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., has pledged to push for construction of a fence along the entire length of the border. By contrast, Gov. Rick Perry has described a full-length fence as "idiocy," though he embraces limited fencing in strategic locations.

The issue is part of a larger dispute over illegal immigration that could resurface in tonight's Republican debate in Las Vegas. Perry has been put on the defensive by opponents who charge that he is soft on illegal immigration because of his support of a 2007 Texas law that permitted in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants.

He has responded to the criticism by pointing to the state's five-year, $400 million-plus law enforcement effort on the border, portraying himself as the toughest candidate in the race when it comes to border security.

GOP rivals

Bachmann is the first candidate to sign a pledge circulated by a newly formed group calling for completion of a double fence along the full length of the border before the end of 2013. The group, Americans for Securing the Border, is led by Van D. Hipp Jr., a former Republican Party chairman in South Carolina who served as deputy assistant Army secretary under President George H.W. Bush.

Hipp said his group has been up and running for only about three weeks but is generating strong support from voters demanding tough measures to support the border.

"It's one of the most important national security issues of our time," Hipp said. His organization is calling on all candidates for president as well as the House and Senate to sign the pledge.

Ryan Williams, press secretary for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, said Monday that the campaign has not seen the pledge but "would certainly be open to reviewing it." He said Romney, who is the front-runner for the Republican nomination, "supports a border fence" to crack down on illegal immigration.

Allison Castle, communications director in the Texas governor's office, said Perry "supports fencing in strategic areas such as those with high population density, but for the hundreds of miles of remote land in between, the most effective border security strategy is to increase the patrol presence on the ground, in the air, and in the water with personnel and advanced technology."

Perry has repeatedly opposed the concept of a full-length barrier. During a trade visit to Mexico City in 2007, according to The Associated Press, he said a border-length wall is "idiocy" and "absolutely would not work."

Leaky fencing

The 649 miles of fencing in four U.S. border states was authorized by the Secure Fence Act, which then-President George W. Bush signed into law in October 2006. The barriers, according to the Border Patrol, include 350 miles of fencing to stop pedestrians, constructed at a cost of $6.5 million per mile, and 299 miles of fencing to repel vehicles, which cost $1.8 million per mile.

The designs include wire mesh, chain link, metal posts and upright metal landing mats. The Hidalgo County segment that bisects Leonardo and Anita Ramirez's property includes metal poles atop concrete as part of a Rio Grande levee.

"We tried to stop it from being built," said Feliberto Ramirez of Houston, the Ramirez's 54-year-old son. "It's not doing the job."

Critics say the barriers constitute an elongated eyesore, particularly in populous areas, and come nowhere close to plugging the border.

Access roads that allow passage for U.S. residents are easily exploited by illegal intruders, many residents say. And then there's the now-timeworn joke that the wall has caused a boom in the Mexican ladder industry.

Cuban "Rusty" Monsees, who lives near Brownsville, says illegal crossers can "shinny up" the 18-foot poles on his property and often come up to his house at night. "They ask for food, they ask for use of the cellphone, they ask for a ride into town," he said.

Deterrent factor

But Border Patrol officials say the fence serves as a deterrent and has contributed substantially to a downturn in illegal crossings. As a result of a combination of measures, including fencing and an expanded Border Patrol presence, apprehensions in 2010 numbered 447,000, compared to 540,000 in 2009 and 1.6 million in 2000, said Border Patrol spokesman Bill Brooks.

He said the fence provides an impediment to illegal entries, giving Border Patrol officers more time to catch crossers. Agents also aggressively patrol along the fence looking for crossers.

"The fence does exactly what it was intended to do," Brooks said.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/10/17/3451733/border-fence-returns-to-political.html

The Burden of Borders

2011-10-17T14:22:00.000-07:00

The Scientist
October 17, 2011
by Jesse Lasky

Jaguars once ranged across the US southwest, but a campaign of extermination up until the 1960s eliminated them from the region. In recent decades a few individuals crossed from Mexico into the United States and took up residence in Arizona and New Mexico, but the jaguar’s recolonization in the States is up against a literal barrier—the extensive man-made fences and walls along the US-Mexico border.

Besides the burden posed to US jaguar recolonization, border barriers pose an extraordinary threat to other species and entire ecosystems. Barriers have recently been constructed across a huge scale, and are not subject to any environmental regulation. As such, dozens of environmental protection laws that we rely upon to protect us and our surrounding ecosystems are legally nullified when the US government chooses to build barriers. The risk is exceptional because the US-Mexico border passes straight through the most biodiverse landscapes of the United States. Large strips of habitat were destroyed and disturbed in the construction of about 700 miles of barriers, along with accompanying roads and nighttime stadium-lighting, all of which involves massive clearing of vegetation and disturbed soil from construction. Furthermore, the fences prevent many larger animals from traveling the large distances necessary to find resources or mates.

Border barriers are a particularly high threat to isolated populations, which face an increased risk of extinction. Populations that get wiped out from a natural disaster are less likely to be re-colonized by others of their species if they cannot migrate easily due to barriers. Additionally, when populations do not exchange migrants, the members of a small isolated population will mate only with each other. This inbreeding results in lower genetic diversity, slowing adaptive evolutionary change and potentially increasing deleterious recessive alleles that depress survival and reproduction. Large mammals like desert bighorn sheep, which are federally protected in the US and Mexico, are particularly under threat. Their populations interconnect across the international border and their migrations will likely be disrupted by fences. Indeed, previous research has found them to be particularly sensitive to interstate highways, for example, that blocked migration and led to a rapid loss of genetic diversity.

Finally, border fences pose a threat to species like jaguars that are in the process of shifting or expanding their ranges in response to environmental change, or other ecological factors. As the Earth warms, many populations have begun moving towards the North and South poles, or towards higher elevations, tracking their preferred climates. Barriers that run latitudinally, such as those along the US-Mexico border, may block species from expanding their range, causing them to be squeezed against the border.

Tim Keitt (University of Texas at Austin), Walter Jetz (Yale University), and I recently published a study that for the first time assessed the risk posed by border barriers to all species of amphibians, reptiles, and non-flying mammals. We identified which border species are most threatened by barriers across their range, such as species with small ranges that could be at risk of extinction from current barriers. In particular, we identified 23 species that already have more than 50 percent of their range blocked by barriers, three of which are listed as globally threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). According to our analysis, the wildlife of the California Coast and the Gulf Coast face the greatest threats from current barriers.

Clearly, there is a fundamental conflict between wildlife and the border patrol. On one hand, migration is critical to many wildlife species and secretive animals like to move under the cover of vegetation or night. On the other hand, the border patrol wants to increase visibility and decrease the permeability of the border to stop illegal crossing by humans. For example, the border patrol plans to spray herbicide along the Rio Grande to eradicate Arundo donax, an invasive species of reed that grows tall and dense and provides a good hiding place.

One alternative to physical barriers may be improved remote-sensing technology to allow the border patrol to identify illegal border-crossing without disrupting wildlife dispersal. However, the government recently canceled a “virtual fence” system of remote sensors because it became very expensive and often malfunctioned.

Perhaps a more practical way of reducing the conflict between wildlife and the border patrol is to reduce the quantity of illegal border traffic in other manners, such as improvement in economic conditions in Mexico, increased numbers of worker visas, and policies that reduce the flow of illegal guns and drugs across the border. Some politicians continue to focus on barrier construction, however. The Secretary of Homeland Security still has the authority to fence the entire border at any time, unchecked by any regulatory law, and a bill introduced this year by a Utah Republican Representative would extend the unregulated areas to border patrol activities within 100 miles of the Canadian and Mexican borders. The Obama administration has been pursuing immigration reform that would be linked to heightened border security, possibly by means of physical barriers. And lower level governments may also build barriers; the Arizona State Senate, for example, has recently passed legislation authorizing construction of pedestrian fences.

With such efforts underway, it is imperative that we recognize and study environmental impacts of border barriers. With the proper policy changes and conservation actions, we can limit the ecological damage caused by border policies.

http://the-scientist.com/2011/10/17/opinion-the-burden-of-borders/

Michele Bachmann Signs "Double Border Fence" Pledge Written by Ex-Con Lobbyist

2011-10-17T07:11:00.000-07:00

Comedy Central
October 17, 2011
by Ilya Gerner

This weekend, Michele Bachmann delivered her message on immigration policy the only way she knows how: with all the subtlety of a jackhammer. More precisely, the subtlety of a jackhammer to be used in the construction of a "date certain, secure double fence across the entire US border with Mexico prior to the end of 2013."

Speaking in Perry, Iowa — see what she did there! — a town whose population is approximately one-third Latino, Bachmann pledged to continue demonizing the people who have "taken" America's most desirable meatpacking plant jobs so that their children might have a chance at an education…

"She castigated a Texas law that allows illegal immigrants under certain circumstances to pay in-state tuition at colleges and universities — a policy Perry has said he supports. Such a policy deprives citizens of opportunities, she said, and acts as a "magnet" drawing illegal immigrants into the country…

"Bachmann signed the pledge, circulated by recently established nonprofit group Americans for Securing the Border, to build a double fence along the entire border by 2013.

"The group is grassroots and citizen-funded and aims to promote political action over rhetoric, said Chairman Van D. Hipp Jr."

Of course, "illegal immigrants" are "illegal" in the sense that they committed a civil misdemeanor, not a criminal offense, when crossing the border without inspection. But in the interest of fairness, I should defer to Van D. Hipp Jr. on this question, since he appears to have much more first-hand experience with the justice system than I can claim…

"Former [South Carolina] state Republican Chairman Van D. Hipp Jr., who was sentenced Monday to five years' probation and fined $5,000 for accepting illegal campaign contributions, said he would be crazy to return to politics. "I told my family if they see me going to a precinct meeting they have the right to have me committed to a mental institution," said Hipp…"

"In return for the guilty plea, the government dismissed a 14-count fraud and money laundering indictment stemming from operation of a phone sex business.

"That indictment alleged Hipp recruited people to open merchant credit card accounts to process credit card charges for B.C. Services of Mount Pleasant, a phone sex provider."
Well, as long as he's paid his debt to society (house arrest, probation, and 200 hours of community service), I suppose we can trust Hipp with setting the nation's border security agenda. I mean, there's also the issue of Hipp being chairman of American Defense International, Inc., a Washington D.C.-based lobbying firm that represents dozens of construction and contracting firms who could benefit from a massive government contract to build the fence, but what's a conflict of interest or two between friends?

http://www.indecisionforever.com/2011/10/17/michele-bachmann-signs-double-border-fence-pledge-written-by-ex-con-lobbyist/

Border plans rankle some

2011-10-16T08:45:00.000-07:00

Bonner County Daily Bee
October 15, 2011
By CAMERON RASMUSSON

NAPLES — Nerves ran ragged Thursday over a generalized strategic plan for security along 4,000 miles of U.S.-Canadian border.

Despite reassurances that the document under discussion authorized no specific actions, public concerns over private property rights and intrusive security threatened to overtake the meeting.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials held the meeting to gather public opinion over a programmatic environmental impact statement that identifies several alternatives for future security strategies. CBP environmental planning chief Jennifer Hass said the PEIS lays the groundwork for any border security enhancements in the future.

“If specific projects are contemplated, we can use this document as a planning tool,” she said.

According to the agency’s statement of purpose, the plan provides CBP with “the flexibility to expand or alter its activities over the next five to seven years to maintain effective control of the northern border.”

However, the document’s inability to precisely identify those expansions or alterations fostered agitation among meeting attendees.

According to the PEIS itself, border officials identified five different policies they could implement.

A “no action” alternative simply maintains current operations.

The second alternative emphasizes construction of new Border Patrol stations while upgrading current stations.

The third alternative expands the use of short-range radar, ground sensors, unmanned aerial systems, wireless communications and other technologies.

The fourth alternative focuses on improving and creating roads, cutting trenches, constructing towers or raising fences to improve Border Patrol navigability and prevent illegal crossings.

Finally, the fifth alternative mixes elements from all the other strategies to create a balanced security policy.

The PEIS also ranks each plan based on the type, severity and likelihood of an impact on the social and natural environment.

“What we found was moderate or minor impacts regardless of the alternative,” said Bruce Kaplan, senior planner for MANGI Environmental Group. “The impacts we did find were mostly construction-related.”

According to Border Patrol information officer James Frackelton, illegal weapons transportation and drug trafficking are the primary reasons for enhancing security. However, he added that should security measures be revised, they will always take U.S. citizen well-being into account.

“After we do risk analysis, we’re going to do the thing that makes sense for the area and the taxpayers,” he said. “In the end, we’re working for you.”

Among all the listed alternatives, the prospect of fencing raised the most consternation. According to the document, fencing would be used in short-range sections to “manage movement in trouble spots where passage of cross-border violators is difficult to control.”

“We never intended the kind of fencing you might see on the southern border,” Hass said. “This is more along the lines of fencing you would use on your own property.”

Idaho Rep. George Eskridge, R-Dover, cautioned CBP officials to be very clear about the types of fencing under consideration. In a written statement, he urged the agency to find other means of enhancing security.

“No matter how small or short in distance, any unilateral action to build a fence sends the worst possible message to our neighbors and friends to the north as well as to the rest of the world,” he said.

Washington resident Johnna Exner also worried about the consequences of increased security. As the owner of property about a mile from the border, she attended the meeting to inquire about the safety of her land and animals. However, she had no love for current border crossing regulations.

