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
Showing posts with label jaguar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jaguar. Show all posts
Monday, December 5, 2011
Monday, November 21, 2011
Arizona hunter spots rare U.S.-Mexico borderlands jaguar
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
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
Thursday, September 23, 2010
FWS Southwest Director: People, Not Species, Toughest Part of Job
New York Times
September 23, 2010
by April Reese
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- It was late 2007, and the Department of Homeland Security's effort to block passage of drug smugglers and illegal immigrants into the United States from Mexico by building several hundred miles of new reinforced fencing along the border was in full tilt.
But when the project reached Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, comprising about 118,000 acres of southern Arizona, Homeland Security hit a snag.
Refuge manager Mitch Ellis informed DHS officials that he could not approve the fence project, planned for about a 1-mile stretch along the refuge's southern perimeter, because it would bisect habitat for the endangered jaguar and other species in violation of the Endangered Species Act.
Frustrated with Ellis's decision, which required approval from the Fish and Wildlife Service's Region 2 headquarters in Albuquerque, DHS took its case to Southwest Regional Director Benjamin Tuggle.
Tuggle, who was appointed to the Southwest post just before Congress mandated construction of the fence, came up with a compromise: FWS would give Homeland Security the refuge land it needed for the fence, but in return FWS would receive lands of comparable ecological value elsewhere in the area, of the service's choosing (Land Letter, Nov. 29, 2007).
The decision, which allowed DHS to avoid exercising a controversial waiver authority granted to it by Congress to bypass federal environmental laws to expedite construction of the border fence, was unpopular not only with environmental groups and some members of the public, but also with the refuge staff.
But the 56-year-old Tuggle, who has one of the toughest jobs in the agency, is not one to wilt in the face of a challenge.
That quality, he says, has served him well in his four and a half years as the commander of the a region that has proven to be a hotbed of politically thorny issues, he says.
'I learn where you're coming from'
On any given day, Tuggle, whose region stretches from Oklahoma to Arizona, could be contending with efforts to recover Mexican wolves, the development of oil and gas resources in prairie chicken habitat, illegal drug smuggling through refuge lands, or how to ensure the survival of endangered animals and plants along the border fence that is designed to be impenetrable to smugglers and illegal immigrants.
In fact, upon arriving in the Southwest after a stint as acting special assistant to the director in Washington, D.C., Tuggle set his sights on fixing the beleaguered Mexican wolf program, determined to bring the tiny population back from the brink amid a backdrop of vehement local opposition (Land Letter, May 13).
And he has proven himself unafraid to take a strong stand. Discussing the spate of recent illegal shootings of Mexican wolves, whose population dropped to 42 animals last year, Tuggle makes no bones about his view of the perpetrators.
"People who are shooting wolves are criminals," he said flatly, sitting at a table near the window of his expansive corner office in downtown Albuquerque. "I will do whatever it takes to handle that illegal activity."
Amid the books, native pottery and stuffed animals filling his large office bookcase is a pair of buttons: One, from Defenders of Wildlife, depicts a Mexican wolf with the words "Wanted Alive" printed underneath; the other depicts the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association logo. In Tuggle's view, considering both perspectives is a critical part of doing his job.
"I'm a very good listener because that's the only way I learn where you're coming from," he said. "That's how you sustain a coalition."
Yet Tuggle still faces criticism from local officials and residents in the Mexican wolf recovery area, which straddles the New Mexico-Arizona border, that he does not listen well enough.
For instance, his office recently established an "interdiction fund" to pay ranchers for livestock lost to wolves and financially support other measures aimed at reducing wolf-livestock conflicts, such as hiring range riders to deter wolves. But some local officials have complained that the stakeholder group that will decide how the money is spent will be weighted in favor of conservationists (Land Letter, March 25).
But while people on both sides of the issue may disagree with Tuggle, they always know where he stands, said Eva Sargent, southwest program director for Defenders of Wildlife. "He's very sort of straight-talking, I think not only with us but with the ranchers and all the stakeholders," she said. "Even if you don't agree with what he says, ... you pretty much understand where he's coming from."
At times, FWS, as the agency responsible for upholding one of the most embattled environmental laws -- the Endangered Species Act -- also clashes with other federal agencies over projects that could harm protected wildlife and plants. The challenge is most evident in the Southwest, where border security has become a major policy issue, leading to the construction of hundreds of miles of new fence, including across ecologically important public lands.
In Texas and Arizona, where a string of wildlife refuges harbor some of the last vestiges of habitat for the ocelot, jaguar and other threatened and endangered species, Tuggle and his refuge managers have undertaken sensitive negotiations with Homeland Security officials to try to mitigate the damage from the fence.
"I think Dr. Tuggle has done a fair job," said Ellis, the former manager of Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, who now oversees the Southwest Arizona National Wildlife Refuge Complex, including the Kofa, Imperial and Cibola refuges. "I think it's very difficult trying to reconcile our agency's mission with the mission of the DHS. It's hard to have win-win situations."
That said, Ellis acknowledges that he and his supervisor do not always see eye to eye, as evidenced by their difference of opinion over the border fence project at Buenos Aires NWR.
"I would have liked to have seen FWS take a firmer stand and say with that particular pedestrian barrier, giving them a permit was not consistent with our laws," Ellis said. "The public needs to see we're at odds here."
Tuggle, who has a doctorate in zoology, said that while the science on a resource issue is usually clear, it is dealing with the divergent views among various interests that is challenging.
"Natural resource management is not difficult; people management is difficult," he said.
Ruffled agency feathers
That can extend to his own workforce as well. While Tuggle describes his management style as "open and inclusive," he has drawn criticism for failing to respect the expertise of his employees in the field.
"There's almost a kind of parental attitude toward the project leaders in the field," said one senior FWS field manager, who asked not to be named. "A very scolding tone at times. We've got some very experienced project leaders doing good work. But the impression they've gotten is, 'You guys in the field don't know what you're doing.' There's no trust."
Better communication from Region 2 headquarters would go a long way in resolving the problem, the field manager added.
Tuggle admitted that his decisions are not always popular with FWS employees. But, he added, field managers sometimes fail to understand other factors that must be taken into account in species decisions.
"That's a fair criticism," he said of the complaint that he sometimes contradicts his field staff. "There are a lot of times that recommendations come in from the field which don't comport with the reality of the decisions we have to make. I think I try to communicate about the decision, but they don't always like the decision. But I always respect their expertise."
Tuggle recalled a project proposed for Kofa National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona a few years ago. When an electric utility applied for a permit to run a power line through the refuge, along the route of an existing line, Tuggle approved the project, even though refuge officials opposed it.
"There were a lot of people who were very upset I made that decision," Tuggle said. "But I stand by it. That was one of the more controversial ones, but I think we negotiated it in a fair way."
Tuggle acknowledged that he can be tough at times, but said he sees himself as fair. "I'm not really a bullying type," he said. "I'd much rather get flies with sugar, not salt."
While Tuggle has drawn internal flak for decisions that contradict the recommendations of his staff, he also has a reputation for defending his employees when they are in the political hot seat.
Mike Hawkes, who retired as manager of Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge last May, said that when his staff drew fire for issuing littering citations to a humanitarian group that placed water jugs in the desert for illegal border crossers, Tuggle encouraged the staff to continue their enforcement efforts and "let the public go ahead and see us doing our jobs."
