Thanks to:
Showing posts with label Border Wall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Border Wall. Show all posts
Thursday, November 8, 2007
KANSAS: Wall Being Built Around Native American University
All walled up at Haskell
LINK TO VIDEO: http://tv.ku.edu/news/2007/11/05/all-walled/
LINK TO COMMENT: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/nov/07/feds_ok_wetlands_slt_route/#comments
If some national officials have their way, the Great Wall of Haskell could become a reality.
Representatives from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of Homeland Security toured Haskell Indian Nations University Monday to discuss placing a wall or fence around the campus' perimeter. The reps were in town to conduct a security assessment and formulate a recommendation for Haskell's safety.
Patrick Vacha, member of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, said the security checks were effective.
"The security assessments we do are all-hazard," Vacha. "We take into account intruders coming in and people not being allowed access to facilities."
Haskell officials are tossing around the idea of a wall that would close the now-open university, allowing passage at only two points. Though university officials say securing the perimeter of the 320-acre campus would keep students safer, not all students agree.
"I don't see what a wall or barrier, whether it's a natural landscape or fence, wall or whatever, would really do anything as far as enhancing security," said Jimmy Beason, editor of "The Indian Leader".
Within 45 days, the visiting representatives should issue a recommendation to Haskell. University officials will then poll students like Beason on their opinion and work on a security implementation plan.
Thanks to:
Ne74
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
ARTICLE: Taking The Border Battle To The Streets
Nov. 6, 2007, 4:12PM
Taking border battle to the streets
In Houston, debate gives way to confrontation of illegal immigrants, their supporters
By JAMES PINKERTON
Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle
It's become a Saturday morning ritual on a street corner in Spring.
Two dozen U.S. Border Watch volunteers, some wearing combat boots and military-style garb, face off with Hispanic day laborers and a half-dozen of their supporters.
''Stop the hate! Stop the fear! Immigrants are welcome here!" boomed a woman's voice recently over a portable loudspeaker.
''Thou Shall not Steal America," reads a sign waved by a member of Border Watch, a group based in Spring.
A similar scene has unfolded over the past months at the busy intersection of Steubner-Airline and Wimbelton Estates Drive in northwest Harris County. The day laborers, many of them undocumented, gather each morning in the Speedo gas station parking lot.
And nearly every Saturday morning since September, dozens of Border Watch members have attempted to drive them away. They chant slogans, wave signs and film employers who pick up immigrants for work.
Far from the halls of Congress and the front lines of the Southwest border, the divisive immigration debate is being played out in local neighborhoods, including the Houston area. A number of groups have upped the ante by moving from debate to confrontation, attempting to take immigration duties into their own hands.
Since the Minuteman group staged a border surveillance operation in Arizona in 2005, more than 250 new anti-immigrant groups have formed, said Mark Potok, director of Southern Poverty Law Center's intelligence project, which monitors such organizations.
''There's been a prairie fire in the last couple of years — these groups have really exploded," Potok said.
In April, the center listed 144 ''Nativist Extremist" organizations that go beyond debate and target individuals, Potok said. There are 13 immigration-related activist groups in Texas, and Border Watch was among three in the Houston area.
"The most significant danger posed by these groups is the poisoning of the democratic debate" about immigration levels, Potok said. Instead, the groups have turned ''the discussion into a diatribe about how Mexicans are destroying our culture, bringing diseases to our country and killing dozens of Americans every day," he said.
'It's about being illegal'
The president of Border Watch, Curtis S. Collier, said his members don't have a racist agenda. Their goal is simple: Expel the millions of illegal immigrants in the United States.
''To be racist, you have to target someone because of their race," Collier said. ''We don't care who you are. If you're here illegally we want you to go home. It's not about being brown-skinned, it's about being illegal."
Doris Meissner, who headed the Immigration and Naturalization Service during the Clinton era, said groups such as Border Watch have proliferated due to frustration over the government's inability to control illegal immigration. And while Meissner characterized the groups as ''spot outbreaks," she considers them a threat.
''They are dangerous because they do border on vigilante activity," said Meissner, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank based in Washington, D.C.
But groups lobbying for limited immigration see the growing activism differently.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform, said the explosive growth of immigration as a domestic issue — fueled in part by the Internet — and the formation of activist groups was triggered by the Bush administration's failure to crack down on illegal immigration. ''It is a truly magnificent populist action, in a way we haven't seen in decades," he said.