“Probably half the people I know don’t go to Canada anymore,” she said. “It’s too much of a hassle.”

The PEIS will be under public review until Oct. 31. Visit www.northernborderpeis.com to read it in its entirety or file a comment.

http://www.bonnercountydailybee.com/news/local/article_1c0bba94-f6f6-11e0-a03d-001cc4c002e0.html

Bill before U.S. House would give Border Patrol unprecedented powers in Olympic National Park

2011-10-16T08:39:00.000-07:00

Peninsula Daily News
October 16, 2011
By Paul Gottlieb

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Border Patrol could build roads in Olympic National Park and other wilderness areas without approval from the federal departments of Interior and Agriculture under legislation that has survived a key congressional committee's vote.

House leadership is deciding if the National Security and Lands Protection Act, approved 26-17 on Oct. 5 by the House Committee on Natural Resources, will go to the House floor for a vote, committee spokeswoman Crystal Feldman said Friday.

The bill, HR 1505, would grant broad new powers to U.S. Customs and Border Protection — the umbrella agency for the Border Patrol — within 100 miles of the northern border with Canada and southern border with Mexico.

Under the provisions of the bill, the agency would have “immediate access” to any public land managed by the federal government “for purposes of conducting activities that assist in securing the border (including access to maintain and construct roads, construct a fence, use vehicles to patrol and set up monitoring equipment).”

It allows the agency to waive the Endangered Species Act and three dozen other mostly environmental laws within that zone and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, which guarantees access to religious sites and protection of “sacred objects.”

Republican U.S. Rep. Bob Bishop of Utah sponsored HR 1505 and chairs the Natural Resources Committee.

George Behan, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, whose constituency includes Clallam and Jefferson counties, said Friday that it's unlikely the bill will gain any traction.

“It's way too broad and is not expected to move anywhere other than [Bishop's] committee,” Behan said.

But it's created somewhat of a stir on the North Olympic Peninsula, where increased Border Patrol staffing and patrols sparked the formation of Port Angeles-based Stop the Checkpoints, which has picketed the site of a new, under-construction $5.7 million Border Patrol station two miles east of downtown Port Angeles.

“To me, this is like using the fear of immigration and terrorism to do away with environmental protections as part of the overall right-wing movement,” Lois Danks, the group's organizer, said last week.

Supporters of the proposed law said the legislation would put the Border Patrol on a level playing field with drug smugglers and human traffickers on the nation's southern border who have no regard for laws, environmental or otherwise, and can act with impunity in such regions as designated wilderness areas, where motorized transport is forbidden.

“Cartels have figured out that the Border Patrol can't maintain a routine presence on federal lands,” said Melissa Subbotin, spokeswoman for Bishop.

The bill seeks to achieve “operational control” over international land borders.

It would prevent the secretary of the interior, who manages Olympic National Park and other national parks, and the secretary of agriculture, who manages national forests — including Olympic National Forest — from blocking U.S. Customs and Border Protection's efforts to “achieve operational control” over a 100-mile band south of the Canadian border.

Operational control was defined by U.S. Border Patrol Chief Michael Fisher, testifying Feb. 15 before the House Committee on Homeland Security, as “the ability to detect, identify, classify and then respond to and resolve illegal entries along our U.S. Borders.”

To that end, the Border Patrol would be allowed to conduct vehicle patrols of designated wilderness areas, where motorized vehicles are otherwise banned.

The Border Patrol now has vehicle access to existing roads in Olympic National Park, said Blaine Sector spokesman Richard Sinks.

Sinks said the Border Patrol maintains “situational awareness” of wilderness areas by working with the Forest Service, Department of Interior and county, state and tribal law enforcement agencies and “is continually analyzing the threat to and through the wilderness park areas.”

But what about building a road in Olympic National Park where there isn't one now?

Border Patrol spokeswoman Kerry Rogers said the agency does not comment on pending legislation.

And park officials have not yet studied the bill and its implications, park spokeswoman Barb Maynes said Friday.

The law would open up to Border Patrol vehicular activity to the 44,258-acre Buckhorn Wilderness Area, which abuts Olympic National Park's eastern boundary, and the 166,825-acre Brothers Wilderness Area in Olympic National Forest in Jefferson County — where motorized vehicle traffic is not allowed.

That doesn't sit well with the Washington Wilderness Coalition, whose conservation director called the legislation “an extreme kind of overreaction.”

“It's like heating your house with a flamethrower,” Tom Uniack said, fearful the legislation could open the door to more widespread abandonment of “cornerstone environmental laws.”

The legislation was not aimed at activities on the U.S.-Canadian border, Subbotin said.

“It was written specifically to address issues along the southern border, but it's hard to exclude the northern border,” she said.

“This would remove the checkerboard pattern of where the Border Patrol can and can't patrol.”

Funding for such projects as roads also could be an issue.

Congress “would still have to appropriate funds” for road-building projects, Feldman said.

“The only reason they would construct roads is if there is criminal activity going on,” she added.

“They would need to ensure operational control at the border if there is evidence of criminal activity.”

Asked how likely it is that the Border Patrol would waive environmental and land management laws along the northern border, Feldman said, “It's an unlikely site for large-scale illegal entry.”

If passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama, the law would sunset in five years.

“That does not change my concerns at all,” Uniack said.

http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20111016/NEWS/310169986/bill-before-us-house-would-give-border-patrol-unprecedented-powers

Michele Bachmann vows to finish Mexico border fence

2011-10-16T08:32:00.000-07:00

Los Angeles Times
October 15, 2011
By Seema Mehta

Reporting from Perry, Iowa— Michele Bachmann, struggling to regain a foothold in the GOP presidential race, opened a hard new front Saturday on immigration, signing a pledge to push to complete a fence along the entire Mexican border by 2013 and saying she would consider allowing federal agents to conduct raids to find illegal immigrants.

"That will be job No. 1," Bachmann said of the fence. "And it will be every mile, it will be every yard, it will be every foot, it will be every inch of that border, because that portion you fail to secure is the highway into the United States."

Bachmann became the first major presidential candidate to sign a pledge by the Americans for Securing the Border, an advocacy group, that she would support constructing a double fence along the length of the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of 2013.

Illegal immigration has became a pivotal issue in the Republican contest, with Texas Gov. Rick Perry facing vocal criticism for his longtime support of in-state tuition rates for illegal immigrants.

Bachmann prefaced her remarks to about 100 people at the historic Hotel Pattee here in Perry, Iowa, by saying that Americans must have a discussion about ending illegal immigration and that doing so was not racist.

"It's OK to talk about this subject. Sometimes we're told it's not OK to talk about illegal immigration, that somehow that means we're prejudiced or we're bigoted or we're biased against Hispanics or that we don't love people that are Hispanic," she said. "That's not what I hear from the people of Iowa. I don't hear people of Iowa that are racist or bigoted in their remarks. What I hear from the people of Iowa is they are tired of paying for other people's items, they are tired of paying for illegal immigration."

Bachmann argued that a porous border is a national security threat, and she cited a report that tens of thousands of those caught trying to enter the nation illegally were from nations other than Mexico.

"Fifty-nine thousand this year came across the border … from Yemen, from Syria. These are nations that are state sponsors of terror. They're coming into our country," she said.

Yemen is not on the United States' list of state sponsors of terrorism, according to the State Department. Four nations are on that list — Cuba, Syria, Iran and Sudan.

Bachmann also used a litany of statistics to argue that illegal immigration was a national drain. She asserted that illegal immigrants were more likely to be high school dropouts and that households headed by those who do not obtain high school degrees and who receive welfare drain the nation's coffers. She said illegal immigrants cost the federal, state and local governments $113 billion annually, a figure she said came from the conservative Federation for American Immigration Reform.

Estimates about the cost of illegal immigration vary widely, ranging from a few billion dollars annually to much larger figures. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that state and local governments incur costs because of illegal immigrants, but the effect was probably "modest," and that there was no consensus on how to determine a national cost.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform is controversial; the Southern Poverty Law Center says the organization's leaders have ties to white supremacist groups.

A man in the audience asked why Bachmann castigates those who are high school dropouts as a drain on society but then fights in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants.

"Why would you choose to punish these kids who came here when they were young, no choice of their own?" asked Perry resident Eddie Diaz, 32.

Bachmann said that she was not punishing them, but rather opposed giving special advantages to lawbreakers.

"When people break the law …" Bachmann said.

Diaz interrupted, "They did not break the law."

The two continued to repeat those lines until Bachmann said, "People who come into the country break the law. That's an indisputable fact. When someone comes into the country illegally, that is breaking the law…. You're entitled to your opinion."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bachmann-immigration-20111016,0,6563993.story

Cain Proposes Electrified Border Fence

2011-10-16T08:25:00.000-07:00

New York Times
October 15, 2011
by Edward Wyatt

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain said Saturday that part of his immigration policy would be to build an electrified fence on the country’s border with Mexico that could kill people trying to enter the country illegally.

The remarks, which came at two campaign rallies in Tennessee as part of a barnstorming bus tour across the state, drew loud cheers from crowds of several hundred people at each rally. At the second stop, in Harriman, Tenn., Mr. Cain added that he also would consider using military troops “with real guns and real bullets” on the border to stop illegal immigration.

The remarks were among the most pointed yet by Mr. Cain about illegal immigration, and they come as he is enjoying a surge in national political polls on the back of his victory in a recent Florida straw poll. They also follow on remarks made by Representative Michele Bachmann on Saturday during a speech on illegal immigration in Iowa, in which she also advocated a border fence.

It is not the first time that Mr. Cain has floated the idea of an electrified fence. He has told the story many times of a caller to his former radio show who chastised him for talking about building a border fence, saying that such an idea was impractical. Mr. Cain often says he told the caller that he had recently returned from China, and if the Chinese could build the Great Wall then America could build a border fence.

Last summer, after President Obama remarked that some Republicans seemed to want a moat filled with alligators in addition to a fence, Mr. Cain responded by saying that he would indeed add an alligator-filled moat to his proposed fence, which would be topped with electrified barbed wire.

In his remarks on Saturday, Mr. Cain appeared to go a step further. Speaking to a rally sponsored by the Roane County Tea Party, Mr. Cain said that part of his plan would be to “secure the border for real” with a fence.

“It’s going to be 20 feet high. It’s going to have barbed wire on the top. It’s going to be electrified. And there’s going to be a sign on the other side saying, ‘It will kill you — Warning.’” At an earlier rally, on the campus of Tennessee Tech University in Cookeville, Tenn., he added that the sign would be written “in English and in Spanish.”

“This nation has always been a nation with wide open doors,” Mr. Cain said at the second rally. “We want to make it easy for people to come through the front door. And we’re going to shut off the back door so you don’t have to sneak into America.”

Saying that some critics have told him that his remarks about building a fence are insensitive, Mr. Cain said that the fault lies with the actions of some illegal immigrants. “It’s insensitive for them to be killing our citizens, killing our border agents,” he said. “That’s what’s insensitive. And that mess has to stop.”

In addition using a fence and unspecified “technology” to cut down on illegal immigration, Mr. Cain added: “If we have to put troops with real guns and real bullets for part of it, we can do that too.”

Brent Wilkes, Vice Chair of the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, said Mr. Cain’s remarks were reflective of increasingly harsh prescriptions for dealing with illegal immigration being offered by Republican presidential candidates.

“These folks who come across the border are at most committing a misdemeanor,” Mr. Wilkes said. “To suggest that they would be electrocuted or shot would be to treat them harsher than we treat murderers or rapists. It’s a real distortion of the rule of law.”

Mr. Wilkes said Mr. Cain is mistaken when he implies that it would be easy for would-be Mexican immigrants to enter the country legally. In fact, he said, there are few if any visas available for Mexican nationals who do not have a firm job offer in this country or who do not already have relatives living here legally.

After long being considered an also-ran in the Republican field, Mr. Cain has surged into the spotlight following his victory in the Florida straw poll and because of interest in his unusual 9-9-9 tax plan, which would set personal and business income tax rates at 9 percent each and institute a 9 percent national sales tax, eliminating all other federal taxes.

The Tennessee tour, which began Friday near Memphis, Mr. Cain’s birthplace, has drawn crowds of several hundred supporters and curious onlookers at each of eight stops

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/cain-proposes-electrified-border-fence/

Bachmann Pledges Border Fence With Mexico

2011-10-16T08:19:00.000-07:00

Associated Press / FOX News
October 15, 2011

PERRY, Iowa – Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, a long-shot Republican presidential contender, signed a pledge Saturday to push for construction of a fence along the entire length of the border with Mexico, raising the issue of illegal immigration in an Iowa town where about one third of the residents are Hispanic.

Bachmann also renewed her attacks on the immigration policies of Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, one of her rivals for the Republican nomination, and she criticized President Barack Obama for what she called his failure to control the border.

"President Obama has failed the American people by failing to secure the southern border," said Bachmann. "I will secure that border and that will be job one."

Bachmann's call for increased border security was made in a town where the meatpacking industry has drawn immigrant workers. Thirty-two percent of the town's 9,800 residents are Hispanic.

Van Hipp Jr., head of Americans for Securing Our Border, said Bachmann was the first Republican presidential hopeful to sign the pledge, but he added the group plans to aggressively seek the support of others as well. The document binds Bachmann to support the construction of a double fence along the length of the U.S. border with Mexico by 2013.

"I have been saying this all through the campaign,' Bachmann said. "Now you have my word in writing."