"He does seem to back up his field folks," Hawkes said. "He stuck his neck out and took the heat occasionally. If we decided to do something, he wouldn't back out of it for political reasons later on. He provided back-up."
Ellis agreed. "When issues are important and they need to be championed, he's stepped up, and he's taken some difficult issues forward," he said, citing a decision Tuggle made to cull mountain lions on Kofa National Wildlife Refuge to help conserve bighorn sheep (Land Letter, May 27). "When we need support at the regional level, he will take them on, and he's a good spokesperson for those issues."
Diversifying the ranks
When he is not negotiating the rough political terrain of endangered species and refuge management, Tuggle, who is African-American, is helping lead the charge to bring greater diversity to FWS and also to raise the profile of wildlife conservation within minority communities.
"I think there's a pool of people we haven't tapped that don't look like the rest of us that we need to bring in," he said. "We need to continue to help the new generation understand the gift that's been given to us so that they will inherit that stewardship sensibility."
FWS is doing more outreach to college students, encouraging them to apply for internships to explore conservation work, he said. The agency also visits minority communities to try to generate more interest in wildlife conservation and natural resource careers, he added.
Tuggle, who is known to hand out copies of Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods," about the modern disconnect between children and nature, also strongly supports providing opportunities for city kids to get outside. Recalling that he developed his own love for the natural world during summer visits to his grandmother's house in Georgia, Tuggle said that exposure to flora and fauna is key in putting more children on the path to conservation and wildlife careers.
In fact, the very future of conservation in the United States may depend on it, he said.
"If you look at conservation in the world, the United States is the leader," he said. "If the U.S. has the best conservation ethic in the world, it's reflective of the people. And if the demographics of those people is changing ... there might be people who don't think endangered species are important, they might not think habitat is important. We need to get to those people right away, and help them understand that that's part of what makes this country great."
The country's public lands are part of its national heritage, and everyone has a stake in natural resource management, he added.
"It really is a patriotic issue," he said. "Because this country has been founded on the greatness of the resources of this country."
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/09/23/23greenwire-fws-southwest-director-people-not-species-toug-61265.html?pagewanted=2
September 23, 2010
by April Reese
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- It was late 2007, and the Department of Homeland Security's effort to block passage of drug smugglers and illegal immigrants into the United States from Mexico by building several hundred miles of new reinforced fencing along the border was in full tilt.
But when the project reached Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, comprising about 118,000 acres of southern Arizona, Homeland Security hit a snag.
Refuge manager Mitch Ellis informed DHS officials that he could not approve the fence project, planned for about a 1-mile stretch along the refuge's southern perimeter, because it would bisect habitat for the endangered jaguar and other species in violation of the Endangered Species Act.
Frustrated with Ellis's decision, which required approval from the Fish and Wildlife Service's Region 2 headquarters in Albuquerque, DHS took its case to Southwest Regional Director Benjamin Tuggle.
Tuggle, who was appointed to the Southwest post just before Congress mandated construction of the fence, came up with a compromise: FWS would give Homeland Security the refuge land it needed for the fence, but in return FWS would receive lands of comparable ecological value elsewhere in the area, of the service's choosing (Land Letter, Nov. 29, 2007).
The decision, which allowed DHS to avoid exercising a controversial waiver authority granted to it by Congress to bypass federal environmental laws to expedite construction of the border fence, was unpopular not only with environmental groups and some members of the public, but also with the refuge staff.
But the 56-year-old Tuggle, who has one of the toughest jobs in the agency, is not one to wilt in the face of a challenge.
That quality, he says, has served him well in his four and a half years as the commander of the a region that has proven to be a hotbed of politically thorny issues, he says.
'I learn where you're coming from'
On any given day, Tuggle, whose region stretches from Oklahoma to Arizona, could be contending with efforts to recover Mexican wolves, the development of oil and gas resources in prairie chicken habitat, illegal drug smuggling through refuge lands, or how to ensure the survival of endangered animals and plants along the border fence that is designed to be impenetrable to smugglers and illegal immigrants.
In fact, upon arriving in the Southwest after a stint as acting special assistant to the director in Washington, D.C., Tuggle set his sights on fixing the beleaguered Mexican wolf program, determined to bring the tiny population back from the brink amid a backdrop of vehement local opposition (Land Letter, May 13).
And he has proven himself unafraid to take a strong stand. Discussing the spate of recent illegal shootings of Mexican wolves, whose population dropped to 42 animals last year, Tuggle makes no bones about his view of the perpetrators.
"People who are shooting wolves are criminals," he said flatly, sitting at a table near the window of his expansive corner office in downtown Albuquerque. "I will do whatever it takes to handle that illegal activity."
Amid the books, native pottery and stuffed animals filling his large office bookcase is a pair of buttons: One, from Defenders of Wildlife, depicts a Mexican wolf with the words "Wanted Alive" printed underneath; the other depicts the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association logo. In Tuggle's view, considering both perspectives is a critical part of doing his job.
"I'm a very good listener because that's the only way I learn where you're coming from," he said. "That's how you sustain a coalition."
Yet Tuggle still faces criticism from local officials and residents in the Mexican wolf recovery area, which straddles the New Mexico-Arizona border, that he does not listen well enough.
For instance, his office recently established an "interdiction fund" to pay ranchers for livestock lost to wolves and financially support other measures aimed at reducing wolf-livestock conflicts, such as hiring range riders to deter wolves. But some local officials have complained that the stakeholder group that will decide how the money is spent will be weighted in favor of conservationists (Land Letter, March 25).
But while people on both sides of the issue may disagree with Tuggle, they always know where he stands, said Eva Sargent, southwest program director for Defenders of Wildlife. "He's very sort of straight-talking, I think not only with us but with the ranchers and all the stakeholders," she said. "Even if you don't agree with what he says, ... you pretty much understand where he's coming from."
At times, FWS, as the agency responsible for upholding one of the most embattled environmental laws -- the Endangered Species Act -- also clashes with other federal agencies over projects that could harm protected wildlife and plants. The challenge is most evident in the Southwest, where border security has become a major policy issue, leading to the construction of hundreds of miles of new fence, including across ecologically important public lands.
In Texas and Arizona, where a string of wildlife refuges harbor some of the last vestiges of habitat for the ocelot, jaguar and other threatened and endangered species, Tuggle and his refuge managers have undertaken sensitive negotiations with Homeland Security officials to try to mitigate the damage from the fence.
"I think Dr. Tuggle has done a fair job," said Ellis, the former manager of Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge, who now oversees the Southwest Arizona National Wildlife Refuge Complex, including the Kofa, Imperial and Cibola refuges. "I think it's very difficult trying to reconcile our agency's mission with the mission of the DHS. It's hard to have win-win situations."
That said, Ellis acknowledges that he and his supervisor do not always see eye to eye, as evidenced by their difference of opinion over the border fence project at Buenos Aires NWR.
"I would have liked to have seen FWS take a firmer stand and say with that particular pedestrian barrier, giving them a permit was not consistent with our laws," Ellis said. "The public needs to see we're at odds here."
