KRGV
March 21, 2011
by Manuel de la Rosa
BROWNSVILLE - Some residents living near the border fence say it hasn't stopped human and drug smuggling.
Joel De La Garza runs a grocery store on Oklahoma Street. He has owned it for several years. De La Garza used to see immigrants on a daily basis. Now, he rarely sees them because of the fence right in front of his business.
"We do see some of them but not as many as we used to before the wall went up. The reason why they aren't coming is the opening is quite far away from here," says De La Garza.
Many residents we spoke to see immigrants backpacking with what is believed to be drugs. It's usually at dawn or early in the morning. Law enforcement officials say drug smugglers are doing this due to the security at the border.
The border fence was supposed to slow down human and drug trafficking. The Border Patrol reports they aren't catching as many immigrants.
Federal authorities say there is proof in the numbers the wall is working. Residents who are on the front line don't see it the same way.
When the gates are installed, it may change the smuggling efforts, but for now, these residents say the smugglers have adapted to the border fence.
http://www.krgv.com/news/local/story/Some-Residents-Say-Border-Fence-Has-Been/ALiMYL37lEWNRlsVr1S6sw.cspx
Monday, March 21, 2011
Negative effects of border fence studied
Brownsville Herald
March 20, 2011
by Jacqueline Armendariz
The U.S.-Mexico federal border fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately, a study recently published by local university professors found.
The environmental effects of the fence on the people of the region, something little focused on amid the heated political debate surrounding it, was investigated by University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College professors Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson.
"We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: the wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate," Wilson, an environmental science professor, said. "This region suffers from extreme poverty and low education. The wall, given its placement, seems to exacerbate the undue burden that our already overburdened local community is trying to overcome."
The findings, published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal "The Southwestern Geographer," found that groups like Hispanics, those with low income and people who are foreign born, were most affected by the fence in Cameron County.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas with much of it on private land, the study said.
"It was an issue literally in our backyard," Benavides said in a press release. "No one was doing these types of studies, which would have been part of an environmental assessment study."
The research itself took place in 2007 and found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county, the study said.
Meanwhile, the government encountered significant resistance, the study said, some calling the fence’s placement "arbitrary."
The government was not forthcoming on its method to determine where the fence would go, so much so that eventually a lawsuit was brought against the Department of Homeland Security and Corps of Engineers to get the latest data, Wilson said.
He said researchers suspect the disparities may have been widened with the fence’s current location compared to its proposed location.
"Obviously, the groups more in position to negotiate are going to be the ones with greater means and educational qualifications," Wilson said.
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against DHS when it was proposed the fence run through the university’s property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Benavides and Wilson collaborated with several other academic entities on the study, including the University of Texas at Austin’s Working Group on Human Rights and the Border Wall and the Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice.
Currently, Wilson said, he and his fellow researchers are analyzing the final location of the fence compared to its planned location to find any changes in disparities.
Future research is in the planning stages regarding the deaths of undocumented immigrants in Arizona and California border regions in the context of the fence’s construction, he said.
The fence has pushed undocumented immigrants further into remote locations where water and shelter are not readily available, which results in more deaths, Wilson said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/fence-124179-border-federal.html
March 20, 2011
by Jacqueline Armendariz
The U.S.-Mexico federal border fence negatively affects minorities disproportionately, a study recently published by local university professors found.
The environmental effects of the fence on the people of the region, something little focused on amid the heated political debate surrounding it, was investigated by University of Texas at Brownsville and Texas Southmost College professors Jude Benavides and Jeff Wilson.
"We do not want to speculate as to the intent of the government on where it was placed but the results are clear: the wall is in the backyard of those who would be least equipped to negotiate," Wilson, an environmental science professor, said. "This region suffers from extreme poverty and low education. The wall, given its placement, seems to exacerbate the undue burden that our already overburdened local community is trying to overcome."
The findings, published in the 2010 edition of the annual journal "The Southwestern Geographer," found that groups like Hispanics, those with low income and people who are foreign born, were most affected by the fence in Cameron County.
With the combination of the Secure Border Fence Act of 2006 and another 2008 appropriations bill, the federal government was set to construct about 700 miles of barrier, about 315 miles of which is in Texas with much of it on private land, the study said.