She called control of the border a national security issue and said illegal immigration costs the U.S. more than $100 billion a year. At the same time she rejected suggestions that talking about cracking down on illegal immigrants is racist or anti-Hispanic.

"It's OK to talk about this issue," said Bachmann. "Some say it's not OK to talk about this subject because that somehow means we are prejudiced or bigoted or biased against Hispanics. That's not what I hear form the people of Iowa. They are tired of paying for other people."

Hipp said the pledge was intended to insure that action is taken on the issue. "For too long, too many politicians have given only lip service to the war on our border," he said. "The rule of law has been ignored and the federal government has been derelict in its duty in defending our borders."

Cracking down on illegal immigration has become a major theme in the Republican race, with most of the candidates charging that Perry isn't tough enough on the issue.

Perry has taken a lot of heat for Texas' policy of allowing the children of illegal immigrants to pay lower in-state tuition rates to attend public colleges. Bachmann raised the issue again Saturday. "In 2009 in Texas there were 12,138 students that benefited from that," she said. "That cost the taxpayers of Texas $25.9 million."

Bachmann congratulated Hipp's group for injecting the immigration issue into the campaign, calling it a "wonderful gift."

She said that an alleged Iranian plot to launch a campaign of bombing and assassination in the U.S. would have involved people slipping across the border illegally. "This is not just an economic issue, this is also a national security issue. It's an issue dealing with terrorism."

Bachmann argued that it will be virtually impossible to cut into the nation's jobless rate until illegal immigration is reduced.

Bachmann told reporters she chose the town of Perry for signing the pledge because of its demographics. Asked if she chose Perry because it is the namesake of a leading opponent in the race, she said: "I thought about that too."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/15/bachmann-pledges-border-fence-with-mexico/

Hidalgo County tries again for levee cash

2011-10-14T07:40:00.000-07:00

The Monitor
October 12, 2011
by Jared Janes

EDINBURG — Hidalgo County will try once again for federal reimbursement of more than $60 million in levee repairs that commissioners funded using receipts from a 2006 bond issuance.

County officials are planning to travel to Washington, D.C., later this year to ask federal representatives to re-introduce legislation to reimburse the county for its expenses or identify in-kind contributions and other ways to recapture the funds. The county’s congressional representatives have tried twice before to pass legislation to reimburse the county, but the bills have died in committee each time.

County Judge Ramon Garcia said he is hopeful the third time is the charm, despite the apparent intent of federal budget writers to cut costs.

“We’ve got a better shot … if we do something about it,” Garcia said. “If we’re going to wait for the federal government to send us a check, it’s not going to happen.”

Beginning in 2007, Hidalgo County invested slightly more than $60 million into repairing the county’s aging levee system, including about $45 million that was directed toward adding a concrete flood barrier into the Department of Homeland Security’s border fence. The county’s expenditures came after the International Boundary and Water Commission — the binational agency that manages the flood control system along the Rio Grande — told the Federal Emergency Management Agency that it would not certify the levees, putting thousands of Hidalgo County homeowners at risk of having to buy expensive flood insurance premiums.

Garcia said the county’s funds were “well-spent” because they served as a catalyst for a cash infusion through the economic stimulus package that was used to rebuild more than 90 miles of Hidalgo County levees, a project that proved timely last summer when the Rio Grande crested at its highest point in four decades after Hurricane Alex receded.

But the lack of a formal reimbursement agreement between federal representatives and former County Judge J.D. Salinas’ administration has left the county struggling to be paid back after putting the majority of its voter-approved $100 million bond issuance into the federal responsibility of maintaining the levees. The investment shored up flood systems near the affluent Sharyland Plantation neighborhood and the industrial area around the Foreign Trade Zone, but it left other drainage projects included in the bond issuance for flood-prone parts of the county without a direct funding source.

Hidalgo County commissioners asked two lobbying groups — Hollis Rutledge and Associates and Dos Legislative Services — to lead another effort for federal reimbursement. In 2007 and 2009, U.S. Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, D-Mercedes, filed legislation to authorize the IBWC to reimburse state and local governments for expenses on levee improvements.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which maintains flood control systems in the interior of the United States, can reimburse local governments for what they spend. But the IBWC, a little-known federal agency that falls in the oversight of the U.S. Department of State, does not have similar authorization.

Rutledge told commissioners in a presentation Tuesday that he will ask for the legislation to be reintroduced and will also meet with members of the committees where the bills died. He will also explore whether assistance from the North American Development Bank, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and other sources could be directed toward county drainage projects that weren’t completed because their share of the bond proceeds went toward the levee system.

“We’re talking about some serious money that we need to recapture from the bond election,” Rutledge said, later adding that it will be a “difficult process” to receive federal reimbursement.

Godfrey Garza, the general manager for the Hidalgo County drainage district, said passing legislation for local drainage projects isn’t unprecedented. A county lobbying effort managed to get its share of the costs for the proposed Raymondville Drain — a massive channel connecting northern Hidalgo County to the Laguna Madre — reduced from 35 percent to 10 percent, saving the county about $70 million over the life of the project.

The county formed a committee in August to identify the county’s pressing drainage and formulate a plan to fund them. Garza said securing federal funding for the committee’s plans would fulfill the same role as federal reimbursement.

“It’s important that we get those dollars back and use them toward the drainage system that we need,” he said. “If we can get state or federal dollars to do those projects, it’s the same thing (as reimbursement).”

http://www.themonitor.com/articles/levee-55596-tries-cash.html

Northern Border Fence Idea Raises Eyebrows Along Frontier

2011-10-13T15:02:00.000-07:00

OPB News
October 12, 2011
by Tom Banse

BLAINE, Wash. - A planning document describing possible security enhancements along our northern border is raising eyebrows both in Canada and the U.S. Most notably, the study for the Department of Homeland Security raises the idea of fencing short portions of the northern border. Some Canadians are offended by the idea. The U.S. agency is now trying to contain the negative reaction. Correspondent Tom Banse has details from Blaine, Washington.

I'm standing now right on the U.S.-Canada border, having approached from the U.S. side across a playground. Just across the line is a pretty much unremarkable neighborhood in Canada.

There's no fence. Just this shallow ditch and some warning signs saying you're leaving the United States. I can literally just jump across. Now I'm in Canada. Jump right back. And we're back in the U.S.

"Don't Fence Me In" is the song they're singing across the border this month. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency instigated the lament with an environmental review.

The planning document contemplates short stretches of fencing on the northern border. Also up for discussion are upgrades to patrol roads, short-range radar, more cameras or aerial drones, among other things.

But it was the fence that caught the locals' attention the most says British Columbia legislator Barry Penner.

"It is a disappointing development to think that after all these many years of being good neighbors, one side or the other might think it necessary now to build a fence," he says.

Penner represents a district along the Canada-U.S. border outside Vancouver. In response to voices like this, the U.S. border agency is trying to tamp down fears.

Customs and Border Protection planner Don Beckham says the agency has no intention of building a fence on the northern border that resembles the steel curtain along parts of the Mexican border.

"We do discuss fencing, but it would be at very specific locations like fencing on either side of a small, remote port of entry to keep people literally from driving through a field to avoid the port of entry," he explains.

Beckham says it would be totally unrealistic to deter illegal border crossings by fencing the entire 4,000 mile long border with Canada. His team favors a flexible approach that uses a broad array of possible security measures.

"We are looking forward five to seven years, understanding that the security threat is not static," Beckham says. "It is constantly changing and Customs and Border Protection needs to change the responses to meet the threat."

Beckham says his agency is listening to public comments and won't make any decisions until at least next year.

Bellingham resident Caroline Correa came to a public meeting with concerns about aerial drone surveillance and how border fencing might block wildlife migration.

"But it seemed to be minimal if I'm hearing correctly," she says. "That's a comfort level and we would have to make certain that they hold their word."

Vancouver Sun newspaper columnist Vaughn Palmer finds it ironic the discussion of fencing came up just as the Canadian government is deep in talks with the Obama Administration about a joint North American security pact. The idea there is to tighten controls around the perimeter of our two countries and thereby enable freer mobility across the shared border.

"Since 9/11, that cross-border relationship has changed in any number of ways," Palmer says. "We're going to be struggling to reconcile the security concerns in the United States with the trade and tourism interests between the two countries."

---

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency is holding a public hearing Thursday in Boundary County, Idaho to gather more reactions to its northern border study document. That gathering is happening from 7 to 9 p.m. at the event center in Naples, Idaho.

Comments can also be submitted by email: http://www.northernborderpeis.com/get-involved.html
On the Web:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection - Northern Border study:

http://www.northernborderpeis.com/
Opinion column by J.L Granatstein in the Ottawa Citizen:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/American+friends+trouble/5526694/story.html

http://news.opb.org/article/northern_border_fence_idea_raises_eyebrows_along_frontier/

Drug Smugglers Tunnel Into Arizona Parking Spaces

2011-10-12T14:08:00.000-07:00

ABC News
October 12, 2011
By RANDY KREIDER

Drug smugglers are endlessly creative when it comes to inventing ways to move marijuana, cocaine and other contraband from Mexico into the United States.

In the latest innovation uncovered by law enforcement, smugglers in the border town of Nogales, Arizona were bringing drugs into the U.S. for the cost of a quarter.

The parking meters on International Street, which hugs the border fence in Nogales, cost 25 cents. Smugglers in Mexico tunneled under the fence and under the metered parking spaces, and then carefully cut neat rectangles out of the pavement. Their confederates on the U.S. side would park false-bottomed vehicles in the spaces above the holes, feed the meters, and then wait while the underground smugglers stuffed their cars full of drugs from below.

When the exchange was finished, the smugglers would use jacks to put the pavement "plugs" back into place. The car would drive away, and only those observers who were looking closely would notice the seams in the street.

In all, U.S. Border Patrol agents found 16 tunnels leading to the 18 metered parking spaces on International Street. The pavement is now riddled with neat, symmetrical patches.

"It's unbelievable," Nogales mayor Arturo Garino told Tucson, Arizona ABC affiliate KGUN. "Those are the strides these people take to get the drugs across the border."

Past methods of smuggling have included catapults that launch bales of drugs across the border fence. "The [smugglers] have tried everything," said Garino, "and this is one of the most ingenious [methods] of them all.

The city, advised by Homeland Security, has agreed to remove the parking meters. Nogales stands to lose $8,500 annually in parking revenue, plus the cost of citations.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/drug-smugglers-tunnel-arizona-parking-spaces/story?id=14722556

GOP Uses Border Fence as Immigration Distraction for 2012

2011-10-12T13:57:00.000-07:00

US News & World Reports
October 12, 2011
by Mallie Jane Kim

In GOP primary politics, the U.S.-Mexico border fence is an immigration litmus test, but an apparently unhelpful one. Experts close to the issue agree that the fence may be a nice symbolic sound bite for candidates to show border security bona fides, but it does little to address the nation's complex immigration quagmire. "It's three quarters symbolic and very expensive," says immigration policy expert Rick Swartz, who helped construct and advocate pro-immigrant legislation since the 1980s. Swartz says fencing has definitely helped curb illegal crossings and drug smuggling in some places, but it's "more promoted as a panacea that it is in fact a panacea."

Nevertheless, some 2012 candidates continue to find political capital in touting the fence.

Former Customs and Border Protection Commissioner W. Ralph Basham last month called the idea of constructing a physical fence along the entire border one of the "dumbest" ideas he was presented with during his tenure. A better way, according to Thad Bingel, a security and intelligence consultant who served as Basham's chief of staff, is a mix of infrastructure, like fencing, combined with people and technology, like sensors and unmanned aircraft. "There's a fundamental misunderstanding about what a fence—even the triple-layer fencing in San Diego—actually does for you. All it really does is buy you time," he explains. "None of the fencing is impenetrable. People will eventually dig under it or cut through it or go over it, but it gives you enough time to respond and apprehend them."

[Read: Ex-Border Security Chief Calls Fence a Dumb Idea.]

Since the border terrain varies so widely, different areas call for different types of fencing, if any, designed to hinder either pedestrian traffic or vehicles. And some areas have a natural fence to slow illegal crossers or smugglers already: mountains and the Rio Grande.

In urban areas like San Diego, Bingel explains, "you have seconds or minutes to respond to an incursion before they disappear into a building or somebody's car and get away," he says, explaining why a fence to block pedestrians is helpful there. But in a rural area, like Arizona's Sonoran Desert, it takes a day or two to walk to a paved road from the border, and a simple vehicle barrier can do the trick. "You've got time to track them and apprehend them at a more convenient point than needing a fence out there that would really be a waste of resources."

And wasting resources is never a popular idea, particularly at a time when federal budgets are tight. In 2009, the Government Accountability Office estimated the cost at $6.5 million per mile for pedestrian fencing and $1.8 million per mile for vehicle fencing. The same report found that there had been 3,363 breaches in the border fence as of May 2009, each costing an average of $1,300 to repair—that's more than $4 million.

[Check out a roundup of political cartoons on immigration reform.]

The real immigration problem is far more complex, experts say. Approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants are already in the country and have been for years. Anywhere from one third to one half of those entered legally and overstayed visas, according to estimates by the Government Accountability Office and the Pew Hispanic Center. And illegal border crossings have decreased markedly in the past decade, likely from a combination of increased security, economic doldrums in the United States, and an improved Mexican economy. The border is a just a small part of the problem—a symptom. And treating a symptom won't cure a disease.