Tuggle, who has a doctorate in zoology, said that while the science on a resource issue is usually clear, it is dealing with the divergent views among various interests that is challenging.
"Natural resource management is not difficult; people management is difficult," he said.
Ruffled agency feathers
That can extend to his own workforce as well. While Tuggle describes his management style as "open and inclusive," he has drawn criticism for failing to respect the expertise of his employees in the field.
"There's almost a kind of parental attitude toward the project leaders in the field," said one senior FWS field manager, who asked not to be named. "A very scolding tone at times. We've got some very experienced project leaders doing good work. But the impression they've gotten is, 'You guys in the field don't know what you're doing.' There's no trust."
Better communication from Region 2 headquarters would go a long way in resolving the problem, the field manager added.
Tuggle admitted that his decisions are not always popular with FWS employees. But, he added, field managers sometimes fail to understand other factors that must be taken into account in species decisions.
"That's a fair criticism," he said of the complaint that he sometimes contradicts his field staff. "There are a lot of times that recommendations come in from the field which don't comport with the reality of the decisions we have to make. I think I try to communicate about the decision, but they don't always like the decision. But I always respect their expertise."
Tuggle recalled a project proposed for Kofa National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona a few years ago. When an electric utility applied for a permit to run a power line through the refuge, along the route of an existing line, Tuggle approved the project, even though refuge officials opposed it.
"There were a lot of people who were very upset I made that decision," Tuggle said. "But I stand by it. That was one of the more controversial ones, but I think we negotiated it in a fair way."
Tuggle acknowledged that he can be tough at times, but said he sees himself as fair. "I'm not really a bullying type," he said. "I'd much rather get flies with sugar, not salt."
While Tuggle has drawn internal flak for decisions that contradict the recommendations of his staff, he also has a reputation for defending his employees when they are in the political hot seat.
Mike Hawkes, who retired as manager of Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge last May, said that when his staff drew fire for issuing littering citations to a humanitarian group that placed water jugs in the desert for illegal border crossers, Tuggle encouraged the staff to continue their enforcement efforts and "let the public go ahead and see us doing our jobs."
"He does seem to back up his field folks," Hawkes said. "He stuck his neck out and took the heat occasionally. If we decided to do something, he wouldn't back out of it for political reasons later on. He provided back-up."
Ellis agreed. "When issues are important and they need to be championed, he's stepped up, and he's taken some difficult issues forward," he said, citing a decision Tuggle made to cull mountain lions on Kofa National Wildlife Refuge to help conserve bighorn sheep (Land Letter, May 27). "When we need support at the regional level, he will take them on, and he's a good spokesperson for those issues."
Diversifying the ranks
When he is not negotiating the rough political terrain of endangered species and refuge management, Tuggle, who is African-American, is helping lead the charge to bring greater diversity to FWS and also to raise the profile of wildlife conservation within minority communities.
"I think there's a pool of people we haven't tapped that don't look like the rest of us that we need to bring in," he said. "We need to continue to help the new generation understand the gift that's been given to us so that they will inherit that stewardship sensibility."
FWS is doing more outreach to college students, encouraging them to apply for internships to explore conservation work, he said. The agency also visits minority communities to try to generate more interest in wildlife conservation and natural resource careers, he added.
Tuggle, who is known to hand out copies of Richard Louv's book "Last Child in the Woods," about the modern disconnect between children and nature, also strongly supports providing opportunities for city kids to get outside. Recalling that he developed his own love for the natural world during summer visits to his grandmother's house in Georgia, Tuggle said that exposure to flora and fauna is key in putting more children on the path to conservation and wildlife careers.
In fact, the very future of conservation in the United States may depend on it, he said.
"If you look at conservation in the world, the United States is the leader," he said. "If the U.S. has the best conservation ethic in the world, it's reflective of the people. And if the demographics of those people is changing ... there might be people who don't think endangered species are important, they might not think habitat is important. We need to get to those people right away, and help them understand that that's part of what makes this country great."
The country's public lands are part of its national heritage, and everyone has a stake in natural resource management, he added.
"It really is a patriotic issue," he said. "Because this country has been founded on the greatness of the resources of this country."
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/09/23/23greenwire-fws-southwest-director-people-not-species-toug-61265.html?pagewanted=2
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Reflecting on the Wall: Barriers threaten environmental protection in the Southwest
Harvard Crimson
November 12, 2009
by Patrick Behrer
This week marks the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. As we recognize the historic occasion of East Germany’s opening, America quietly completes construction of its own wall. The southern border barrier between the United States and Mexico covers 670 miles of southwestern desert between Mexico and the four states it borders. Like the Berlin Wall, the border wall is emblematic of much more than just a boundary between countries. Cutting indiscriminately across ecologically-priceless land, it has become a symbol of governmental disregard for environmental protection.
The Bush Administration began the project in 2006 as the most recent attempt to stem the tide of illegal immigration, and it now nears completion; at 630 of 670 miles completed, Obama shows no signs that he intends to halt construction of the final portions. Humanitarians and budget hawks have blasted the wall as ineffective and enormously costly. With a final price tag of more than $4 billion and $6.5 billion in estimated maintenance expenses over the next 20 years, the direct, measured costs alone are immense. However, to discuss the project’s environmental impact, one must recognize the systematic neglect of environmental laws that occurred during its construction.
The Real ID Act of 2005 allowed the Department of Homeland Security to construct infrastructure along our nation’s borders with immunity from all government laws and regulations. Using the power granted under this act, the Secretary waived the impact assessment requirements of both the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Protection Act. Thus, the border wall’s construction—which took place on some of the most ecologically valuable land in the country—went ahead without any consideration of its impact on the native species that call this area home.
Not surprisingly, this wall has wreaked havoc on the ecosystems of the area. It cuts off migration routes for species such as the Sonoma Pronghorn, already endangered, whose population has crashed to as few as 31 individuals. If congress had not exempted the border patrol from the ESA, this damage would have been sufficient to stop or dramatically alter the construction plans. Instead, building the wall has categorically ignored environmental damage and, as a result, threatened the survival of the only known pair of breeding jaguars in the United States.
Are environmental concerns sufficient reasons to stop this construction? Perhaps not. There are severe economic and social costs to unchecked illegal immigration. However, the wall should not have received blanket exemption from environmental regulation. The Obama administration claims it will step up to the plate to combat global climate change, yet their silent acquiescence to the destruction of the southwestern desert throws this commitment into question.
These may seem unrelated and, thus, some might understand how the Administration can separate climate change policy from broader environmental concerns. Their logic: Climate change is a global threat while the wall only damages a small section of desert. However, this view ignores the reality that the southwestern desert is a globally unique and important biosphere recognized by both The Nature Conservancy and the United Nations. Indeed, the wall threatens the San Pedro River, one of TNC’s eight “Last Great Places” in the world. Climate change is an issue so large that addressing it will entail broad behavioral changes—this, in turn, requires a new environmental consciousness. We cannot flip a switch and fix climate change, as it remains too pervasive for easy solutions. Only by considering the environmental impacts associated with all of our actions can we to truly address this global crisis.