"It was an issue literally in our backyard," Benavides said in a press release. "No one was doing these types of studies, which would have been part of an environmental assessment study."
The research itself took place in 2007 and found Cameron County had one-third of the proposed fence gaps, more than any other Texas county, the study said.
Meanwhile, the government encountered significant resistance, the study said, some calling the fence’s placement "arbitrary."
The government was not forthcoming on its method to determine where the fence would go, so much so that eventually a lawsuit was brought against the Department of Homeland Security and Corps of Engineers to get the latest data, Wilson said.
He said researchers suspect the disparities may have been widened with the fence’s current location compared to its proposed location.
"Obviously, the groups more in position to negotiate are going to be the ones with greater means and educational qualifications," Wilson said.
UTB-TSC itself filed a civil lawsuit against DHS when it was proposed the fence run through the university’s property. The two entities reached a compromise in August 2008.
Benavides and Wilson collaborated with several other academic entities on the study, including the University of Texas at Austin’s Working Group on Human Rights and the Border Wall and the Rapoport Center for Human Rights and Justice.
Currently, Wilson said, he and his fellow researchers are analyzing the final location of the fence compared to its planned location to find any changes in disparities.
Future research is in the planning stages regarding the deaths of undocumented immigrants in Arizona and California border regions in the context of the fence’s construction, he said.
The fence has pushed undocumented immigrants further into remote locations where water and shelter are not readily available, which results in more deaths, Wilson said.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/fence-124179-border-federal.html
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Rep. Hunter proposes more border fencing
San Diego Union-Tribune
March 15, 2011
by Elizabeth Aguilera
A bill introduced in Congress today could lead to an additional 350 miles of fencing along the southwest border and would require the Department of Homeland Security to report to Congress when apprehension activity climbs 40 percent year over year, if it is approved.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, authored the bill, titled “Unlawful Border Entry Prevention Act,” in response to a Government Accountability Report that found 44 percent of the southwest border is under “operational control” and 15 percent is totally secure. The legislation is co-sponsored by Republicans Brian Bilbray, Solana Beach, Ed Royce, Fullerton, and Ted Poe, Texas, and North Carolina Democrats Heath Shuler and Mike McIntyre.
“Despite considerable gains in recent years, the Southwest border is nowhere near secure,” Hunter said. “This not only presents a significant risk to U.S. national security, but also undermines the safety of communities on both sides of the border.”
The bill would need approval in the House of Representatives as well as the Senate and the signature of President Barack Obama to become law.
Hunter's bill also requires Homeland Security to report to Congress if apprehensions increase 40 percent from one year to next in any given sector along the southwest border. The report must include a plan for gaining “operational control.”
Apprehensions are at an all time low across the southwest border, an indicator, officials say, of increased security and a decrease in attempts by people to cross illegally. Last year Border Patrol reported 463,000 apprehensions, a decrease of 36 percent over the previous two years.
The GAO report “Preliminary Observations on Border Control Measures for the Southwest Border,” released last month, found the Border Patrol has various levels of control along the border and responds best to unlawful activity after illegal entry into the U.S. is made and not on the immediate border.
The government’s analysis found that of the 873 miles Border Patrol reports are under operational control about 129 miles are classified as controlled. More than half of the southwest border is “managed,” which means response to activity occurs after illegal entry. The southwest border encompasses nearly 2,000 miles.
In San Diego nearly 90 percent of border miles are under “operational control,” according to the report. Yuma reported 100 percent operational control and Tucson and El Paso reported around 70 percent operational control. Marfa, Del Rio, Laredo and the Rio Grande Valley reported less than 40 percent of operation control, according to GAO.
As of Dec. 2010, 649 miles of pedestrian and vehicle type fencing has been erected. DHS was required to identify the fencing locations prior to Dec. 2008.
While the GAO report is accurate, according to Border Patrol officials, it does not take into account collaborations with other agencies on both sides of the border. It also uses limited definitions of terms created for personnel but not necessarily for outside review or understanding, said Deputy Chief Ronald D. Vitiello at the time the report was released.
Vitiello said the terms in the report such as “operation control” are internal measures and may be misunderstood by those outside the agency. Operational control as it is defined by Border Patrol involves: detection of persons crossing the border, identification of the person, classification of the level of threat, respond and resolve.