"When you're really making a point that we don't like what's going on in suburban Phoenix," Bingel explains, "building a triple-layer fence down in the west desert of Arizona won't actually do anything to improve the situation."

The push for more fencing at the border, he adds, is like trying to solve yesterday's problem. "The damage was done 10 years ago. It's a matter of interior enforcement now," Bingel says. "In some ways, we're fighting the last war on that, and in some cases a war that's already being fought and won with the additional resources that have actually come since 2003, 2004."

Still, several of the 2012 GOP candidates push the fence idea, or attack Texas Gov. Rick Perry—who has a comparably moderate immigration record—for suggesting the fence is a waste of resources, and saying, "If you build a 30-foot wall from El Paso to Brownsville, the 35-foot ladder business gets real good."

Last week, Rep. Michele Bachmann said she will build the fence, "every mile, every yard, every foot, every inch." Former Godfather's Pizza CEO Herman Cain joked about creating something like an electrified Great Wall of China with an alligator moat, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney supports a "high-tech" fence, though he hasn't fleshed out the details.

"It's a preposterous oversimplification, but it's one that has political currency," says Chris Newman, director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network's legal programs, who thinks focusing the debate on the fence is a harmful and manipulative distraction. "Like most things in the immigration debate, it plays to people's fears as opposed to providing legitimate solutions to problems facing the country."

[Read: After 9/11, Immigration Became About Homeland Security.]

But simplifying the issues is just the way of politics, says Jim Carafano, immigration analyst at the right-leaning Heritage Foundation. It's a bumper sticker debate. "Border security is about what's going on inside Mexico; it's about what's happening at the border; it's about what's going on inside the United States; it's about economics; it's about transnational criminal activity; it's about how people feel about their communities," he explains. "Anybody that can fit that on a bumper sticker, God bless them."

Republican strategist Luis Alvarado of the political consulting firm Revolvis also blames primary politics for the focus on the fence as a tangible object that serves as a proxy for the complex issues at the heart of the immigration debate. "In a certain way, it's one way of relegating all the problems of immigration to one specific issue," he says, adding that this is something both parties do. "Politically, we all know that it's not a viable issue for either party until after 2012 elections are done and over with."

And though Latino voters are not a monolithic, single-issue group, Alvarado explains, those focused on immigration "feel that they've been shelved until 2013" by the president and by GOP candidates. "They're so frustrated with everybody that they've become apathetic," he says. "I don't think they're going to come out and vote in volumes like they did in the 2008 presidential cycle."

Bingel, the former Customs and Border Protection chief of staff, says he understands that support for a physical fence, particularly in places like Arizona, comes from frustration that the federal government hasn't brought immigration policy up to date. He doesn't believe the conversation about the fence itself is bad, as long as it doesn't stop there. "If the fence is a symbol of how to talk about the range of different things we still need to do, then that's a good thing in my mind," he says. "But I hope people don't literally take it as the fence and the fence alone is the solution for that 2,000 miles of border; that would be short-sighted."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/10/12/gop-uses-border-fence-as-immigration-distraction-for-2012

Project fixes outdated border fence in Douglas

2011-10-11T20:52:00.000-07:00

KPHO Channel 5
October 11, 2011
by Phil Benson

DOUGLAS, AZ (KPHO) -
Construction to replace an estimated six miles of outdated primary pedestrian fence along the U.S-Mexico border adjacent to the City of Douglas in Arizona began last week.

The project will replace landing mat fencing originally constructed in the early 1990s, with new fencing that is 18 feet high, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection said in a news release.

The fencing will be located on both sides of the Port of Douglas. The project should be completed by next March and will make the fencing significantly more difficult to breach.

CBP has completed a total of approximately 650 miles of pedestrian and vehicle fence along the Southwest border out of the 652 miles mandated by Congress.

http://www.kpho.com/story/15670278/outdated-border-fence-in-douglas

No Easy Path for Bill to Exempt Border Patrol From Environmental Laws

2011-10-10T10:53:00.000-07:00

Congressional Quarterly
October 11, 2011
By Tim Starks

A Republican push to exempt the Homeland Security Department from observing environmental laws along the border has gained traction in several congressional committees in recent weeks. But with critics speaking out against the measure and Congress focused on other priorities, further movement is uncertain.

The proposal, a 2010 GOP campaign pledge, faces resistance from the Obama administration, environmental groups and some border state Democrats. Further complicating its prospects are the broader immigration debate, Congress’ preoccupation with the budget deficit and the need for supporters to find a suitable legislative vehicle.

In their 2010 “Pledge to America,” House Republicans vowed to “ensure that the Border Patrol has the tools and authorities to establish operational control at the border and prohibit the secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture from interfering with Border Patrol enforcement activities on federal lands.”

Last week, the House Natural Resources Committee approved, on a party-line 26-17 vote, a bill that would give U.S. Customs and Border Protection authority to patrol, build roads and fences and construct temporary offices in national parks, forests and other public lands within 100 miles of U.S. borders with Canada and Mexico.

The measure, sponsored by Utah Republican Rob Bishop, would block the Interior and Agriculture departments from holding the border agency to more than 30 environmental statutes, some decades old, including the National Environmental Policy Act (PL 91-190), the Clean Water Act (PL 100-4) and the Solid Waste Disposal Act (PL 94-580).

Also last week, House Homeland Security Chairman Peter T. King, R-N.Y., a cosponsor of Bishop’s bill, introduced a reauthorizing bill for the Homeland Security Department (HR 3116) that includes a similar provision. The language mirrors an amendment offered by Arizona Republican John McCain that made its way into the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee-approved Homeland Security authorization bill (S 1546).

Next Steps Unclear

Versions of the language were adopted by both the House and Senate in previous years as amendments to other bills, but the provision did not become law.

Bishop has yet to discuss the next step for his legislation with GOP leadership. But he is not worried about support from GOP leaders in the long term.

“The only problem we have is not the bill itself but the atmosphere around here,” said Bishop, chairman of the Natural Resources subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands. “Everything has been about dealing with the budget and appropriations. It has sucked the air out of every other issue. This is not a budget issue. That’s the only negative as far as time, but there’s commitment to this concept and idea.”

But the bill has run into opposition from environmental advocates, administration officials and some Democrats.

“This legislation represents a serious threat to a long list of bedrock environmental protections that for decades have safeguarded the health and well-being of Americans,” Jane Danowitz, Pew Environment Group’s director of U.S. public lands, said after Bishop’s bill won committee approval. “Improving national security and border protection is critical to our country, but waiving core conservation measures will not accomplish this goal.”

Kim Thorsen, the Interior Department’s deputy assistant secretary for law enforcement, security and emergency management, told Bishop’s subcommittee in July that the bill could do serious harm. “As drafted, this bill could impact approximately 54 units of the national park system, 228 national wildlife refuges, 122 units of the National Wilderness Preservation System managed by Interior, and 87 units of [the Bureau of Land Management’s] National Landscape Conservation System, resulting in unintended damage to sensitive natural and cultural resources, including endangered species and wilderness,” Thorsen said in written testimony. Thorsen added that the bill also could also affect water channels, levees, canals and bridges along a 1,000-mile stretch of the Colorado River that are required in order to fulfil U.S. water-sharing obligations with U.S. and Mexican users.

Border State Concerns

Some border state Democrats also have cast the bill in harsh terms. At the July hearing, subcommittee member Raúl M. Grijalva of Arizona said the bill “may succeed in decreasing immigration, but only because the water, air and environments of border communities will be so degraded, no one will want to come here.”

Bishop said he has altered his bill to reflect several concerns voiced by critics. But he noted that Mexican drug cartels are causing environmental damage along the border, citing suspicions among U.S. law enforcement that cartel-tied drug manufacturers are behind numerous wildfires.

Bishop said environmental protection cannot be the only priority. “On the border there is something more important than wilderness designation, and that’s patrolling the border and trying to protect people’s lives,” he said.

If Bishop’s bill does not advance, it is unclear how the GOP will make good on its pledge. Although similar language was included in both the House and Senate homeland security authorization bills, no such authorization bill has ever been enacted.

2 illegal immigrants die in San Diego-area maritime accidents

2011-10-06T20:49:00.000-07:00

One is found dead inside a smuggling boat washed ashore at Pacific Beach and the other dies in an attempt to swim around a border fence.

Los Angeles Times
October 6, 2011
by Richard Marosi

Reporting from San Diego -- An illegal immigrant was found dead inside a smuggling boat that came ashore at San Diego's Pacific Beach and another died in a failed attempt to swim around a border fence in separate maritime incidents since Tuesday, according to federal authorities.

Early Wednesday morning, U.S. Border Patrol agents inspecting a 16-foot panga boat near Law Street at Pacific Beach discovered a dead Mexican man and another unidentified person. Following footprints along the beach, the agents found 13 additional illegal immigrants hiding in a residential area.

Eleven of the immigrants were hospitalized and released. One man suffering from dehydration and hypothermia remained in the hospital, according to Border Patrol spokesman Scott Simon.

The group of nine men and six women were all Mexican nationals, he said. Authorities are investigating whether a smuggler also was aboard the boat. The immigrant's cause of death has yet to be determined.

The skiff appeared to be caught in turbulent waters during the trip from Baja California. Smuggling groups often depart from as far away as Ensenada on journeys in rickety boats that can take 12 hours or more.

In another recent incident, seven immigrants were rescued a mile off San Diego's Mission Beach after their boat broke down Sunday.

Smugglers show no signs of letting up on their maritime trafficking attempts. Border authorities arrested 633 illegal immigrants in 183 maritime incidents during the federal fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Illegal immigrants also continue trying on their own. On Tuesday night, a 43-year-old man died attempting to swim around a border fence that extends into the breakers at San Diego County's Border Field State Park.

He was not wearing a wet suit or flotation device, Simon said. Two other illegal immigrants who tried to swim around the border fence were arrested.

Over the last year, four people have died in maritime smuggling incidents, including two immigrants who died while their boat tried to land at Torrey Pines State Beach, north of San Diego.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1006-smuggling-boat-20111006,0,7261822.story

Environmental impact statement leaves border fencing a possibility

2011-10-06T20:43:00.000-07:00

Watertown Daily Times
October 6, 2011
by Josh Gore

MASSENA — Residents of the St. Regis Mohawk Reservation and the village of Massena told U.S. Customs and Border Protection representatives Tuesday night they do not want a fence along the northern border.

Representatives of the border security agency came to solicit feedback and official reaction of the Northern Border Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, which purposes to “provide a well-integrated, reasonable framework for sustaining and enhancing security” over the next five to seven years.

Of the 30 people who attended the meeting at the Massena Veterans of Foreign Wars post, most did not know much about the document, but they did know a fence was discussed.

Corey Tarbell, 37, Akwesasne, found out about an hour before the meeting and rushed over, he said.

“I don’t know what they’re trying to accomplish today,” Mr. Tarbell said.

A PowerPoint presentation and posters throughout the room explained possible security situations.

Future administrations will look at the report when making decisions about how to handle future threats, Customs and Border Protection representative Don Beckham said.

Mr. Tarbell and many others were agitated when told they could not speak at the meeting but could record their comments in a microphone in the back of the room.

“I’m steaming about this,” he said. “These recordings don’t mean anything to them.”

Speaking into the recording device or giving a written statement were the only ways audience members could make official comments.

The group, though, decided to speak its opinions aloud for about 30 minutes.

“We can’t predict what the security will be,” Mr. Beckham said. “Please put your comments on the record.”

Many did walk to the back of the conference room to speak into a recording machine, but some left after just speaking to the audience.

Jessica L. Jock, Massena, said drafting a report that covers the entire border and not each specific area doesn’t do the area justice. She also said another meeting should be held to explain better the future security in the local area.

According to the impact statement, fencing off the border in “trouble spots” could be used to deter illegal activity.

“They are screaming terrorism and taking away our civil liberties,” said Kakawerais, a 55-year-old grandmother from Akwesasne.”You don’t care about the people, and you don’t care about the environment.”

Mr. Beckham, though, said fencing would be in specific areas only and would not blanket the border.

Many at the meeting said the presenters were not familiar with the area and were reading information they could present to people anywhere along the northern border.

“It’s just blanket information — not specific,” Mr. Tarbell said. “I still don’t know what’s going on.”

Mr. Tarbell, who crosses the border five to seven times a day for work, also said the United States is trying to make people afraid.

“They have done everything else; a fence is next,” Mr. Tarbell said.

Those who would like to submit an official comment can do so at www.northernborderpeis.com.

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20111006/NEWS05/710069888

Crossing Over, and Over

2011-10-05T19:51:00.000-07:00

New York Times
October 2, 2011
by Damien Cave

AGUA PRIETA, Mexico — "My wife, my son — I have to get back to them," Daniel kept telling himself, from the moment he was arrested in Seattle for driving with an expired license, all the way through the deportation proceeding that delivered him to Mexico in June.

Nothing would deter him from crossing the border again. He had left his hometown at 24, he said. Twelve years later, he spoke nearly fluent English and had an American son, a wife and three brothers in the United States. "I’ll keep trying," he said, "until I’ll get there."

This is increasingly the profile of illegal immigration today. Migrant shelters along the Mexican border are filled not with newcomers looking for a better life, but with seasoned crossers: older men and women, often deportees, braving ever-greater risks to get back to their families in the United States — the country they consider home.

They present an enormous challenge to American policy makers, because they continue to head north despite obstacles more severe than at any time in recent history. It is not just that the American economy has little to offer; the border itself is far more threatening. On one side, fences have grown and American agents have multiplied; on the other, criminals haunt the journey at every turn.