Endeavors like the border wall demonstrate very clearly that this new consciousness does not yet exist. Unfortunately, this project has not occurred in isolation. The U.S. Navy conducts sonar testing that has little practical benefit but inflicts proven, lethal affects on marine mammals. Until the government shows a willingness to seriously consider environmental costs in all its decisions, the commitment to fight climate change is little more than empty words.
The fall of the Berlin Wall 20 years ago signaled a sea change in international policy and kick started a period of unprecedented global openness. While the border wall does not have this same public resonance, stopping its construction would be a first step toward creating a new environmental consciousness within the U.S. government. This sea change would prove no less significant than that which occurred after the fall in Germany. The last 20 years have seen international barriers shrink on an unprecedented scale; the next 20 must see environmental consciousness of the same scale.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/12/wall-environmental-change-climate/?dsq=22863606#comment-22863606
November 12, 2009
by Patrick Behrer
This week marks the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. As we recognize the historic occasion of East Germany’s opening, America quietly completes construction of its own wall. The southern border barrier between the United States and Mexico covers 670 miles of southwestern desert between Mexico and the four states it borders. Like the Berlin Wall, the border wall is emblematic of much more than just a boundary between countries. Cutting indiscriminately across ecologically-priceless land, it has become a symbol of governmental disregard for environmental protection.
The Bush Administration began the project in 2006 as the most recent attempt to stem the tide of illegal immigration, and it now nears completion; at 630 of 670 miles completed, Obama shows no signs that he intends to halt construction of the final portions. Humanitarians and budget hawks have blasted the wall as ineffective and enormously costly. With a final price tag of more than $4 billion and $6.5 billion in estimated maintenance expenses over the next 20 years, the direct, measured costs alone are immense. However, to discuss the project’s environmental impact, one must recognize the systematic neglect of environmental laws that occurred during its construction.
The Real ID Act of 2005 allowed the Department of Homeland Security to construct infrastructure along our nation’s borders with immunity from all government laws and regulations. Using the power granted under this act, the Secretary waived the impact assessment requirements of both the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Protection Act. Thus, the border wall’s construction—which took place on some of the most ecologically valuable land in the country—went ahead without any consideration of its impact on the native species that call this area home.
Not surprisingly, this wall has wreaked havoc on the ecosystems of the area. It cuts off migration routes for species such as the Sonoma Pronghorn, already endangered, whose population has crashed to as few as 31 individuals. If congress had not exempted the border patrol from the ESA, this damage would have been sufficient to stop or dramatically alter the construction plans. Instead, building the wall has categorically ignored environmental damage and, as a result, threatened the survival of the only known pair of breeding jaguars in the United States.
Are environmental concerns sufficient reasons to stop this construction? Perhaps not. There are severe economic and social costs to unchecked illegal immigration. However, the wall should not have received blanket exemption from environmental regulation. The Obama administration claims it will step up to the plate to combat global climate change, yet their silent acquiescence to the destruction of the southwestern desert throws this commitment into question.
These may seem unrelated and, thus, some might understand how the Administration can separate climate change policy from broader environmental concerns. Their logic: Climate change is a global threat while the wall only damages a small section of desert. However, this view ignores the reality that the southwestern desert is a globally unique and important biosphere recognized by both The Nature Conservancy and the United Nations. Indeed, the wall threatens the San Pedro River, one of TNC’s eight “Last Great Places” in the world. Climate change is an issue so large that addressing it will entail broad behavioral changes—this, in turn, requires a new environmental consciousness. We cannot flip a switch and fix climate change, as it remains too pervasive for easy solutions. Only by considering the environmental impacts associated with all of our actions can we to truly address this global crisis.
Endeavors like the border wall demonstrate very clearly that this new consciousness does not yet exist. Unfortunately, this project has not occurred in isolation. The U.S. Navy conducts sonar testing that has little practical benefit but inflicts proven, lethal affects on marine mammals. Until the government shows a willingness to seriously consider environmental costs in all its decisions, the commitment to fight climate change is little more than empty words.
The fall of the Berlin Wall 20 years ago signaled a sea change in international policy and kick started a period of unprecedented global openness. While the border wall does not have this same public resonance, stopping its construction would be a first step toward creating a new environmental consciousness within the U.S. government. This sea change would prove no less significant than that which occurred after the fall in Germany. The last 20 years have seen international barriers shrink on an unprecedented scale; the next 20 must see environmental consciousness of the same scale.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2009/11/12/wall-environmental-change-climate/?dsq=22863606#comment-22863606
Thursday, September 3, 2009
The border wall blocks a natural migration
Austin-American Statesman
September 3, 2009
by John Young
PRESCOTT, Ariz. — "It's no wasteland."
No, not this mountainous berg where seemingly everyone over 65 wants to live.
Sergio Avila-Villegas is talking about the U.S.-Mexico border, which bobcats, ocelots, jaguars, mountain lions, black bears and so much more inhabit.
Avila-Villegas, a biologist with the Sky Island Alliance, is a lonely voice pointing out how political forces in America are subdividing a biome in disastrous ways.
At a colloquium at Prescott College, he described how the ongoing construction of the U.S. border wall brings ecological devastation — most particularly among the species that migrate and otherwise reside in a region with only natural barriers.
This is made possible in fast-track fashion because Congress and the Bush administration strip-mined environmental safeguards from the legislation enabling the border fence. Congress also removed all fiscal common sense from the hysteria-derived gambit, as some segments south of San Diego cost $21 million a mile.
That underlines a message Avila-Villegas wants people to understand: "It's a wall. It's not a fence."
It's a wall that not only blocks animal migration and destroys habitat. Its furious dust-raising construction causes air and water pollution. It also diverts rivers and floodwaters.
Ah, but does it divert migration of Mexicans entering our nation illegally? In some cases, yes. In other cases, a medieval device called a ladder foils Washington's greatest designs.
The amazing thing about this is that the Bush administration sought to justify it, at least in part, on ecological reasoning.
Just look, said then-Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, at all the trash left by the non-Americans crossing the border. A wall will stop that and save the environment, he said.
But: Just in case a wall would cause other environmental effects far more long-lasting than sandwich wrappers in the sun, Republicans inserted in the Real I.D. Act of 2005 — the immigration grab-bag that included this monstrosity — a pretty puppy called Section 102. It allows Homeland Security to waive all standard environmental safeguards associated with giant infrastructure projects like this.
That means that the 30-plus species of mammals in the region in question, as well as the owls, migratory birds and more, are all at risk. Federal policies typically take such matters into consideration. Not in this case.
But it's a wasteland — no? Hot, dry, inhospitable to creatures in Bermuda shorts?
What it is, as least in the borderlands of Arizona, is "one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world," Avila-Villegas said. It is where a tropical ecosystem shakes hands with a temperate North American cousin. Don't be misled by the hulking presence of the Sonoran and Chihuahan deserts. The area teems with life. And we are destroying it.
People can always outwit wall-builders. But nature has problems with obstructions. Avila-Villegas shows sobering photos of how flood waters surging up against the wall dividing the border town of Nogales caused homes on the Mexican side to be submerged.
Just the price of — what? Do we assume that such walls really accomplish what they seek to do?
People living in the border areas point out the futility in trying to wall off the border. For one thing the terrain is too unforgiving in many places. For another, as observed day after day, what jaguars and ocelots can't master, wily human beings will as they seek to feed their families. It's the cats who will starve, or turn their attention to cattle or human beings to put food in their mouths.