They keep close watch
Border Watch was co-founded by Collier, a 47-year-old Spring resident who spent eight years as a U.S. Army policeman before opening a small pest control company. He claims 1,628 members nationwide, with chapters in El Paso, San Antonio and Arkansas. Twice a year, Border Watch tracks illegal immigrants crossing the Texas-Mexico border
Collier, who speaks about border security at events across Texas, repeats claims that 25 Americans citizens are killed each day by undocumented immigrants. Islamic terrorists are slipping across the Southwest border, he says, camouflaged as illegal immigrants.
''There have been reports of Spanish-speaking schools popping up in the Middle East and teaching people in that part of the world to speak Spanish so they can blend in easily," Collier said.
Potok, with the poverty center, said those claims are common to this new breed of anti-illegal immigration activists. ''These are the paranoid fantasies of people with difficulty handling reality," he said.
Border Watch monitors some of what Collier said are 57 day labor sites in the Houston area.
''We do day labor observations ... workplace investigations, undercover operations," Collier said. ''Like, we'll go to day labor sites and pose as employers to figure out if they're here illegally and what their wages are going for."
He has even posted a video on YouTube documenting one of his "investigations."
So when church leaders in the Spring area proposed a center for day workers who use Stuebner-Airline as a gathering place, Collier and his group pounced.
''All hell broke out," recalled pastor Franklin Moore, part of a local-interfaith group working to establish a center.
''All we wanted to do was get a place for day laborers to be safe, to get out of the sun and rain, to get a drink and go to the bathroom," Moore said.
Border Watch volunteers marched on the Chamber of Commerce, and scores of members dominated a September meeting on the proposed center.
After weeks of Saturday demonstrations by Border Watch volunteers, several pro-immigrant organizations have shown up to support the day laborers. One recent Saturday, the two sides again faced off yards apart at the entrance to the Speedo convenience store. Two police cruisers were parked nearby to keep protesters apart.
Facing off on one corner
''Border Watch has been out here for several weeks harassing the day laborers, and we're out here to oppose the racism and harassment," said David Michael Smith, a professor at the College of the Mainland in Texas City. He has helped sponsor protests by the International Socialist Organization and the Progressive Workers Organizing Committee, among others.
Smith's wife, Rona, an elementary school counselor, used a loudspeaker to lead chants. About a dozen day laborers, with nothing to do since only two employers appeared all morning, held up protest signs. ''Racists! Fascists! Hey, hey, Border Watch go away!" Rona chanted.
Collier stood at the head of the Border Watch volunteers and unsuccessfully challenged Smith and his wife to debate. ''David, you and Rona look alone over there," he chided.
Soon after the protest began, sheriff's deputies had to intervene when neighbors upset with the noise confronted Rona. With the loudspeaker turned off, confrontations continued.
''You are the real traitors of the country, you are dividing the country. All these people are here to work," shouted Cristobal Hinojosa, with Mexicans in Action, who approached Border Watch volunteers.
The demonstration ended shortly before noon. Moore, the pastor, said both sets of protesters have hurt efforts to find a safe place for day laborers. ''It's gotten so convoluted, I don't know how to fix it," he said.
james.pinkerton@chron.com
Thanks to:
Border Wall in the News
Chertoff gave a press conference to announce the apprehension stats for the fiscal year. Here are the related articles:
Interesting fact: Apprehensions fell by 45% in the Del Rio Sector where there is no border wall, but rose by 7% in the walled up San Diego Sector.
Apprehensions of border-crossers drop
http://www.latimes.
Another threat:
Chertoff might waive laws to get Texas border fence built
http://www.chron.
"Progress" apparently includes an increase in migrant deaths in AZ:
More drugs seized, fewer migrants arrested: Chertoff will highlight progress along border
http://www.azcentra
A GAO report documents the number of people crossing illegally through points of entry.
21,000 Slipped Past Borders Illegally
http://ap.google.
OpEds:
By Rep. Grijalva
Failing our nation, failing our planet:
http://www.tucsonci
An excellent reframing of the issue:
Mad rush for border wall adds to San Pedro woes
http://www.azstarne
Thanks to:
No Border Wall
noborderwall@yahoo.com
Chertoff Pledges To Fight Border Security Lawsuits
Chertoff pledges to fight border security lawsuits
http://www.themonit
curity.html
Associated Press
November 7, 2007 - 7:40AM
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff
pledged Tuesday to fight all lawsuits against his efforts to secure
the border, ranging from building fences to requiring new driver's
licenses.