And yet, while these factors — and better opportunities at home — have cut illegal immigration from Mexico to its lowest level in decades, they are not enough to scare off a sizable, determined cadre.

"We have it boiled down to the hardest lot," said Christopher Sabatini, senior director for policy at the Council of the Americas.

Indeed, 56 percent of apprehensions at the Mexican border in 2010 involved people who had been caught previously, up from 44 percent in 2005. A growing percentage of deportees in recent years have also been deported before, according to Department of Homeland Security figures.

For the Obama administration, these repeat offenders have become a high priority. Prosecutions for illegal re-entry have jumped by more than two-thirds since 2008. Officials say it is now the most prosecuted federal felony.

President Obama has already deported around 1.1 million immigrants — more than any president since Dwight D. Eisenhower — and officials say the numbers will not decline. But at a time when the dynamics of immigration are changing, experts and advocates on all sides are increasingly asking if the approach, which has defined immigration policy since 9/11, still makes sense.

Deportation is expensive, costing the government at least $12,500 per person, and it often does not work: between October 2008 and July 22 of this year, Immigration and Customs Enforcement spent $2.25 billion sending back 180,229 people who had been deported before and come back anyway. Many more have returned and stayed hidden.

Some groups favoring reduced immigration say that making life harder for illegal immigrants in this country would be far more efficient. They argue that along with eliminating work opportunities by requiring employers to verify the reported immigration status of new hires, Congress should also prohibit illegal immigrants from opening bank accounts, or even obtaining library cards.

"You’d reduce the number of people who keep coming back again and again," said Bob Dane, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform. The alternative, says Doris Meissner, the country’s top immigration official in the mid-1990s, is to accept that illegal immigrants like Daniel "are people with fundamental ties to the United States, not where they came from."

"Our societies are so deeply connected," Ms. Meissner said, referring primarily to the United States and Mexico, the main source of illegal immigrants. "And that is not reflected at all in policy."

The administration acknowledges that immigrants like Daniel are rooted in the United States and typically have otherwise clean criminal records. But under its new plan introduced in August — suspending deportations for pending low-priority cases, including immigrants brought to the United States as children — repeat crossers are singled out for removal alongside "serious felons," "known gang members" and "individuals who pose a clear risk to national security."

Administration officials say they are trying to break the "yo-yo effect" of people bouncing back, as mandated by congress when it toughened laws related to illegal re-entry in the 1990s.

But some experts argue that this commingling actually undermines security. After a decade of record deportations, critics argue, it has become even harder to separate the two groups that now define the border: professional criminals and experienced migrants motivated by family ties in the United States.

"If you think drug dealers and terrorists are much more dangerous than maids and gardeners, then we should get as many visas as possible to those people, so we can focus on the real threat," said David Shirk, director of the Transborder Institute at the University of San Diego. "Widening the gates would strengthen the walls."

Crime and the Border

The border crossers pouring into Arizona a decade or two ago were more numerous, but less likely to be threatening. David Jimarez, a Border Patrol agent with years of experience south of Tucson, recalled that even when migrants outnumbered American authorities by 25 to 1, they did not resist. "They would just sit down and wait for us," he said.

Over the past few years, the mix has changed, with more drug smugglers and other criminals among the dwindling, but still substantial, ranks of migrants.

The impacts are far-reaching. In northern Mexico, less immigration means less business. Border towns like Agua Prieta, long known as a departure point, have gone from bustling to windblown. Taxis that ferried migrants to the mountains now gather dust. Restaurants and hotels, like the sunflower-themed Girasol downtown, are practically empty. On one recent afternoon, only 3 of the 50 rooms were occupied.

"In 2000, we were full every day," said Alejandro Rocha, the hotel’s manager.

New research from the University of California, San Diego, shows that crime is now the top concern for Mexicans thinking of heading north. As fear keeps many migrants home, many experienced border guides, or coyotes, have given up illegal migration for other jobs.

In Tijuana, across the border from San Diego, one well-known coyote is now selling tires. In Nogales, the largest Mexican city bordering Arizona, power has shifted to tattooed young men with expensive binoculars along the border fence, while here in Agua Prieta — where Mexican officials say traffic is one-thirthieth of what it once was — the only way to get across is to deal with gangs that sometimes push migrants to carry drugs.

It is even worse in Matamoros, across from Brownsville, Tex. Just standing at the border fence brings out drug cartel enforcers demanding $300 for the right to pass. Migrants and the organizations that assist them say cartel lieutenants roam the shelters, looking for deportees willing to work as lookouts, earning $400 a week until they have enough to pay for passage north.

"I was thinking about doing it, too," said Daniel, looking down. "But then I thought about my family."

American law enforcement officials say the matrix of drugs, migration and violence has become more visible at the border and along the trails and roads heading north, where more of the immigrants being caught carry drugs or guns — making them more likely to flee, resist arrest or commit other crimes.

"There’s less traffic, but traffic that’s there is more threatening," Mr. Jimarez, the border agent, said.

Larry Dever, the sheriff of Cochise County, Ariz., which sits north of Agua Prieta, agreed: "The guys smuggling people and narcotics now are more sinister."

His county, 6,169 square miles of scrub brush, ranches and tiny towns in the state’s southeast corner, has been an established crossing corridor since the mid-1990s. Since 2008, the police there have tracked every crime linked to illegal immigrants, in part because state and federal officials frequently requested data, treating the county as a bellwether of border security.

Indeed, when a Cochise rancher named Robert Krentz was killed in March 2010 after radioing to his brother that he was going to help a suspected illegal immigrant, the county quickly became a flash point for a larger debate that ultimately led to SB 1070, the polarizing Arizona bill giving the police more responsibility for cracking down on illegal immigrants.

Yet, crime involving illegal immigrants is relatively rare (5 percent of all local crime, Sheriff Dever said). Mostly it consists of burglaries involving stolen food. And, public records show, in 11 of the 18 violent crimes linked to illegal immigrants over 18 months, immigrants were both the victims and attackers.

This is not the portrait given by Republican border governors, including Rick Perry of Texas, a presidential candidate who recently said that "it is not safe on that border." But while Mexican drug cartels have increased their presence from Tucson to New York — sometimes engaging in brutal violence after entering the country illegally — Americans living near the border are generally safe.

A USA Today analysis of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California in July found that crime within 100 miles of the border is below both the national average and the average for each of those states — and has been declining for years. Several other independent researchers have come to the same conclusion.

But the border is not safe for people crossing or patrolling it. The number of immigrants found dead in the Arizona desert, from all causes, has failed to decline as fast as illegal immigration has, while assaults on Border Patrol agents grew by 41 percent from 2006 to 2010, almost entirely because of an increase in attacks with rocks. The heightened risks have stimulated a debate: Has the more aggressive approach — bigger fences, more agents and deportations — contributed to, or diminished, the danger?

Sheriff Dever, lionized as an "illegal immigration warrior" by immigration opponents, says that increased enforcement has made Americans safer and should continue until his neighbors tell him they are no longer afraid.

But some immigration advocates contend that the government’s approach is too broad to be effective. "We have to really separate out the guy who is coming to make a living with his family from the terrorist or the drug dealer," said Peter Siavelis, an editor of "Getting Immigration Right: What Every American Needs to Know."

Home Is Where the Children Are

Deportations have muddled that delineation. In a recent line of deportees piling off a bus on the San Diego side of a metal gate leading to Tijuana, all were equal: the criminal in prison garb with the wispy goatee; the mother averting her eyes; and longtime residents like Alberto Álvarez, 36, a janitor and father of five who said he was picked up for driving without a license.

"Look, I’ve been in the U.S. 18 years," he said, slinging a backpack over his Izod shirt. "Right now, my children are alone, my wife is alone caring for the kids by herself — they’ve separated us."

During the immigration wave that peaked around a decade ago, deportations often meant something different: many deportees had not been in the United States for long; they were going home.

But now that there are fewer new arrivals, the concept of home is changing. Of the roughly 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States, 48 percent arrived before 2000. For the 6.5 million Mexicans in the United States illegally, that figure is even higher — 55 percent, according to the Pew Hispanic Center. There are now also 4.5 million American-born children of unauthorized immigrant parents.

Experts on both sides of the debate say this large group of rooted immigrants presents the nation with a fundamental choice: Either make life in the United States so difficult for illegal immigrants that they leave on their own, or allow immigrants who pose no threat to public safety to remain with their families legally, though not necessarily as citizens.

Steven A. Camarota, a demographer at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, said the government should revoke automatic citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants, and seize assets from deported illegal immigrants so they have fewer incentives to return.

President Obama, having made no progress on getting his legalization plan through Congress, has instead been trying to make enforcement more surgical. Under the new guidelines, officials will use "prosecutorial discretion" to review the current docket of 300,000 deportation cases, suspending expulsions for a range of immigrants.

Several factors prompt "particular care and consideration" for a reprieve, including whether the person has been in the United States since childhood, or is pregnant, seriously ill, a member of the military or a minor, according to a June memo that initiated the change.

The issue of "whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child or parent" appears in the memo’s secondary list of factors to consider. But it is not clear how broadly leniency will be applied. Repeat crossers are given a special black mark, and the administration has already deported hundreds of thousands of minor offenders, despite claiming to focus on "the worst of the worst."

Several Democratic governors and law enforcement officials are particularly angry about Secure Communities, a program to run the fingerprints of anyone booked by the police to check for federal immigration violations. A large proportion of those deported through this process — 79 percent, according to a recent report by the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University — were low-level offenders, often arrested for traffic violations.

Administration officials dispute that, saying the ratio of serious criminals is increasing, and that ultimately they must enforce immigration law against all violators. They have mandated that the program be used nationwide by 2013.

Mexico’s border cities offer a portrait of what that could mean. Nearly 950,000 Mexican immigrants have been deported since the start of fiscal 2008. And in Tijuana — a former hub for migrants heading north, which now receives more deportees than anywhere else — the pool of deportees preparing to cross again just keeps growing.

Maria García, 27, arrived here after being deported for a traffic violation. She said she had spent six years living in Fresno, Calif., with her two Mexico-born sons, 11 and 7. She was one of many who said that without a doubt, they would find their way back to the United States.

"They can’t stop us," she said.

The constant flow of deportees has become a growing concern for Mexican officials, who say the new arrivals are easy recruits, and victims, for drug cartels.

One former deportee was arrested this year for playing a major role in the deaths of around 200 people found in mass graves. In Tijuana, a homeless camp at the border has swollen from a cluster to a neighborhood, as deportees flow in, many carrying stories of being robbed or kidnapped by gangs who saw their American connections as a source for ransom.

Minutes after he arrived, Mr. Álvarez, the janitor, said he was worried about surviving — "you’re playing with your life being here," he said. But his twin sons would turn 2 in a few weeks, and like many others, he said that no matter how he was treated in the United States, he would find his way back.

"I feel bad being here, I feel bad," he said. "I’ve got my kids over there, my family, my whole life. Here" — he shook his head at the end of his first day in Tijuana — "no."

A version of this article appeared in print on October 3, 2011, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Crossing Over, and Over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/03/world/americas/mexican-immigrants-repeatedly-brave-risks-to-resume-lives-in-united-states.html?_r=2

Bishop’s border bill advances over Democrats’ opposition

2011-10-05T15:45:00.000-07:00

Salt Lake Tribune
November 5, 2011
by Matt Canham

Washington • A congressional committee approved a bill Wednesday that would allow the Border Patrol to sidestep environmental laws as it sought to block drug smugglers, human traffickers and undocumented immigrants from sneaking into the United States from Mexico.

The legislation is a top priority for Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, who argues that restrictions on public lands have inhibited U.S. agents from tracking and arresting suspected criminals.

“This is about providing the Border Patrol with the tools they want and they need to achieve the mission that we gave them,” he said, before the Natural Resources Committee approved his bill on a vote of 26 to 17.

Border Patrol officials have publicly disagreed with the need for the law. And Democrats on the committee described the bill as a veiled attempt at gutting protections on wild lands.

“What in the world does the Migratory Bird Act or the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act or the Safe Drinking Water Act have to do with the ability of the Customs Department to enforce the U.S. Border?” asked Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J. “The entire point of this legislation has nothing to do with border security, with human trafficking, with smuggling. It is a clear and simple attack on environmental protection legislation.”

The bill now goes before the full House where it has a decent chance of passage, as Republicans hold a sizable majority.

Bishop asked the committee to adopt some changes to his legislation that he hoped would ease some concerns. He limited its scope to 100 miles from the borders with Canada and Mexico, eliminating any impact on the coastlines or with Hawaii.

His amendment also limited the federal agencies that could waive environmental laws to only Customs and Border Protection, and only for the purposes of building patrol roads, fences, surveillance towers or to use aircraft.

If passed, the legislation would expire after five years, giving Congress a chance to see if it was meeting its goals.

“We can no longer turn our backs on the violence, environmental degradation and rampant criminal activity occurring on our public lands,” Bishop said.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/52681101-90/border-bill-environmental-legislation.html.csp

U.S. mulls Canadian border fence

2011-09-29T19:20:00.000-07:00

CBC News
September 29, 2011

The United States is looking at building fences along the border with Canada to help keep out terrorists and other criminals, according to a draft report by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency

The report proposes the use of "fencing and other barriers" on the 49th parallel to manage "trouble spots where passage of cross-border violators is difficult to control."