The border wall may be America's greatest boondoggle in terms of cost and benefits. So, why does it proceed?
Why, particularly, when the administration and Congress behind it are consigned to the dust. This Congress can put a stop to it. It ought to based on fiscal concerns alone. At minimum, it needs to yank out the provision which treats environmental protection as wholly alien.
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/09/04/0904young_edit.html
September 3, 2009
by John Young
PRESCOTT, Ariz. — "It's no wasteland."
No, not this mountainous berg where seemingly everyone over 65 wants to live.
Sergio Avila-Villegas is talking about the U.S.-Mexico border, which bobcats, ocelots, jaguars, mountain lions, black bears and so much more inhabit.
Avila-Villegas, a biologist with the Sky Island Alliance, is a lonely voice pointing out how political forces in America are subdividing a biome in disastrous ways.
At a colloquium at Prescott College, he described how the ongoing construction of the U.S. border wall brings ecological devastation — most particularly among the species that migrate and otherwise reside in a region with only natural barriers.
This is made possible in fast-track fashion because Congress and the Bush administration strip-mined environmental safeguards from the legislation enabling the border fence. Congress also removed all fiscal common sense from the hysteria-derived gambit, as some segments south of San Diego cost $21 million a mile.
That underlines a message Avila-Villegas wants people to understand: "It's a wall. It's not a fence."
It's a wall that not only blocks animal migration and destroys habitat. Its furious dust-raising construction causes air and water pollution. It also diverts rivers and floodwaters.
Ah, but does it divert migration of Mexicans entering our nation illegally? In some cases, yes. In other cases, a medieval device called a ladder foils Washington's greatest designs.
The amazing thing about this is that the Bush administration sought to justify it, at least in part, on ecological reasoning.
Just look, said then-Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, at all the trash left by the non-Americans crossing the border. A wall will stop that and save the environment, he said.
But: Just in case a wall would cause other environmental effects far more long-lasting than sandwich wrappers in the sun, Republicans inserted in the Real I.D. Act of 2005 — the immigration grab-bag that included this monstrosity — a pretty puppy called Section 102. It allows Homeland Security to waive all standard environmental safeguards associated with giant infrastructure projects like this.
That means that the 30-plus species of mammals in the region in question, as well as the owls, migratory birds and more, are all at risk. Federal policies typically take such matters into consideration. Not in this case.
But it's a wasteland — no? Hot, dry, inhospitable to creatures in Bermuda shorts?
What it is, as least in the borderlands of Arizona, is "one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world," Avila-Villegas said. It is where a tropical ecosystem shakes hands with a temperate North American cousin. Don't be misled by the hulking presence of the Sonoran and Chihuahan deserts. The area teems with life. And we are destroying it.
People can always outwit wall-builders. But nature has problems with obstructions. Avila-Villegas shows sobering photos of how flood waters surging up against the wall dividing the border town of Nogales caused homes on the Mexican side to be submerged.
Just the price of — what? Do we assume that such walls really accomplish what they seek to do?
People living in the border areas point out the futility in trying to wall off the border. For one thing the terrain is too unforgiving in many places. For another, as observed day after day, what jaguars and ocelots can't master, wily human beings will as they seek to feed their families. It's the cats who will starve, or turn their attention to cattle or human beings to put food in their mouths.
The border wall may be America's greatest boondoggle in terms of cost and benefits. So, why does it proceed?
Why, particularly, when the administration and Congress behind it are consigned to the dust. This Congress can put a stop to it. It ought to based on fiscal concerns alone. At minimum, it needs to yank out the provision which treats environmental protection as wholly alien.
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/09/04/0904young_edit.html
Friday, February 20, 2009
Captured jaguar 1st in US to get collar for tracking
February 20, 2009
Arizona Daily Star
by Tony Davis and Brady McCombs
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/281034
Arizona Daily Star
by Tony Davis and Brady McCombs
Arizona officials have captured and placed a tracking collar on a wild jaguar for the first time ever in the United States, the state wildlife agency said Thursday.
The male cat was captured Wednesday southwest of Tucson during a research study concerning mountain lions and black bears. The location of the capture was not released.
While individual jaguars have been photographed sporadically along the Mexican border the past few years, the capture occurred outside the area where the last known photograph of a jaguar was taken in January, state Game and Fish officials said in a press release.
The jaguar was fitted with a satellite tracking collar and then released. The collar will provide biologists with location points every three hours, the press release said. Early tracking indicates the cat is doing well and has already traveled more than three miles from the capture site, the release said.
The jaguar weighs 118 pounds with a thick and solid build, the department said. Field biologists said the cat appeared healthy and hardy.
Game and Fish officials could not be reached Thursday night to answer questions about the capture.
The data produced by the collar will shed light on a little-studied population segment of this species that uses Southern Arizona and New Mexico as the northern extent of its range.
The jaguar has been listed as an endangered species by the federal government since 1997, the year after a Douglas-area rancher spotted the first one seen in the United States for many years.
"While we didn't set out to collar a jaguar as part of the mountain lion and bear research project, we took advantage of an important opportunity," Terry Johnson, endangered species coordinator for the Arizona Game and Fish Department, said in the news release. "More than 10 years ago, Game and Fish attempted to collar a jaguar with no success. Since then, we've established handling protocols in case we inadvertently captured a jaguar in the course of one of our other wildlife management activities."
The capture didn't surprise Jack L. Childs, project coordinator for the Borderlands Jaguar Detection Project, based in Amado. Using remote-sensing cameras, the group has taken 26 photographs of jaguars in the wilds of Southern Arizona.
"We've known we've had jaguars for 100 years in Arizona and we've been documenting it for the past 10 years. This just kind of further verifies that we do have jaguars down here," Childs said.
The study on habitat connectivity for mountain lions and black bears that produced the accidental capture of the jaguar was intended, in part, to analyze the effects of new border fencing on the two large animals, he said.
With this jaguar collared, officials now have a great opportunity to analyze the effects of the fencing. As long as the jaguar remains alive and the collar continues to work, they'll be able to follow the movements of the cat for about two years, he said.
The capture was announced at Thursday's meeting of the Jaguar Conservation Team, a group of scientists, agency officials, private individuals and conservationists seeking to map out an effort to improve the future of the animal in the borderlands area.
Michael Robinson, an environmentalist on the team, said he was happy the jaguar sustained no injuries.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Border Plan Will Address Harm Done at Fence Site
New York Times
January 16, 2009
LOS ANGELES — The federal government has pledged millions of dollars to make up for the environmental damage from building hundreds of miles of fences along the Mexican border through wilderness and protected lands.
But environmental groups who have fought the fence called it too little, too late.
In an announcement on Thursday, federal officials said the new spending was intended to resolve any conflict in the missions of the Departments of Homeland Security and Interior. The former is building nearly 670 miles of fences and other security equipment along the border, while the latter is charged with protecting and maintaining several hundred miles of public lands along the fence.
The officials said the Homeland Security Department would devote up to $50 million in the next year for “reasonable mitigation measures” to compensate for the damage or loss of animal and plant habitat and cultural areas like American Indian religious sites.
