"they are running it [the wall] down the throats of the residents of Brownsville"

Valley fence mapped

Anastasia Ustinova and Hernán Rozemberg
Express-News Staff Writers

The agency published the most detailed descriptions to date of the design and preliminary maps to begin studying the environmental impact of the fence, designed to deter illegal immigration.
"In order to secure our nation's borders, CBP is developing and deploying the most effective mix of proven technology, infrastructure and increased personnel," the agency said in its environmental statement.

Agency officials declined comment and referred calls to headquarters in Washington.
Though the final design won't be approved until the close of the public comment period, which ends Oct. 15, the agency said the fence will be at least 16 feet high and 3 to 6 feet below ground, capable of withstanding vandalism, cutting and penetrating, as well as a crash of a 10,000-pound vehicle traveling 40 mph.

Border community leaders were surprised, disappointed and even angry over the government's announcement of the environmental study. "We continue to be confused and bewildered, and I don't think it's by accident," said Chad Foster, mayor of Eagle Pass and chairman of the Texas Border Coalition, a group of leaders from El Paso to Brownsville. "They've never been open. They've never been above board. There's never a good time for a bad idea, but at least they're consistent about that."

The wall will consist of 21 segments, which will range from 1 to 13 miles, along the border near Rio Grande City, McAllen, Mercedes, Harlingen, Brownsville and Fort Brown.
Similar impact studies are expected for other border regions.

"The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is working with public and private landowners to obtain easements or purchase the construction corridor," CBP said in the proposal.
The fence is part of the Security Defense Act, which calls for 700 miles of reinforced barriers in all four states along the Mexican border.

Congress allocated $1.2 billion for the construction of 370 miles of fence, with about 153 miles of it in Texas, by the end of 2008. CBP said if approved, the construction of the "tactical infrastructure" would begin next spring.

The agency said it would clear vegetation to build temporary access roads and construction staging areas, which will affect a swath of about 60 feet, stretching along the 70 miles.
"They're supposed to be working with us, but instead they are running it down the throats of the residents of Brownsville," said Pat Ahumada, mayor of Brownsville.

The construction also will affect portions of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, which has raised concerns among environmentalists, who fear the fence will destroy riverfront wildlife habitat that attracts thousands of eco-tourists from all over the world.
The environmentalists also say the fence could cut access to the Rio Grande for endangered species, such as ocelots and jaguarondi, destroying one of the most biologically diverse regions in the country.

"It's a huge chance to think about the total impact of the wall," said Martin Hagne, executive director of the Valley Nature Center in Weslaco, who has seen the maps. "It is obviously extensive and is going to affect federal and state parks."

Nancy Brown, an outreach manager at the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge near McAllen, said she has had several meetings with the CBP officials and that the location of the fence didn't come as a surprise.

"We understand that they have this mandate to put this fence up," Brown said. "But we have a mandate to protect the wildlife, and we are doing the best that we can."
Border residents have learned to become skeptical of what they're told by the government, said Foster of the Texas Border Coalition.

The last time he met with David Aguilar, the National Border Patrol chief, Foster was assured there were no definitive plans on the border fence. Now, he learned by surprise that the fence segments have been clearly defined and that they don't always stick to the river, but cut inland across private property.

Foster predicted that landowners would be up in arms as soon as they heard about the government's proposal. But that's not the message border agents are hearing from their superiors.

Agents were briefed last week on details of the proposed fence segments, said one agent in the Harlingen station who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Agents were told plans were progressing smoothly and that property owners were on board — that owners were not concerned with the fence as long as they still had access to their land.
The agent found that determination hard to believe, figuring there must be some landowners who want no part of the deal.

Most agents are basically indifferent to the issue. Fence or not, the agent said, their lives go on.
"Most of the guys don't really care one way or the other," the agent said. "It's no big deal to us. The fence will probably deter some. But we'll still have plenty of work."

Building the Barrier Plans call for a fence that would:
• Be 16 feet high and up to 6 feet underground.
• Withstand the crash of a 5-ton vehicle traveling 40 mph.
• Survive extreme weather changes.
• Withstand vandalism and cutting.
• Not impede the natural flow of water.
• See the plan for the Border Fence

By the Numbers
• 70: Number of miles of fencing in the Lower Rio Grande Valley
• 21: Number of segments to be installed
• 60: Width, in feet, of the fence corridor during construction
• 508: Total acres occupied by the fence corridor during construction