But a spokesperson for U.S Customs and Border Protection said the government is not considering the fence option "at this time" and instead is looking at the environmental effects of putting more manpower, technology and infrastructure along the border.

The border service is also pondering options including a beefed-up technological presence through increased use of radar, sensors, cameras, drones and vehicle scanners. In addition, it might continue to improve or expand customs facilities at ports of entry.

The agency considered but ruled out the possibility of hiring "significantly more" U.S. Border Patrol agents to increase the rate of inspections, noting staffing has already risen in recent years.

Customs and Border Protection is inviting comment on the options and plans a series of public meetings in Washington and several U.S. border communities next month. It will then decide which ideas to pursue.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano noted last month the challenges of monitoring the vast, sparsely populated northern border region. She stressed manpower, but also a greater reliance on technology.

Ironically, the moves come as Canada and the U.S. try to finalize a perimeter security arrangement that would focus on continental defences while easing border congestion. It would be aimed at speeding passage of goods and people across the Canada-U.S. border, which has become something of a bottleneck since the 911 attacks.

Relatively speaking, Washington has focused more energy and resources on tightening security along the border with Mexico than at the sprawling one with Canada.

But that may be changing.

Only small portion secured

A U.S. Government Accountability Office report recently warned that only a small portion of the border with Canada is properly secure. It said U.S. border officers control just 50 kilometres of the 6,400-kilometre boundary.

The Customs and Border Protection report says while fences have been a big element in deterring unauthorized crossings of the U.S.-Mexican border, "it is unlikely that fencing will play as prominent a role" on the northern border, given its length and terrain that varies from prairie to forest.

However, the agency would use fencing and other barriers such as trenches to control movement and sometimes delay people trying to sneak across the border, increasing the likelihood they could be caught, says the report.

It doesn't provide details about what the fences might look like, but suggests they would be designed to blend into the environment and "complement the natural landscape."

The approach would also involve upgrading roadways and trails near the border.

"The lack of roads or presence of unmaintained roads impedes efficient surveillance operations," says the report. "Improving or expanding the roadway and trail networks could improve mobility, allowing agents to patrol more miles each day and shortening response times."

Over the last two years, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has already made what it calls "critical security improvements along the northern border," adding inspectors at the ports of entry and Border Patrol agents between ports, as well as modernizing land crossings.

Nearly 3,800 Customs and Border Protection officers scrutinize people and goods at crossings. The number of Border Patrol agents working between crossings along the northern parallel has increased 700 per cent since Sept. 11, 2001. And some three dozen land ports of entry are being modernized.

Unmanned U.S. aircraft patrol about 1,500 kilometres along the northern border from Washington to Minnesota as well as more than 300 kilometres of the Canadian border around New York state and Lake Ontario.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/09/29/fence-border-canada.html?cmp=googleeditorspick

U.S. denies border-fence plan, despite report

2011-09-29T19:01:00.000-07:00

Globe and Mail
September 29, 2011
by Tu Thanh Ha and John Ibbitson

The United States government insists it has no plans to put up a fence along parts of the Canada-U.S. border, despite a report that contemplates exactly that.

The report from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency put forward the possibility of fencing the border to deter illegal crossings. But a statement from the agency insisted that “a border fence along the northern border is not being considered at this time.”

The study that proposed the fence was intended to put forward options that could be considered “if additional manpower, technology, and infrastructure were employed,” the statement said.

There is no suggestion as yet that Congress or the Obama administration are planning to substantially increase border-protection funding.

The issue of a possible fence emerged as both countries prepared to release their Beyond the Border joint initiative that aims, in part, to improve border security through co-operation.

The possibility of the fence was brought up in a draft environmental impact study released two weeks ago seeking input from American communities along the 6,400-kilometre border from Maine to Washington State. The fencing would be far less extensive than that of the U.S.-Mexico border. Other tools could include deploying more remote sensors and upgrading checkpoints.

“While fencing has played a prominent role in CBP’s enforcement strategy on the Southern Border to deter illegal border crossings, it is unlikely that fencing will play as prominent a role on the Northern Border, given the length of the border and the variability of the terrain,” the document says.

“CBP would use fencing and other barriers to manage movement (e.g., trenching across roads) in trouble spots where passage of cross-border violators is difficult to control; the resulting delay for cross-border violators would increase the rate of interdiction.”

An accompanying table shows there would be about five major projects, either upgrading access roads or building fences of more than 400 metres in length in each of four geographic areas: the border west of the Rockies, the Prairies, the Great Lakes and New England.

The proposal does not involve the border between Alaska and Canada.

The document outlines five alternatives to help the border agency “protect the Northern Border against evolving threats over the next five to seven years”:

- Maintaining the status quo. The study warns that “this alternative would not fully meet the need for the program because it would not allow CBP to improve its capability to interdict cross-border violators or to identify and resolve threats.”

- Upgrading current facilities such as border-patrol stations and ports of entry and providing more housing for personnel. “These facilities, built for a different era of operations, are poorly configured to support CBP’s evolving trade facilitation and antiterrorism mission,” the study says.

- Increasing detection by fielding more patrols and deploying more high-tech hardware, such as body and container scanners, remote sensors, microphones and cameras and radar.

- “Tactical security infrastructure,” meaning expanding access roads and “constructing additional barriers, such as selective fencing or vehicle barriers, at selected points along the border to deter and delay cross-border violators.”

- A mix of the last three options.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-denies-border-fence-plan-despite-report/article2184300/

U.S. eyes fencing along Canadian border

2011-09-29T05:14:00.000-07:00

Globe and Mail
September 29, 2011
by Jim Bronskill

The United States is looking at building fences along the border with Canada to help keep out terrorists and other criminals.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency has proposed the use of “fencing and other barriers” on the 49th parallel to manage “trouble spots where passage of cross-border violators is difficult to control.”

The border service is also pondering options including a beefed-up technological presence through increased use of radar, sensors, cameras, drones and vehicle scanners. In addition, it might continue to improve or expand customs facilities at ports of entry.

The agency considered but ruled out the possibility of hiring “significantly more” U.S. Border Patrol agents to increase the rate of inspections, noting staffing has already risen in recent years.

The proposals are spelled out in a new draft report by the border service that examines the possible environmental impact of the various options over the next five to seven years.

Customs and Border Protection is inviting comment on the options and plans a series of public meetings in Washington and several U.S. border communities next month. It will then decide which ideas to pursue.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano noted last month the challenges of monitoring the vast, sparsely populated northern border region. She stressed manpower, but also a greater reliance on technology.

Ironically, the moves come as Canada and the U.S. try to finalize a perimeter security arrangement that would focus on continental defences while easing border congestion. It would be aimed at speeding passage of goods and people across the Canada-U.S. border, which has become something of a bottleneck since the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Relatively speaking, Washington has focused more energy and resources on tightening security along the border with Mexico than at the sprawling one with Canada.

But that may be changing.

A U.S. Government Accountability Office report recently warned that only a small portion of the border with Canada is properly secure. It said U.S. border officers control just 50 kilometres of the 6,400-kilometre boundary.

The Customs and Border Protection report says while fences have been a big element in deterring unauthorized crossings of the U.S.-Mexican border, “it is unlikely that fencing will play as prominent a role” on the northern border, given its length and terrain that varies from prairie to forest.

However, the agency would use fencing and other barriers such as trenches to control movement and sometimes delay people trying to sneak across the border, increasing the likelihood they could be caught, says the report.

It doesn’t provide details about what the fences might look like, but suggests they would be designed to blend into the environment and “complement the natural landscape.”

The approach would also involve upgrading roadways and trails near the border.

“The lack of roads or presence of unmaintained roads impedes efficient surveillance operations,” says the report. “Improving or expanding the roadway and trail networks could improve mobility, allowing agents to patrol more miles each day and shortening response times.”

Over the last two years, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has already made what it calls “critical security improvements along the northern border,” adding inspectors at the ports of entry and Border Patrol agents between ports, as well as modernizing land crossings.

Nearly 3,800 Customs and Border Protection officers scrutinize people and goods at crossings. The number of Border Patrol agents working between crossings along the northern parallel has increased 700 per cent since Sept. 11, 2001. And some three dozen land ports of entry are being modernized.

Unmanned U.S. aircraft patrol about 1,500 kilometres along the northern border from Washington to Minnesota as well as more than 300 kilometres of the Canadian border around New York state and Lake Ontario.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/us-eyes-fencing-along-canadian-border/article2184300/

Creative pot smugglers try 'a little bit of everything'

2011-09-28T19:57:00.000-07:00

Arizona Daily Star
September 28, 2011
by Brenna Goth

Nogales smugglers are trying new tricks to get their product through the border fence built this summer.

Capitalizing on the 4-inch openings between steel bars in the fence, pot bundles have been found molded into long, thin tubes that can slip between the slats, law enforcement officials say.

Tossing large, football-shaped bundles over the fence has also become prevalent since the new construction, said Santa Cruz County Sheriff Tony Estrada. Estrada has worked in law enforcement at the border for more than 40 years and said smugglers have tried "a little bit of everything."

With the football bundles, smugglers tape the packages before throwing or launching them from Mexico.

"There are quarterbacks in Mexico and receivers in the U.S.," said Lt. Gerardo Castillo, who works for the Santa Cruz County Metro Task Force. "We try to intercept, obviously."

The thin bundles of pot were first found during a July seizure and were likely passed through a space, Castillo said. He said the tubular bundles were about 20 inches long and about a half-inch thinner than the new border-fence gaps.

The 2.8-mile border fence completed this summer aimed to provide more security through increased height and strength.

But smugglers find tactics to address any new challenges a fence provides, Castillo said.

"It's a cat-and-mouse game," he said. "If we build a wall, they're going to climb it. Whatever barrier exists, they're going to overcome it."

Increased Border Patrol manpower and technology have forced smugglers to bring across smaller loads in recent months, said Agent Jason Rheinfrank.

Rheinfrank recalled other unusual smuggling tactics, like a colleague who found a man wading through the Douglas sewage system with a scuba mask and bundle of marijuana, and the time someone used the lighting system at a baseball field in Douglas to attach fishing line from Mexico to a house.

"They'd zip-lined it (marijuana) down across the border," Rheinfrank said. "They come up with all different methods."

Though it is possible for people to pass things between spaces in the new fence, the visibility provided by the openings is beneficial, Rheinfrank said.

"If you're up to no good? Boom. We can instantly respond to that area," Rheinfrank said.

Estrada said he did not envision any changes being made to the fence to prevent the package-passing. Opportunity will remain despite prevention efforts, he said.

"It just makes cartels more creative," Estrada said. "That's the nature of the beast down here in Nogales."

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_2330a339-707b-50a4-9ad3-dc2265e7ebfd.html

Border fence fails to end drug smuggling

2011-09-28T19:52:00.000-07:00

UPI
September 28, 2011

NOGALES, Ariz., Sept. 28 (UPI) -- A new border fence in Nogales, Ariz., is no barrier to drug smugglers who simply make narcotics hand-offs between the fence's re-enforced bars, officials said.

The Santa Cruz County Metro Task Force says its investigators discovered a number of oddly shaped bundles of marijuana during a recent drug seizure, the Nogales International reported Tuesday.

Forty-eight pounds of marijuana had been wrapped in thin tubular packages investigators say they believe were slipped through the fence, which has interconnected, concrete-filled steel tubes with an approximately 4-inch open space between them.

Task force Lt. Gerry Castillo dubbed the transfers "boom-boom" hand-offs in which someone on the Mexico side quickly pushes a package through to a person on the U.S. side before fleeing.

Passing contraband through the fence is nothing new and smugglers use "any method they can conceive of," Border Patrol Agent Eric Cantu said.

The $11.6-million, 2.8-mile border fence was completed this summer following a groundbreaking in March.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/09/28/Border-fence-fails-to-end-drug-smuggling/UPI-31191317233868/?spt=hts&or=2

Smugglers making hand-offs through bars of border fence

2011-09-27T14:49:00.000-07:00

Nogales International
September 27, 2011
by JB Miller

In another change of tactics precipitated by the new Nogales border fence, smugglers appear to be making narcotics hand-offs from Mexico to the U.S. through the bars of the barrier, authorities say.

Lt. Gerry Castillo of the Santa Cruz County Metro Task Force said his office is looking into a case that began in July when investigators discovered a number of oddly shaped bundles of marijuana during a seizure at an undisclosed location.

He said the investigators at first thought the 48 pounds of marijuana that had been wrapped in thin tubular packages might be "tunnel bundles." However, upon closer examination, they discovered that the bundles were not dirty.

That's when investigators decided that the packages had likely been passed through the fence, which features interconnected, concrete-filled steel tubes with an approximately 4-inch open space between them.

"Boom-boom," is how Castillo described the suspected hand-offs, in which someone on the Mexico side quickly hands a bundle to a person on the U.S. side before taking off.

"We block them for awhile and they come up with another plan," Castillo said of the cat-and-mouse game between drug smugglers and law enforcement.

Castillo said no arrests have been made in the ongoing investigation, but authorities have identified three people of interest.

No change

The new $11.6-million, 2.8-mile border fence was completed this past summer following a groundbreaking in March. At the time of construction, Border Patrol officials said the taller, stronger, more secure barrier would allow it to station fewer agents at the fence and deploy more of them to outlying trouble spots.

However, Agent Eric Cantu, spokesman for the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector, said there has been no change of staffing at the fence area. He added that passing contraband through the fence is nothing new and smugglers use "any method they can conceive of."