That compensation could include modifying the fence to curb flooding and to accommodate threatened and endangered species or restoring their habitats, but officials have not worked out those details and it will vary depending on the area.
The Interior Department will draft a list of priorities by June.
The agreement between the two departments has been in the works since April, when the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, to the dismay of environmentalists and some scientists in the Interior Department, used his Congressionally authorized power to waive environmental laws to speed access to broad swaths of land.
At the time, in the face of an outcry from critics, Mr. Chertoff said the fence construction would proceed but with sensitivity to the environment and in coordination with the Interior Department.
Homeland security officials said the department had spent about $40 million in the past two years to address environmental problems associated with the border security project.
The fence construction and related roads and equipment for detecting illegal border crossers directly affect 200 to 300 miles of Interior Department land along the fence route and some of the most environmentally sensitive sites in the region.
With the promise of new spending coming just days before President-elect Barack Obama takes office on Tuesday, it was unclear on Friday to what extent the agreement would stick.
Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona, a Democrat whom Mr. Obama has chosen to head the Homeland Security Department, has not publicly taken a position on Mr. Chertoff’s use of the waivers, a spokeswoman said.
But Ms. Napolitano has expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the fence. On Thursday, she told a Senate committee considering her nomination that she planned a broad and thorough review of the department’s policies.
Nick Shapiro, a spokesman for the Obama transition office, said, “President-elect Obama will review all 11th-hour regulations and will address them once he is president.”
Lloyd Easterling, a spokesman for Customs and Border Protection, the agency within the Homeland Security Department that will decide how to spend the $50 million, said transition officials were consulted on the agreement and took no position. But Mr. Easterling expressed optimism that it would go forward.
“Good environmental stewardship,” he said, “is transcendental of administrations.”
Environmental groups who challenged the fence construction, including an effort to have the Supreme Court block it, said dozens of species had suffered lost or damaged habitat. Among them, they say, are jaguars, ocelots, deer, javelinas and owls.
The environmental groups said that although steps to minimize the environmental harm of the fence were welcome, they would press the new administration to halt further fence building and reassess what had been done.
“We heard in Janet Napolitano’s remarks this week interest in evaluating this project, and that certainly is what the Sierra Club is asking for,” said Oliver Bernstein, a spokesman for that group in Texas. “This $50 million is too little, too late, but it is recognition that the border wall project is having tremendous environmental consequences.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/us/17border.html
January 16, 2009
LOS ANGELES — The federal government has pledged millions of dollars to make up for the environmental damage from building hundreds of miles of fences along the Mexican border through wilderness and protected lands.
But environmental groups who have fought the fence called it too little, too late.
In an announcement on Thursday, federal officials said the new spending was intended to resolve any conflict in the missions of the Departments of Homeland Security and Interior. The former is building nearly 670 miles of fences and other security equipment along the border, while the latter is charged with protecting and maintaining several hundred miles of public lands along the fence.
The officials said the Homeland Security Department would devote up to $50 million in the next year for “reasonable mitigation measures” to compensate for the damage or loss of animal and plant habitat and cultural areas like American Indian religious sites.
That compensation could include modifying the fence to curb flooding and to accommodate threatened and endangered species or restoring their habitats, but officials have not worked out those details and it will vary depending on the area.
The Interior Department will draft a list of priorities by June.
The agreement between the two departments has been in the works since April, when the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, to the dismay of environmentalists and some scientists in the Interior Department, used his Congressionally authorized power to waive environmental laws to speed access to broad swaths of land.
At the time, in the face of an outcry from critics, Mr. Chertoff said the fence construction would proceed but with sensitivity to the environment and in coordination with the Interior Department.
Homeland security officials said the department had spent about $40 million in the past two years to address environmental problems associated with the border security project.
The fence construction and related roads and equipment for detecting illegal border crossers directly affect 200 to 300 miles of Interior Department land along the fence route and some of the most environmentally sensitive sites in the region.
With the promise of new spending coming just days before President-elect Barack Obama takes office on Tuesday, it was unclear on Friday to what extent the agreement would stick.
Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona, a Democrat whom Mr. Obama has chosen to head the Homeland Security Department, has not publicly taken a position on Mr. Chertoff’s use of the waivers, a spokeswoman said.
But Ms. Napolitano has expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the fence. On Thursday, she told a Senate committee considering her nomination that she planned a broad and thorough review of the department’s policies.
Nick Shapiro, a spokesman for the Obama transition office, said, “President-elect Obama will review all 11th-hour regulations and will address them once he is president.”
Lloyd Easterling, a spokesman for Customs and Border Protection, the agency within the Homeland Security Department that will decide how to spend the $50 million, said transition officials were consulted on the agreement and took no position. But Mr. Easterling expressed optimism that it would go forward.
“Good environmental stewardship,” he said, “is transcendental of administrations.”
Environmental groups who challenged the fence construction, including an effort to have the Supreme Court block it, said dozens of species had suffered lost or damaged habitat. Among them, they say, are jaguars, ocelots, deer, javelinas and owls.
The environmental groups said that although steps to minimize the environmental harm of the fence were welcome, they would press the new administration to halt further fence building and reassess what had been done.
“We heard in Janet Napolitano’s remarks this week interest in evaluating this project, and that certainly is what the Sierra Club is asking for,” said Oliver Bernstein, a spokesman for that group in Texas. “This $50 million is too little, too late, but it is recognition that the border wall project is having tremendous environmental consequences.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/us/17border.html
Thursday, October 23, 2008
U.S. to miss deadline on Mexico border fence
Reuters
October 23, 2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will miss its deadline to complete a security fence along the Mexican border this year, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said on Thursday.
"I don't think we're going to hit the nail on the head and be done by the end of the year," Chertoff told Reuters, adding that about 370 miles of the planned 670-mile (1,070-km) fence had been completed.
Chertoff said he hoped when the Bush administration leaves office in January about 90 to 95 percent of the fence -- a controversial measure that has raised hackles both with Mexico and with U.S. landowners along the proposed route -- would be completed or under construction.
"We've gotten most of the way there. We will be very substantially close," he told Reuters in an interview.
Congress has mandated that the fence, which will eventually stretch from California to Texas to help stem the tide of illegal immigration, be finished this year but law suits have slowed its progress.
"We've had some delay because the court proceedings in Texas have gone more slowly than I thought ... Although every time there's actually been a legal challenge, we've won," Chertoff said.
The nearly 2,000-mile 3,200-km border with Mexico is the main entry route for illegal immigrants into the United States, which is already home to 11 million to 12 million undocumented aliens, or one in every 20 workers in the country.
Better enforcement and mounting U.S. economic troubles have slowed the influx however. Border patrol agents arrested 880,000 people crossing illegally in 2007, down from 1.1 million a year earlier.
PROPERTY, ENVIRONMENT FEARS
The fence is aimed at slowing the migration further, but it has been hit by delays.
About 54 percent of the proposed fence is to be built on private property, raising concerns among ranchers who fear they will lose access to irrigation pumps and ecologists who worry it will block the migration of endangered species such as the jaguar and ocelot.
The U.S. Justice Department has filed dozens of lawsuits seeking court orders to gain access to property for surveying while the Supreme Court has rejected a legal challenge by two environmental groups to Chertoff's decision to waive 19 federal laws to speed construction of the fence.