The GAO also outlined a plan by the Border Patrol to revamp how it assesses outcomes in an effort to make the terms more universal. There will be a gap in reported outcomes next year while the system is being re-purposed, according to the report.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/15/rep-hunter-proposes-more-border-fencing/
March 15, 2011
by Elizabeth Aguilera
A bill introduced in Congress today could lead to an additional 350 miles of fencing along the southwest border and would require the Department of Homeland Security to report to Congress when apprehension activity climbs 40 percent year over year, if it is approved.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, authored the bill, titled “Unlawful Border Entry Prevention Act,” in response to a Government Accountability Report that found 44 percent of the southwest border is under “operational control” and 15 percent is totally secure. The legislation is co-sponsored by Republicans Brian Bilbray, Solana Beach, Ed Royce, Fullerton, and Ted Poe, Texas, and North Carolina Democrats Heath Shuler and Mike McIntyre.
“Despite considerable gains in recent years, the Southwest border is nowhere near secure,” Hunter said. “This not only presents a significant risk to U.S. national security, but also undermines the safety of communities on both sides of the border.”
The bill would need approval in the House of Representatives as well as the Senate and the signature of President Barack Obama to become law.
Hunter's bill also requires Homeland Security to report to Congress if apprehensions increase 40 percent from one year to next in any given sector along the southwest border. The report must include a plan for gaining “operational control.”
Apprehensions are at an all time low across the southwest border, an indicator, officials say, of increased security and a decrease in attempts by people to cross illegally. Last year Border Patrol reported 463,000 apprehensions, a decrease of 36 percent over the previous two years.
The GAO report “Preliminary Observations on Border Control Measures for the Southwest Border,” released last month, found the Border Patrol has various levels of control along the border and responds best to unlawful activity after illegal entry into the U.S. is made and not on the immediate border.
The government’s analysis found that of the 873 miles Border Patrol reports are under operational control about 129 miles are classified as controlled. More than half of the southwest border is “managed,” which means response to activity occurs after illegal entry. The southwest border encompasses nearly 2,000 miles.
In San Diego nearly 90 percent of border miles are under “operational control,” according to the report. Yuma reported 100 percent operational control and Tucson and El Paso reported around 70 percent operational control. Marfa, Del Rio, Laredo and the Rio Grande Valley reported less than 40 percent of operation control, according to GAO.
As of Dec. 2010, 649 miles of pedestrian and vehicle type fencing has been erected. DHS was required to identify the fencing locations prior to Dec. 2008.
While the GAO report is accurate, according to Border Patrol officials, it does not take into account collaborations with other agencies on both sides of the border. It also uses limited definitions of terms created for personnel but not necessarily for outside review or understanding, said Deputy Chief Ronald D. Vitiello at the time the report was released.
Vitiello said the terms in the report such as “operation control” are internal measures and may be misunderstood by those outside the agency. Operational control as it is defined by Border Patrol involves: detection of persons crossing the border, identification of the person, classification of the level of threat, respond and resolve.
The GAO also outlined a plan by the Border Patrol to revamp how it assesses outcomes in an effort to make the terms more universal. There will be a gap in reported outcomes next year while the system is being re-purposed, according to the report.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/15/rep-hunter-proposes-more-border-fencing/
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Border tunnel found east of Calexico
San Diego Union-Tribune
March 9, 2011
by Susan Shroder
A rudimentary tunnel possibly used to smuggle drugs from Mexico into the United States was found about 2 1/2 miles east of the Calexico Port of Entry, federal officials said Wednesday.
“It’s not a significant tunnel,” said Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement.
The tunnel was found by Mexican authorities, she said. It extends under the border fence about 10 feet into the U.S.
It apparently tapped into underground drainage pipes designed to handle water overflow from a reservoir in Mexico, she said. The reservoir is about 80 yards from the border fence.
Mack said that the entrance to the tunnel in Mexico was hand dug.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/09/border-tunnel-found-east-of-calexico/
March 9, 2011
by Susan Shroder
A rudimentary tunnel possibly used to smuggle drugs from Mexico into the United States was found about 2 1/2 miles east of the Calexico Port of Entry, federal officials said Wednesday.