Cantu said blocking the space between the bars with material like steel mesh would be unproductive because smugglers would just cut through it.

"We have to be aware of all techniques currently used and try to mitigate through the increase of infrastructure, manpower, and technology and also through our cooperation with other law-enforcement partners," Cantu said.

http://www.nogalesinternational.com/news/smugglers-making-hand-offs-through-bars-of-border-fence/article_68277168-e920-11e0-8e81-001cc4c03286.html

County Residents Still have Questions About Border Wall

2011-09-24T09:51:00.000-07:00

KRGV
September 23, 2011
by Camaron Abundes

LOS EBANOS - People living near the Rio Grande in northern Hidalgo and Starr counties still have many questions about the border wall. The federal government has yet to figure out where it plans to build 14 more miles of border fence.

Ignacio Gutierrez has lived in Los Ebanos for 34 years in the home he built. Over the last six years, he has heard a lot about changes coming, changes-in the shape of a border fence.

"The way of life we live is the way of life. If you put a wall, the problem won't be for us but for the people who want to come here," says Gutierrez.

Gutierrez says he's not sure the wall - and the multi-millions of dollars it will cost to build it - in this region is worth the money. He says he does feel the impact of Border Patrol agents constantly keeping watch on this sleepy little town.

Fourteen miles of required fencing is expected to go up in Starr County, but that won't happen until there's an agreement between the International Boundary and Water Commission and the Department of Homeland Security.

A spokesperson for DHS says the IBWC has already completed a hydrology study of the land. The study was to help experts understand the impact of the wall on the flood plain. They have yet to sign off on any final plans. That means just about everything about the construction remains in limbo.

Gutierrez doesn't know if the wall will ever come or on which side of the fence he'll find his beloved home. There's just one thing he's certain about.

"Bad people that want to do bad will find a way to keep doing it," says Gutierrez.

He says people who want to enter the United States and move drugs and illegal immigrants will keep looking for ways to do it.

Another thing still up in the air is if the federal government will step in to buy additional lands to build the wall in those areas.

http://www.krgv.com/news/local/story/County-Residents-Still-have-Questions-About/_2H9FQI4kUGROMmz4-oi8g.cspx

Feds plan forum on Paisano Drive border fence

2011-09-22T14:23:00.000-07:00

El Paso Times
September 22, 2011
by Daniel Borunda

U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials will have a public meeting tonight about the environmental impact of the planned construction of an 18-foot-tall border fence at a historic spot off West Paisano Drive.

The open-house-style meeting by CBP Facilities Management and Engineering will be at 6 p.m. at the Holiday Inn Express, 409 E. Missouri in Downtown El Paso.

The planned fence would be behind Old Fort Bliss and where conquistador Don Juan de Oñate is thought to have crossed the Rio Grande at "El Paso del Rio del Norte" in 1598.

"The project will be constructed in the only remaining section of the border in El Paso that does not have a pedestrian fence installed," CBP materials stated. "The fence will reduce illegal cross-border activities in this heavily travelled area of the city."

CBP said the 0.63-mile fence would connect to steel-mesh fencing already along the Rio Grande to the west near Asarco and to the east to the Downtown. The planned fence and an access road would be built in the spring.

The planned fence, named segment K-1B, would be next to the American Canal on U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission land and some private property. Officials said parts of the fence would be removable to allow access to the canal.

In 2008, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security issued a waiver of many environmental laws to speed up the construction of border fences, CBP officials said.Ê

Critics of the so-called border wall argue that the barrier is costly, conveys a hostile message and pushes illegal immigration to remote and dangerous locations.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_18949648

Higher border fence causes smugglers to go airborne

2011-09-20T20:53:00.000-07:00

Nogales International
September 20, 2011
by JB Miller

Like a football team with a faltering ground game, drug smugglers are turning to an air attack in an effort to get their product past the new border fence in Nogales.

Lt. Carlos Jimenez of the Nogales Police Department said that due to the increased height and strength of the new barrier, smugglers are having a hard time climbing or cutting through it. As a result, they are coming up with new ways of launching their product over the fence - including tossing football-shaped bundles of marijuana.

"We have seen different shapes and sizes from football-type to large 5-gallon-can-size, cylinder-shaped bundles," Jimenez said.

In one case, a police canine unit responded to the vicinity of East Nelson Avenue on the night of Sept. 9 after someone reported a suspicious amount of car traffic in the area.

An NPD officer checked several parked vehicles and came across a car with fictitious license plates, which "heightened the officer's attention to it," Jimenez said.

"The officer deployed his police canine and the canine alerted to the car interior," Jimenez said. "The car was unsecured and abandoned so when the officer opened the door to the car in plain sight he saw the black football-shape marijuana bundles."

In all, police seized 39 bundles with a total weight of 39.7 pounds and impounded the car.

The incident sparked a series of football-related jokes and puns when Sheriff Antonio Estrada mentioned during the Sept. 14 County Board of Supervisors that NPD had "intercepted" the football-sized bundles.

"There were no receivers," he said after noting that no arrests had been made. As for the smugglers, "Their timing was off," he suggested.

Catapults also suspected

Jimenez said he believes that smugglers are also be using catapult-type devices to launch heavier bundles over the fence.

For example, on the night of Aug. 5, an anonymous caller reported that packages were being thrown over the border fence near Escalada Drive. A few minutes later, as officers were checking out the scene, another anonymous caller reported that there were bundles being heaved over the fence at West International Street.

The officer who responded to Escalada Drive eventually found five "cylinder-shaped" bundles of marijuana with a total weight of 62 pounds - an average of more than 12 pounds each - and NPD asked Border Patrol to use its cameras along the fence in hopes finding the location and device from which the bundles were being tossed. However, no further discoveries or arrests were made.

Meanwhile at West International Street, officers managed to arrest two men and seize five bundles of pot totaling 117 pounds. Several other men reportedly carrying bundles on their backs escaped into Mexico.

While most cases like these are turned over to the Santa Cruz County Metro Task Force, Jimenez said, NPD also shares information with law enforcement on the Mexico side in an effort to catch suspects and contraband.

The new $11.6-million, 2.8-mile border fence, completed this past summer, ranges from 23 to 30 feet in height and is topped by a 5-foot high, south-facing metal sheet to discourage climbers. It's made of six-inch-square metal tubes, filled with concrete with a strand of rebar running down the middle to thwart cutting.

The landing mat fence that it replaced measured approximately 10 feet tall, and was easier to cut through and burrow under.

http://www.nogalesinternational.com/news/higher-border-fence-causes-smugglers-to-go-airborne/article_2dd7d806-e39c-11e0-a8d0-001cc4c002e0.html

House measure would expand Homeland Security powers, waive environmental laws

2011-09-19T07:43:00.000-07:00

Great Falls Tribune
September 18, 2011
by John S. Adams

HELENA — A controversial bill that would give the Department of Homeland Security unprecedented authority over federal lands within 100 miles of the United States' border is making its way through Congress.

The proposed measure, called the "National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act," would let Homeland Security waive 36 major federal environmental protection laws in order to facilitate border patrol activities on public lands.

Supporters of the bill say it would give U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents more control in securing the nation's borders. Opponents argue that the measure is overly broad and would give Homeland Security unchecked authority to disregard major environmental laws on public lands, including wilderness areas, national parks and wildlife refuges among others.

Congressman Denny Rehberg, one of the 49 Republican co-sponsors of the measure, said the bill is aimed at giving border patrol agents the tools they need to secure the border.

"This bill is about ending a dangerous turf war being waged between various federal government agencies — and it's a turf war that is threatening America's national security," Rehberg said. "The simple idea of the bill is to provide the border patrol with the same access on federal land that it currently has on state and private land. There is nothing about this bill that creates any new authority to intrude into the lives of Americans."

Critics, including Democratic Sen. Jon Tester, say House Resolution 1505 is on par with the Patriot Act and REAL ID, in terms of granting the federal government unprecedented and overreaching powers.

"It's a federal land grab at its worst," Tester said. "I just can't see how any lawmaker would think it's a good idea to allow the Department of Homeland Security to make sweeping decisions about our land and ignore our rights without any public accountability."

The bill would give the secretary of homeland security total operational authority over all federal lands within 100 miles of the U.S. international and maritime borders. Under the proposed law, DHS would have immediate access to, and control over, any public land managed by the federal government for "purposes of conducting activities that assist in securing the border (including access to maintain and construct roads, construct a fence, use vehicles to patrol and set up monitoring equipment)."

In Montana, the law would impact nearly the entire northern third of the state, including Glacier National Park; portions of the Kootenai and Flathead national forests; The Flathead, Blackfeet, Rocky Boy's, Fort Belknap and Fort Peck Indian reservations, the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge, and tens of thousands of acres of Bureau of Land Management lands.

The measure also waives 36 major environmental laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Park Service Organic Act, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the National Historic Preservation Act and the Clean Air Act.

Homeland Security spokesman Matt Chandler said the agency does not comment on the specifics of pending legislation.

Kim Thorsen, deputy assistant secretary for law enforcement, security and emergency management at the U.S. Department of Interior, testified to the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands that the Obama administration opposes the measure.

"We recognize the significant ecological and cultural values of the extensive lands Interior agencies manage near the borders, and we strive to maintain their character and fulfill our mission to protect and preserve these assets on behalf of the American people," Thorsen said in written testimony to the committee. "We also believe that these two objectives — securing our borders and conserving our federal lands — are not mutually exclusive; we are not faced with a choice between the two, instead, we can — and should — do both."

According to Thorsen, HR 1505 would have a significant impact on the Interior Department's ability to carry out its mission to protect natural and cultural resources on federally managed and trust lands.

"As drafted, this bill could impact approximately 54 units of the national park system, 228 national wildlife refuges, 122 units of the National Wilderness Preservation System managed by Interior, and 87 units of BLM's National Landscape Conservation System, resulting in unintended damage to sensitive natural and cultural resources, including endangered species and wilderness," Thorsen wrote.

John Leshy, a University of California - Hastings, law professor and a former committee staffer, told the committee that compared with other legislation he has seen, HR 1505 is "the most breathtakingly extreme legislative proposal of its kind."

"I have grave concerns, not only about its wisdom as a matter of policy, but also its constitutionality as a matter of law," Hastings told the committee.

He also said that under the bill, Homeland Security's actions would be immune from court review, except for constitutional claims.

Supporters of the measure say that's exactly the point.

Zack Taylor, vice chairman of the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers, said the foundational components of border security are national security and public safety. He said no other laws — including environmental protection laws — should ever supersede those foundational principles.

"What has happened is the importance on the environment has come to rule everything else," Taylor said in an interview last week. "In our view, the people are more important than the porcupine or the wolverine or the wolf or the grizzly bear."

Jane Danowitz, director of U.S. Public Lands for the Pew Environment Group, said the measure is part of a "disturbing trend" in Congress to undo environmental regulations in the name of public safety or national security.

"Anti-environmental bills that would never pass under their own merits are now being recast as solutions to some of the country's most pressing problems," Danowitz said. "We all care about national security and protecting our borders, but waiving core conservation measures is not the way to do it."

Supporters say the criticisms of the bill are overblown.

"HR 1505 isn't about creating new enforcement authority. Rather, it's about making existing laws actually work as intended by alleviating the regulatory burden of certain environmental laws," Rehberg said.

Rehberg said the bill is not just about preventing terrorists from entering this country, it also is about stemming the flow of illegal immigrants, drug smuggling and the abuse of public lands by criminals and drug cartels.

"At the end of the day, I never want to have to tell a Montana family that their loved one was killed by someone on drugs that got into our state because some federal bureaucrats couldn't work together to control the border," Rehberg said.

Tester said the bill has far greater implications than its supporters acknowledge.

"This is a whole lot worse than just granting agents access to certain federal lands. It gives one federal department the ability to run roughshod over the rights of law-abiding Americans and seize vast swaths of land we all own and use — with no public accountability," Tester said. "This nation is very capable of fighting terrorism without turning into a government police state, but that's exactly what this unpopular plan would do."

According to the bill's sponsor, Utah Republican Rep. Rob Bishop, the measure could see a mark-up before the end of the year.

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20110919/NEWS01/109190303/House-measure-would-expand-Homeland-Security-powers-waive-environmental-laws?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cs

Lucio: I Plan to See Border Wall Torn Down in My Lifetime

2011-09-17T20:29:00.000-07:00

Rio Grande Guardian
September 17, 2011
by Steve Taylor

BROWNSVILLE, Sept. 17 - State Sen. Eddie Lucio says if Rio Grande Valley residents keep up the pressure, they will succeed in tearing down the border wall.

“I was born and reared here and I have never seen anything like this monstrosity,” Lucio said, referring to the border wall. “In my lifetime I want to see the border wall come down, just like I saw the Berlin Wall come down. Even if I am 85 or 90 years old, I want to be there when the wall comes down.”

Lucio said he also wants to see, in his lifetime, the appropriate level of compensation paid to those whose homes and land have been disfigured by the border wall. “We give big corporations on Wall Street billions of dollars of tax relief. Why can’t we give the little people, people I consider great Americans and great Texans, some relief? We should not turn our backs on those in need,” he said.

Lucio, D-Brownsville, made his comments in an exclusive interview with the Guardian immediately following a town hall meeting he held to discuss to the impact the border wall has had on landowners who live between the wall and the Rio Grande.