Chertoff said progress was being made on other measures aimed at boosting border security, including moves to double the number of border patrol personnel on the job to more than 18,000 by the end of 2008.
"We will hit the 18,000 target," he said.
He said that plans for a $21 million expansion of a high-tech "virtual fence" along parts of the border were being implemented and the first test section was yielding results.
"We've used it to catch thousands of illegal migrants we've also seized several tons of marijuana," he said.
The government announced this year that it was awarding Boeing Co contracts to build two sections of the fence that would include fixed towers, radar and ground sensors, remote control cameras and software linking border agents.
Newspapers have reported delays with the system, but Chertoff said there were still plans to deploy elements of the virtual fence around Tucson and Yuma in Arizona over the next year or so.
Chertoff said U.S. officials were working with their Mexican counterparts to develop measures such as border checks to help stem the trafficking of guns southward from the United States, a major complaint in Mexico.
"There's no question that having some border control facility will be an important part of their strategy for keeping guns out," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49M8K620081023?sp=true
October 23, 2008
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will miss its deadline to complete a security fence along the Mexican border this year, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said on Thursday.
"I don't think we're going to hit the nail on the head and be done by the end of the year," Chertoff told Reuters, adding that about 370 miles of the planned 670-mile (1,070-km) fence had been completed.
Chertoff said he hoped when the Bush administration leaves office in January about 90 to 95 percent of the fence -- a controversial measure that has raised hackles both with Mexico and with U.S. landowners along the proposed route -- would be completed or under construction.
"We've gotten most of the way there. We will be very substantially close," he told Reuters in an interview.
Congress has mandated that the fence, which will eventually stretch from California to Texas to help stem the tide of illegal immigration, be finished this year but law suits have slowed its progress.
"We've had some delay because the court proceedings in Texas have gone more slowly than I thought ... Although every time there's actually been a legal challenge, we've won," Chertoff said.
The nearly 2,000-mile 3,200-km border with Mexico is the main entry route for illegal immigrants into the United States, which is already home to 11 million to 12 million undocumented aliens, or one in every 20 workers in the country.
Better enforcement and mounting U.S. economic troubles have slowed the influx however. Border patrol agents arrested 880,000 people crossing illegally in 2007, down from 1.1 million a year earlier.
PROPERTY, ENVIRONMENT FEARS
The fence is aimed at slowing the migration further, but it has been hit by delays.
About 54 percent of the proposed fence is to be built on private property, raising concerns among ranchers who fear they will lose access to irrigation pumps and ecologists who worry it will block the migration of endangered species such as the jaguar and ocelot.
The U.S. Justice Department has filed dozens of lawsuits seeking court orders to gain access to property for surveying while the Supreme Court has rejected a legal challenge by two environmental groups to Chertoff's decision to waive 19 federal laws to speed construction of the fence.
Chertoff said progress was being made on other measures aimed at boosting border security, including moves to double the number of border patrol personnel on the job to more than 18,000 by the end of 2008.
"We will hit the 18,000 target," he said.
He said that plans for a $21 million expansion of a high-tech "virtual fence" along parts of the border were being implemented and the first test section was yielding results.
"We've used it to catch thousands of illegal migrants we've also seized several tons of marijuana," he said.
The government announced this year that it was awarding Boeing Co contracts to build two sections of the fence that would include fixed towers, radar and ground sensors, remote control cameras and software linking border agents.
Newspapers have reported delays with the system, but Chertoff said there were still plans to deploy elements of the virtual fence around Tucson and Yuma in Arizona over the next year or so.
Chertoff said U.S. officials were working with their Mexican counterparts to develop measures such as border checks to help stem the trafficking of guns southward from the United States, a major complaint in Mexico.
"There's no question that having some border control facility will be an important part of their strategy for keeping guns out," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE49M8K620081023?sp=true
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Border-fence dispute snares rare jaguars
CNN
May 5, 2008
DOUGLAS, Arizona (CNN) -- It's a tale of homeland security concerns blocking wildlife management, and the hue and cry that ensues.
When most people think of jaguars, they think of the jungles of Central and South America, not the remote desert ranges between the United States and Mexico.
That region is known as mountain lion country, and that's what rancher Warner Glenn thought he was tracking when he saddled up his mules on a summer day 12 years ago near Douglas, Arizona.
Glenn has hunted mountain lions for 60 years, since he was eight years old. But Glenn was stunned when he saw what his hunting dogs had chased up to a high mountain perch.
The rancher took what's believed to be the first photo of a live jaguar in the United States. But it wasn't his last. In 2006, some 40 miles away, Glenn and his hunting party again cornered a jaguar -- a different one.
Jaguars, an endangered species, have a breeding population in northern Mexico. Scientists believe there are no more than 120 left in the wild there.
It's believed that since 1910, the cats are only visitors north of the border. They have been virtually unstudied here until recently.
But Glenn and other conservationists worry that the possible return of breeding jaguars to the United States could be stopped in its tracks. The reason: the border fence.
Last month the Department of Homeland Security waived 30 environmental laws to finish 470 miles of the fence by the end of the year.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress that the agency continues to talk to some 600 landowners along the border to get their input. But in order to comply with the congressional mandate, he said, there is no time to deal with "unnecessary delays caused by administrative processes or potential litigation."
"We are currently in a lawless situation at the border," says Chertoff. "I feel an urgency to get this tactical infrastructure in. And although we're going to be respectful of the environment, we're going to be expeditious."
Two environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club, have filed appeals with the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming the waivers are unconstitutional and set a dangerous precedent.
"National security and environmental protection do not have to be at odds with each other," says Defenders of Wildlife spokesman Matt Clark. "If we can drop this arbitrary deadline for constructing the fence and go through the proper procedures, then there are inevitably ways to minimize environmental impact, but as it is now it's throwing all of those laws out the window."
Mountain lion tracker Jack Childs also worries about the impact of the fence on local wildlife, especially the jaguar.
Childs captured the first video of a live jaguar in the late summer of 1996, a few months after Warner Glenn. Watch Childs and Glenn talk about efforts to preserve the jaguar »
"I knew historically there had been a few jaguars sighted in Arizona but in the last hundred years never in any numbers."
His encounter sparked a passion for the big cats. Along with wife Anna and biologist Emil McCain, he created the Borderlands Jaguar Detection Project.
Childs and McCain hike into remote mountain areas where the jaguars roam and have placed more than 50 motion sensor cameras near the border. They've taken 69 photos of three different jaguars since 2001, including several of the same cat Childs first saw in 1996.
He has nicknamed that cat Macho B.
A jaguar's spots are like fingerprints -- each cat has a unique set. One of the spots on Macho B resembles a Pinocchio cartoon figure, and that's how they identify him.
"We spend a lot of time walking along the border during the daytime, and we actually find his tracks going through the fence, so we know for sure that he crosses back and forth," says Childs.
"A fence like that is going to inhibit wildlife movements and migrations back and forth. It's not going to effectively stop human traffic. They've got wire cutters and torches." See where the jaguars have been spotted »
Childs says the fence also has an impact on wildlife because drug runners and human traffickers have been pushed up into the mountain areas to avoid the fence in the lowland valleys.