“It’s not a significant tunnel,” said Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement.
The tunnel was found by Mexican authorities, she said. It extends under the border fence about 10 feet into the U.S.
It apparently tapped into underground drainage pipes designed to handle water overflow from a reservoir in Mexico, she said. The reservoir is about 80 yards from the border fence.
Mack said that the entrance to the tunnel in Mexico was hand dug.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/mar/09/border-tunnel-found-east-of-calexico/
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Arizona Seeking Pacts With Other States to Defy Federal Government
Arizona Republic
March 9, 2011
by Gina Rough
Arizona lawmakers are working to create alliances with other states on controversial issues such as health care, immigration and firearms regulation in a growing effort to challenge the authority of the federal government.
The push to form interstate compacts, which have the power to supersede existing federal law if approved by Congress, is part of a broader effort at the Arizona Capitol to promote states' rights.
Lawmakers have introduced bills that seek to limit congressional spending and federal authority on issues from elections to environmental inspections, and Gov. Jan Brewer lists federalism as one of her top priority initiatives this term.
So far this session, Republican legislators have introduced more than a dozen bills that propose to create compacts, about three times as many as lawmakers introduced in each of the past two or three years. Among them are measures to allow participating states to build a border fence, regulate endangered species without federal interference and set up their own health-care programs.
Most of the bills are working their way through the legislative process.
Even if the House and Senate pass the measures and the governor signs them, Congress would still have to approve them - and other states would have to pass similar legislation.
Critics question the point of the bills and the motivation of the lawmakers promoting them.
"Right now, Arizona is the epicenter for a lot of - and I am trying to be neutral here -innovative strategies for voicing displeasure with federal law," said Greg Magarian, a constitutional-law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "I have to believe the primary motivation here is political. You pass this and then essentially dare Congress to invalidate it."
Magarian said that it is unlikely that Congress would be willing to sign off on compacts that would essentially give the states a broad range of powers.
"You can't just snap your fingers and make federal law go away," he said.
How it works
The power to form interstate compacts, which are essentially contractual agreements or treaties between participating states, comes from Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution.
The "Compact Clause" essentially prohibits states from banding together and issuing their own currency, keeping troops and engaging in certain other activities without the consent of Congress. But, in recent decades, states have used the clause to create agreements to take control of a host of issues not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, such as water regulation, waste disposal or power use.
Nick Dranias, director for the center of constitutional government at the Goldwater Institute, said there are about 200 interstate compacts throughout the country, with the average state participating in about 25 agreements. Arizona, for example, is part of the Colorado River Compact, a 1922 agreement among seven Western states that regulates use of the river's water.
The new push to use compacts, however, is as a means to directly challenge the authority of the federal government. Proponents of states' rights believe the federal government has, in recent years, overstepped its boundaries by suing Arizona over its immigration law and decreeing that all individuals must carry health insurance.
They typically turn to the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as their legal basis for challenging the federal government. It states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Compacts are a way of returning control over those issues not specifically delegated to the federal government back to the states, said Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, chairwoman of the Senate's Border Security, Federalism and States Sovereignty Committee.
Allen, the primary sponsor or co-sponsor on several of the compact efforts, said she introduced the bills because "the proper balance" needs to be restored between the states and the federal government.
"The states aren't able to do anything anymore," she said. "We aren't able to do the things we need to do for our citizens."
Arizona's efforts
Two of the measures introduced in this year's session are slated to have hearings in committee today.
The House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee is expected to discuss Senate Bill 1406, which authorizes the governor to enter an interstate compact to build and maintain a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.
And the House Health and Human Affairs Committee is expected to hear SB 1592, the health-care compact bill. It proposes an interstate alliance in which states would be responsible for managing and regulating health care within their own borders.
The Senate has passed other bills, including measures to regulate the Mexican gray wolf, but the House still needs to hold committee hearings.
Allen and other lawmakers said they have been in contact with or are working with other states to try to drum up interest in the agreements.
But some measures are having trouble gaining traction in other legislatures.
The compact that has the most momentum is the one that seeks to challenge the new federal health-care law, Dranias and others say.
Seven states, including Arizona, have introduced legislation to regulate their own health care.