Lucio said all the evidence suggests the border wall has not been an effective method in deterring undocumented immigration. He said it was only erected “to satisfy the appetite of immigrant-bashing politicians in other parts of America.”

A much better method of deterring undocumented immigration, Lucio said, would be to set up a four-state immigrant employment zone where Mexican residents could come in and work under a guest worker program. He said he is confident that if such a program were in operation, Mexican nationals would return to their homeland once their work is done.

“If we want to do something about illegal immigration we should create an immigrant employment zone and have guest workers come in. We would know who they are and where they live. At the moment people get in illegally and they spread out. They are in hiding,” Lucio said.

“I want to see the federal government pass legislation to allow the four Border States – Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California - to address this issue at the state level. We know better than the federal government how to set up this program. We need bricklayers, we need roofers; we need dishwashers, we need agricultural workers. Let us as Border States hire workers from Mexico to do the jobs our people are unwilling to do.”

Lucio said if the federal government allowed the Border States to create an immigrant employment zone for Mexican workers, the four states would be a lot cleaner. “These people are workers. They have an incredible work ethic. They would keep our state clean. All they want to do is make a little bit of money to maintain their families. They want to eat. They want to live. Who can blame them? It is all about if we are going to be humanitarians or not,” he said.

Lucio said the U.S. should also be doing more to help Mexico.

“The way you curb illegal immigration from Mexico is to create an economy there that is robust. The Mexican government needs to establish a national minimum wage. You get a $5 dollar minimum wage and these workers will not be coming here. They will stay in Mexico. Lift their economy and you keep these people in their homeland,” he said.

Lucio concluded his interview with the Guardian by casting doubt on the usefulness of a congressional hearing being staged at the University of Texas at Brownsville on Monday by U.S. Rep. Ted Poe, R-Humble. The hearing is slated to focus on border violence.

“My staff has been told only invited guests will be allowed to speak at this hearing and that the people of my community, the people who attended this town hall meeting, will not be allowed to testify. That is un-American,” Lucio said.

“Why bother to hold a hearing if you are not going to hear from the public? Why waste taxpayers’ money? Send us the money for public education or healthcare. Don’t spend all this money on a joyride. As far as I am concerned these members of Congress could have stayed back home and done a teleconference. I am extremely disappointed our residents will not get to speak.”

Poe is a big backer of the border wall. Last March he co-authored the Unlawful Border Entry Prevention Act, which would require construction of an additional 350 miles of border wall.

Despite not being allowed to testify at Poe’s hearing, Lucio said he will try to get all the comments made by those at his town hall meeting entered into the congressional record. “I am going to see if they make these comments part of the record or chuck them away,” Lucio said. He said he would also be sending the comments of those who attended the town hall meeting to President Obama.

Lucio’s town hall meeting was held at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course, adjacent to the Rio Grande.

Among those who spoke at the event were state Rep. René Oliveira, D-Brownsville, landowner Michelle Taylor Moncivaiz, whose home lies between the border wall and the Rio Grande, Equal Voice for America’s Families leader Mike Seifert, La Unión del Pueblo Entero Director Juanita Valdez Cox, Sierra Club Borderlands Team Co-Chair and No Border Wall Coalition Co-Founder Scott Nicol, UT-Brownsville professors Jeff Wilson and Jude Benavides, Hidalgo County Democratic Party activist Aaron Peña III, Texas Rangers Liaison Art Barrera, and Rick Perez, a member of the special investigations unit set up by Cameron County Sheriff Omar Lucio. The only person at the hearing to speak in favor of the border wall was Brownsville resident Dagberto Barrera.

http://www.riograndeguardian.com/rggnews_story.asp?story_no=26

Impact of border wall discussed at meeting

2011-09-17T20:18:00.000-07:00

Brownsville Herald / The Monitor
September 17, 2011
by Jacqueline Armendariz

BROWNSVILLE -- Drug trafficking from Mexico into Cameron County has increased, not decreased, since the border fence was built, a sheriff’s lieutenant said Saturday at a public meeting.

It was one of many points discussed at the “Border Wall Impact” meeting hosted by State Senator Eddie Lucio Jr. at the Fort Brown Memorial Golf Course. The event brought together legislators, city representatives, state and county law enforcement and private citizens to air concerns about the fence.

“Is the fence keeping drugs from coming in? No,” Lieutenant Rick Perez said responding to a question. “We have more drugs now than before.”

Perez is part of the special investigations unit of the Cameron County Sheriff’s Department.

A disconnect between U.S. border communities and the federal government, and the perceived ineffectiveness of the border fence, emerged as the major themes at Saturday’s gathering.

One property owner shared stories about finding drugs near her home and also being the victim of a home burglary.

Among people who spoke, some supported the fence while most did not.

“This is terrorism from the United States to other countries,” Yolanda Garza Birdwell said of the fence and its environmental impact. She described herself as a dual citizen of the U.S. and Mexico and a Laguna Vista resident for a year.

Dagoberto Berrera was at the opposite end of the spectrum. He said he supported the fence, and he spoke disparagingly of undocumented immigrants.

‘Better than nothing’

“The wall is better than nothing,” he said. “Sure, it costs a lot of money, but it also costs us by just letting everybody in here. We are a land of law and order. You’ve got to obey the laws.”

The audience, which included District 4 City Commissioner John Villarreal, numbered a little more than 20 people.

Lucio said he has been disappointed by the lack of information about the impact of the border fence, and said he hoped to use what he learned Saturday to be an advocate for the region in Austin.

“I truly hope that today’s meeting will be the first true step in understanding the real impacts of the border wall on our region with the information that you share, being armed with facts, figures and knowledge,” Lucio told those in attendance.

Lobbying for property owners

Lucio’s brother, Bob Lucio, is the manager of the border golf course that hosted the meeting and said his hope is to get more support for his group called the No Man’s Land Association.

With power in numbers, he said he wants to lobby to help for property owners or businesses like himself whose land has ended up between the Rio Grande River and the border fence.

At the meeting, several audience members brought up concerns about being able to communicate with law enforcement and the environmental impact of the fence, while others spoke to decreased property values and alleged that the federal government has abused its power of eminent domain.

Still others spoke to serious safety concerns, while another audience member raised concerns about the potential psychological effects the border wall has created for communities on both sides. There was also discussion of a University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College study that found the fence effects minorities disproportionately.

Fears for safety

Michelle Moncivaiz identified herself as a property owner living just a short distance from the border fence, but she said she feared for the safety of her family. She pleaded to the law enforcement representatives and legislators present for “more boots on the ground” to help.

“Washington doesn’t understand what this fence has created,” she said. “Where is our Homeland Security? ... Where is America helping us on the border?”

No one at the meeting disputed the assertion that more law enforcement officers are needed along the border. Perez said at the end of this year the Sheriff’s Department will lose 12 deputies who were temporarily staffed through a $2.2 million grant from the Department of Justice.

He read a statement on behalf of Cameron County Sheriff Omar Lucio saying that he never supported the fence. The sheriff was not present at the meeting.

“The sheriff suggests that instead of building the fence, take into consideration giving him the $10 million and you can hire 12 deputies for several years and they would do a better job than the fence,” Perez said. Still, the statement discussed a high-traffic drug smuggling area along Highway 4, where there is no fence.

Sharing information

Texas Ranger Staff Lieutenant Art Barrera said he is the liaison between local, state and federal law enforcement in Operation Border Star, and he reports information to Austin. He and Perez said the entities they work for have not conducted studies on the impact of the fence.

“It’s getting better,” Barrera said of sharing knowledge. “I’m not saying we’re there yet, but information sharing between federal, state and local is on the right track.”

Hearing Monday

A federal hearing on border security is scheduled for Monday. Lucio said state legislators were not invited and that testimony would not be taken from the public. He invited people to attend and submit written testimony with him.

“Only those that have been invited will be able to testify,” he said. “That’s not the practice we’re used to in Austin, and it bothers me.”

On Saturday, Lucio said he had just found out about the federal forum that day, but earlier in the week his spokesman told The Herald that the timing of Saturday’s meeting and Monday’s hearing was coincidental.

The “Secure our Texas Border Forum,” headed by House Representative Ted Poe, R-Humble, and other members of the House Committee on the Judiciary, was rescheduled at least once already this summer. The forum will be at the UTB-TSC Arts Center at 10 a.m. Prominent figures related to border security are scheduled to testify as witnesses.

Too expensive

Lucio said he introduced Senate Bill 1809 this past legislative session in an effort to secure an economic impact study of the border fence in this area. It failed in the House, he said.

He said the state comptroller told him such a study would likely be too expensive to undertake, but he hoped legislation for it could be pushed for in the future.

State Representative Rene Oliveira said the issue of security and immigration were two different things, though they are often connected when discussing the desirability of the border fence.

“I don’t want cartels in the Valley or Texas,” he said. “I don’t want those people to flourish in our country.”

But, he said, learning the impact of the border fence, and how to mitigate any negative effects, is now the necessary focus.

“The wall is here whether we like it or not,” he said. “I don’t think anybody is going to tear it down. The political will is clearly nonexistent for that.”

http://www.themonitor.com/news/border-54855-fence-cameron.html

Environmental waivers enter DHS bill amid growing opposition

2011-09-16T07:02:00.000-07:00

E&E
September 16, 2011
by Annie Snider

Efforts to let the U.S. Border Patrol waive environmental laws on public lands along the border advanced this week in a Senate spending bill.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Wednesday introduced an amendment to the fiscal 2012 Homeland Security spending bill that would give Border Patrol agents free access to public lands within 300 miles of the border with Mexico. The committee approved a modified version, 13-4, that scaled the provision back to a 100-mile zone.

Randy Serraglio, a conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity based in Tucson, Ariz., said McCain's amendment and the whole issue of a conflict between between border security and environmental protections is a red herring.

"There's a motivation for politicians to grandstand on the issue," he said. "Unfortunately, what underlies this issue in general is a lot of ignorance and hysteria that's driven by misinformation."

Serraglio said the proposed exemptions could have a devastating effect on wildlife. In his region of Arizona, he points to jaguar, ocelot and Sonoran pronghorn as some of the sensitive species that could be affected.

Although worded differently, McCain's amendment closely follows a bill introduced earlier this year by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) that applies to the northern, southern and maritime borders. So far, the bill has attracted 49 co-sponsors.

Bishop and other supporters say environmental protections prevent Border Patrol agents from doing their jobs along the 40 percent of border land that is under federal management. Specifically, they point to the 4.3 million acres of wilderness areas where motorized vehicles are generally prohibited (Land Letter, July 14; Greenwire, April 18).

But in two studies completed last fall, the Government Accountability Office found that even when they caused delays, environmental protections were not a significant hindrance to security operations.

And at recent hearings, Border Patrol, Interior Department and Agriculture Department officials have denied that there is a problem.

"Does the Border Patrol face challenges with respect to operating around protected lands when they are in our enforcement zones? Yes," Ronald Vitiello, deputy chief of U.S. Border Patrol, told lawmakers in April. "But we have been able to establish practical solutions to allow for mission success."

Many of those solutions came from a 2006 memorandum of understanding between the Customs and Border Patrol and land managers that gives Border Patrol agents greater access. Most notably, it allows the Border Patrol free access in exigent circumstances, like when in hot pursuit.

But Republicans say the Obama administration is putting a nice face on a dangerous problem.

"You can't come before the American people and say everything is rosy and fine," Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), a co-sponsor of Bishop's bill, told administration officials in April. "The American people are dying. They are getting killed because we have holes in our security ... and we're putting border patrols out there and saying, 'Oh, go on horseback, go on foot,' because we'd much rather protect this little cactus."

Local concerns

Republicans on the House Natural Resources Committee have brought southern ranchers to testify about the dangers of the border region during hearings on Bishop's bill. But Hugo Tureck, a rancher and former chairman of the Central Montana Resource Advisory Council, said that is not an issue in his region.

Moreover, Tureck, who has been closely following recent debate over the Interior Department's ability to designate national monuments on federal land, said he saw hypocrisy in the fact that some of the same lawmakers who co-sponsored Bishop's bill this week decried the Antiquities Act as a "land grab" (Greenwire, Sept. 13).

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) "is talking about how the government has come in the middle of the night and taken away landowners' rights, but then he goes and proposes a bill that gives an agency extreme powers with no oversight," said Tureck, who grazes cattle on public land in Coffee Creek, Mont.

Tureck plans to pen an opinion piece in his local paper to alert Montanans to the issue.

"Homeland Security could stop timber sales, snowmobiles, hunting, they could kick cattle off the land and build a fence wherever they want -- that's all given to them," Tureck said. "Montanans just cherish their public lands. That's why we're here."

'A fundamentally scary piece of legislation'

For John Leshy, a professor at the University of California's Hastings College of Law and a former Clinton administration solicitor for Interior, the problem with the border security bills is that they prevent DHS from being challenged in court.

"This is a fundamentally scary piece of legislation," Leshy said of Bishop's bill. "DHS basically gets a pass on judicial review. You can only challenge them on constitutional grounds, you can't challenge it as being inconsistent with any statute."

Leshy pointed to an exemption that Congress granted DHS in 1996 that was expanded. First, DHS had the right to waive the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act for the construction of 14 miles of fenceline along the Mexican border. Then, in 2005, the right expanded to 70 miles of fence and all environmental laws. A year later, Congress extended the waiver to 400 miles of fence construction.

"If you've got the power, you're eventually going to exercise it," Leshy said. "That's just a fact of human nature."