"It's impacting the animals number one, what's going on down there. It's almost brought my wildlife study to a stop because they (the traffickers) are tearing down my cameras as fast as I'm putting them up because they think we're taking pictures of them."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finds itself in a unique position. Its mission is wildlife and habitat protection, but it must uphold another federal agency's mission to override environmental concerns. Bill Radke, manager of the San Bernardino Wildlife Refuge, says the Border Patrol is trying to work with his agency.
"The hope is that by working with Border Patrol that we can meet the national security mandate and at the same time protect the wildlife," says Radke. "Border Patrol is putting up camera towers but are putting them up on areas that are off the refuge. They're working on barriers but not barriers that would impede wildlife and large animals like jaguars."
At 6 foot 6, with steely blue eyes, dressed in leather chaps astride his mule, rancher Warner Glenn is every inch the American cowboy. And he is a man forever changed by his encounters with the jaguar. He has written a book, "Eyes of Fire," about his experience. He says he'd like to "invite Mr. Bush to come out on a mule" so he can see "what's going on here in these mountains."
For Glenn, the cat represents all that is wild about the Southwest.
"It would be a loss to me that maybe my granddaughter or my daughter wouldn't be able to see one like I have. It's just an animal that's a beautiful, magnificent cat and they're having a little bit of trouble surviving. But they're doing it, and I would hate to see us do anything that would cause the survival of that cat to go backwards.
"I'm a livestock rancher, but I wouldn't mind donating a few calves to that jaguar, so to speak."
Biologist Emil McCain agrees.
"They are part of our natural heritage. They are part of the American West. They are part of the American wild as much as the bald eagle or the grizzly bear, and the jaguar is really special because it is such an elusive and beautiful creature [that] it evokes a sense of imagination and curiosity about the natural world."
Though the jaguar is elusive, conservationists say the animal is caught -- in the political crossfire at the border.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/05/jaguars.fence/?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCText
May 5, 2008
DOUGLAS, Arizona (CNN) -- It's a tale of homeland security concerns blocking wildlife management, and the hue and cry that ensues.
When most people think of jaguars, they think of the jungles of Central and South America, not the remote desert ranges between the United States and Mexico.
That region is known as mountain lion country, and that's what rancher Warner Glenn thought he was tracking when he saddled up his mules on a summer day 12 years ago near Douglas, Arizona.
Glenn has hunted mountain lions for 60 years, since he was eight years old. But Glenn was stunned when he saw what his hunting dogs had chased up to a high mountain perch.
The rancher took what's believed to be the first photo of a live jaguar in the United States. But it wasn't his last. In 2006, some 40 miles away, Glenn and his hunting party again cornered a jaguar -- a different one.
Jaguars, an endangered species, have a breeding population in northern Mexico. Scientists believe there are no more than 120 left in the wild there.
It's believed that since 1910, the cats are only visitors north of the border. They have been virtually unstudied here until recently.
But Glenn and other conservationists worry that the possible return of breeding jaguars to the United States could be stopped in its tracks. The reason: the border fence.
Last month the Department of Homeland Security waived 30 environmental laws to finish 470 miles of the fence by the end of the year.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told Congress that the agency continues to talk to some 600 landowners along the border to get their input. But in order to comply with the congressional mandate, he said, there is no time to deal with "unnecessary delays caused by administrative processes or potential litigation."
"We are currently in a lawless situation at the border," says Chertoff. "I feel an urgency to get this tactical infrastructure in. And although we're going to be respectful of the environment, we're going to be expeditious."
Two environmental groups, Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club, have filed appeals with the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming the waivers are unconstitutional and set a dangerous precedent.
"National security and environmental protection do not have to be at odds with each other," says Defenders of Wildlife spokesman Matt Clark. "If we can drop this arbitrary deadline for constructing the fence and go through the proper procedures, then there are inevitably ways to minimize environmental impact, but as it is now it's throwing all of those laws out the window."
Mountain lion tracker Jack Childs also worries about the impact of the fence on local wildlife, especially the jaguar.
Childs captured the first video of a live jaguar in the late summer of 1996, a few months after Warner Glenn. Watch Childs and Glenn talk about efforts to preserve the jaguar »
"I knew historically there had been a few jaguars sighted in Arizona but in the last hundred years never in any numbers."
His encounter sparked a passion for the big cats. Along with wife Anna and biologist Emil McCain, he created the Borderlands Jaguar Detection Project.
Childs and McCain hike into remote mountain areas where the jaguars roam and have placed more than 50 motion sensor cameras near the border. They've taken 69 photos of three different jaguars since 2001, including several of the same cat Childs first saw in 1996.
He has nicknamed that cat Macho B.
A jaguar's spots are like fingerprints -- each cat has a unique set. One of the spots on Macho B resembles a Pinocchio cartoon figure, and that's how they identify him.
"We spend a lot of time walking along the border during the daytime, and we actually find his tracks going through the fence, so we know for sure that he crosses back and forth," says Childs.
"A fence like that is going to inhibit wildlife movements and migrations back and forth. It's not going to effectively stop human traffic. They've got wire cutters and torches." See where the jaguars have been spotted »
Childs says the fence also has an impact on wildlife because drug runners and human traffickers have been pushed up into the mountain areas to avoid the fence in the lowland valleys.
"It's impacting the animals number one, what's going on down there. It's almost brought my wildlife study to a stop because they (the traffickers) are tearing down my cameras as fast as I'm putting them up because they think we're taking pictures of them."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finds itself in a unique position. Its mission is wildlife and habitat protection, but it must uphold another federal agency's mission to override environmental concerns. Bill Radke, manager of the San Bernardino Wildlife Refuge, says the Border Patrol is trying to work with his agency.
"The hope is that by working with Border Patrol that we can meet the national security mandate and at the same time protect the wildlife," says Radke. "Border Patrol is putting up camera towers but are putting them up on areas that are off the refuge. They're working on barriers but not barriers that would impede wildlife and large animals like jaguars."
At 6 foot 6, with steely blue eyes, dressed in leather chaps astride his mule, rancher Warner Glenn is every inch the American cowboy. And he is a man forever changed by his encounters with the jaguar. He has written a book, "Eyes of Fire," about his experience. He says he'd like to "invite Mr. Bush to come out on a mule" so he can see "what's going on here in these mountains."
For Glenn, the cat represents all that is wild about the Southwest.
"It would be a loss to me that maybe my granddaughter or my daughter wouldn't be able to see one like I have. It's just an animal that's a beautiful, magnificent cat and they're having a little bit of trouble surviving. But they're doing it, and I would hate to see us do anything that would cause the survival of that cat to go backwards.
"I'm a livestock rancher, but I wouldn't mind donating a few calves to that jaguar, so to speak."
Biologist Emil McCain agrees.
"They are part of our natural heritage. They are part of the American West. They are part of the American wild as much as the bald eagle or the grizzly bear, and the jaguar is really special because it is such an elusive and beautiful creature [that] it evokes a sense of imagination and curiosity about the natural world."
Though the jaguar is elusive, conservationists say the animal is caught -- in the political crossfire at the border.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/05/05/jaguars.fence/?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCText
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)