The compact would give member states authority to set up health plans and requirements as they sees fit. If participating states received congressional approval for the compact, constitutional experts believe it would supersede requirements in the recently passed federal health-care bill, including a mandate that every individual have health insurance.
Dranias said he believes the compacts could be a powerful mechanism for returning some powers to the states. "This allows states to combine forces to reduce the size and scope and intrusiveness of the federal government."
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/03/09/20110309arizona-lawmakers-defy-federal-government.html
March 9, 2011
by Gina Rough
Arizona lawmakers are working to create alliances with other states on controversial issues such as health care, immigration and firearms regulation in a growing effort to challenge the authority of the federal government.
The push to form interstate compacts, which have the power to supersede existing federal law if approved by Congress, is part of a broader effort at the Arizona Capitol to promote states' rights.
Lawmakers have introduced bills that seek to limit congressional spending and federal authority on issues from elections to environmental inspections, and Gov. Jan Brewer lists federalism as one of her top priority initiatives this term.
So far this session, Republican legislators have introduced more than a dozen bills that propose to create compacts, about three times as many as lawmakers introduced in each of the past two or three years. Among them are measures to allow participating states to build a border fence, regulate endangered species without federal interference and set up their own health-care programs.
Most of the bills are working their way through the legislative process.
Even if the House and Senate pass the measures and the governor signs them, Congress would still have to approve them - and other states would have to pass similar legislation.
Critics question the point of the bills and the motivation of the lawmakers promoting them.
"Right now, Arizona is the epicenter for a lot of - and I am trying to be neutral here -innovative strategies for voicing displeasure with federal law," said Greg Magarian, a constitutional-law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "I have to believe the primary motivation here is political. You pass this and then essentially dare Congress to invalidate it."
Magarian said that it is unlikely that Congress would be willing to sign off on compacts that would essentially give the states a broad range of powers.
"You can't just snap your fingers and make federal law go away," he said.
How it works
The power to form interstate compacts, which are essentially contractual agreements or treaties between participating states, comes from Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution.
The "Compact Clause" essentially prohibits states from banding together and issuing their own currency, keeping troops and engaging in certain other activities without the consent of Congress. But, in recent decades, states have used the clause to create agreements to take control of a host of issues not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, such as water regulation, waste disposal or power use.
Nick Dranias, director for the center of constitutional government at the Goldwater Institute, said there are about 200 interstate compacts throughout the country, with the average state participating in about 25 agreements. Arizona, for example, is part of the Colorado River Compact, a 1922 agreement among seven Western states that regulates use of the river's water.
The new push to use compacts, however, is as a means to directly challenge the authority of the federal government. Proponents of states' rights believe the federal government has, in recent years, overstepped its boundaries by suing Arizona over its immigration law and decreeing that all individuals must carry health insurance.
They typically turn to the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as their legal basis for challenging the federal government. It states that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Compacts are a way of returning control over those issues not specifically delegated to the federal government back to the states, said Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake, chairwoman of the Senate's Border Security, Federalism and States Sovereignty Committee.
Allen, the primary sponsor or co-sponsor on several of the compact efforts, said she introduced the bills because "the proper balance" needs to be restored between the states and the federal government.
"The states aren't able to do anything anymore," she said. "We aren't able to do the things we need to do for our citizens."
Arizona's efforts
Two of the measures introduced in this year's session are slated to have hearings in committee today.
The House Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee is expected to discuss Senate Bill 1406, which authorizes the governor to enter an interstate compact to build and maintain a fence along the U.S.-Mexican border.
And the House Health and Human Affairs Committee is expected to hear SB 1592, the health-care compact bill. It proposes an interstate alliance in which states would be responsible for managing and regulating health care within their own borders.
The Senate has passed other bills, including measures to regulate the Mexican gray wolf, but the House still needs to hold committee hearings.
Allen and other lawmakers said they have been in contact with or are working with other states to try to drum up interest in the agreements.
But some measures are having trouble gaining traction in other legislatures.
The compact that has the most momentum is the one that seeks to challenge the new federal health-care law, Dranias and others say.
Seven states, including Arizona, have introduced legislation to regulate their own health care.
The compact would give member states authority to set up health plans and requirements as they sees fit. If participating states received congressional approval for the compact, constitutional experts believe it would supersede requirements in the recently passed federal health-care bill, including a mandate that every individual have health insurance.
Dranias said he believes the compacts could be a powerful mechanism for returning some powers to the states. "This allows states to combine forces to reduce the size and scope and intrusiveness of the federal government."
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2011/03/09/20110309arizona-lawmakers-defy-federal-government.html
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Feds spending $41 million on new Nogales fence
KVOA
March 2, 2011
NOGALES - The federal government is putting down $41 million to tear down 2.8 miles of border fence near Nogales and rebuild a higher, deeper "bollard"-style fence.
There will be increased security along that section of the border while the fence is torn down, Nogales Mayor Arturo R. Garino says.
Mayor Garino views the project as a revitalization effort - the new 18-foot fence will help secure the area around the city as it will be higher and deeper in the ground.
Residents are also in favor of the new fence - a Nogales resident of 45 years says he thinks the project will improve the image of the city.
http://www.kvoa.com/news/feds-spending-41-million-on-new-nogales-fence/
March 2, 2011
NOGALES - The federal government is putting down $41 million to tear down 2.8 miles of border fence near Nogales and rebuild a higher, deeper "bollard"-style fence.
There will be increased security along that section of the border while the fence is torn down, Nogales Mayor Arturo R. Garino says.
Mayor Garino views the project as a revitalization effort - the new 18-foot fence will help secure the area around the city as it will be higher and deeper in the ground.
Residents are also in favor of the new fence - a Nogales resident of 45 years says he thinks the project will improve the image of the city.
http://www.kvoa.com/news/feds-spending-41-million-on-new-nogales-fence/
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Feds announce plans to rebuild border fence
ABC 15
March 1, 2011
by Anthony DeWitt
NOGALES, AZ - With immigration issues heating up in Arizona, the federal government has announced that it will begin rebuilding a stretch of border fence in the southern part of our state.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced Tuesday that construction to replace an estimated 2.8 miles of outdated primary-pedestrian fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border would begin in mid-March.
This border fence is adjacent to the city of Nogales, and when rebuilt will reportedly strengthen the security of the southwest border in the Arizona Tucson Sector.
According to a news release from the CBP, the new project will replace “landing mat” fence originally constructed in 1994 and will be replaced with a new 18-foot “bollard fence” on either side of the DeConcini Land Port of Entry.
Landing mat fencing is 10-foot metal fencing that has become obsolete in recent years, because it easy to cut through with a power saw and it completely blocks views on either side, according to Popular Mechanics . The science publication also reported on Bollard fencing, saying that it features large concrete-filled tubes placed close together. It is common to see a simple version of bollard fencing in front of office buildings and shopping malls.
CBP officials said that the new fence has the potential to deflect immigration in these areas by raising the height of the fence and forming a stronger foundation. The project is scheduled to be completed in September 2011.
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 according to a CBP news release.
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_central_southern_az/nogales/feds-announce-plans-to-rebuild-border-fence
March 1, 2011
by Anthony DeWitt
NOGALES, AZ - With immigration issues heating up in Arizona, the federal government has announced that it will begin rebuilding a stretch of border fence in the southern part of our state.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection announced Tuesday that construction to replace an estimated 2.8 miles of outdated primary-pedestrian fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border would begin in mid-March.
This border fence is adjacent to the city of Nogales, and when rebuilt will reportedly strengthen the security of the southwest border in the Arizona Tucson Sector.
According to a news release from the CBP, the new project will replace “landing mat” fence originally constructed in 1994 and will be replaced with a new 18-foot “bollard fence” on either side of the DeConcini Land Port of Entry.
Landing mat fencing is 10-foot metal fencing that has become obsolete in recent years, because it easy to cut through with a power saw and it completely blocks views on either side, according to Popular Mechanics . The science publication also reported on Bollard fencing, saying that it features large concrete-filled tubes placed close together. It is common to see a simple version of bollard fencing in front of office buildings and shopping malls.
CBP officials said that the new fence has the potential to deflect immigration in these areas by raising the height of the fence and forming a stronger foundation. The project is scheduled to be completed in September 2011.
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 according to a CBP news release.
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_central_southern_az/nogales/feds-announce-plans-to-rebuild-border-fence
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)