Chertoff blamed lawsuits like one blocking his department from using
Social Security information and another trying to prevent fence
construction on the Arizona-Mexico border as part of the reason the
federal government has had trouble getting control of the border for
the past 30 years.
"I will fight every lawsuit. I will deal with every procedural
roadblock. I will use every tool the law allows to continue to press
forward in the enforcement of laws," Chertoff said.
Chertoff conducted a multimedia presentation to give a status report
on his department's attempt to tighten immigration enforcement with
existing laws and regulations to "try to fill the gap left open by
Congress' failure to act to address the challenges comprehensively.
He hinged some of the agency's future border security work, such as
building a total 670-mile border fence, on getting more money from
Congress.
But negotiators who drafted a compromise defense spending bill
stripped the measure of $3 billion in emergency border security
money.
The money is already in a Homeland Security Department spending bill
but President Bush is threatening to veto that measure.
The achievements Chertoff named for the fiscal year 2007 that ended
Sept. 30 include:
— Built more than 76 miles of fence, for a total of 106 miles of
pedestrian fence and 115 miles of vehicle fence on the Southwest
border.
— Hired about 15,000 agents.
— Apprehensions fell 22 percent at the U.S.-Mexican border,
indicating fewer illegal crossings.
— The number of businesses using a system that allows them to check
whether workers are legal rose from 11,474 in 2006 fiscal year to
24,463 this year.
Chertoff said the agency plans to send to the White House's Office
of Management and Budget this week proposed changes to rules for the
H2-A temporary agriculture worker program to relieve worker
shortages.
Chertoff declined to provide specifics on the proposal, but said he
is trying to "streamline some of the requirements with respect to
wages" and other requirements. He said he wants sensible changes but
also wants to keep worker protections in place.
Employers consider the H2-A program cumbersome and many hire
undocumented workers rather than use the program.
Growers and immigrant advocates had hoped Congress would pass
immigrant agricultural worker legislation known as AgJobs as part of
the farm bill.
But earlier this week, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she
would not offer it as an amendment to the bill because it did not
have enough support.
Thanks to:
riograndeborderwinds
italiansun@yahoo.com
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Press Conference Call: “Invest in Families, Not in Walls" Campaign -- NOV 8
Contact: E. Elizabeth Garcia: 956/459-3205
"Invest in Families,
Not in Walls"
PRESS RELEASE
Who: Rio Grande Valley--RGV Network
What: Announcement:
"Invest in Families, Not in Walls" Campaign
Where: La Union del Pueblo Entero (LUPE) Corner of Cesar Chavez and Business Hwy 83.
When: Thursday November 8, 2007 at 10:00 a.m.
"Invest in Families, Not in Walls", is a campaign co-sponsor by a coalition of non-profit family advocacy organizations. This is a petition drive campaign to build a constituency of register voters to sign a petition against the border wall. The 'Invest in Families, Not in Walls" Campaign will kick-off with a press conference this Thursday November 8, 2007, at 10:00am at the LUPE headquarters, located at the corner of Cesar Chavez and Business Hwy. 83, San Juan, TX.
San Juan, TX, November 6, 2007: The RGV Network opposes spending our tax dollars on an ineffective border wall. Estimates for the construction of approximately 700 miles of reinforced fencing along sections of the U.S.-Mexico border are about $6 billion to $7. Congress has already approved a down payment of $1.2 billion. We don't believe this investment will ever deliver a measurable or positive return. Even the Department of Homeland Security has said the wall will only slow down, not stop, illegal border crossing.
We believe that money intended for the Border Wall should be invested in our families. With a $1.2 billion dollar investment in health care, housing education, job training, and infrastructure improvement we could actually see a tangible return. If we invest in our children's health today we will be saving billions of dollars on treatment for preventable maladies such as diabetes and childhood obesity. If we invest just a fraction of the $1.2 billion, a mere $125 million, on the rehabilitation of our structurally deficient levees we could avoid a potential Katrina like flood that will cause billions of dollars in property damage and several more billions of dollars in lost agriculture and production.
The RGV Network, serving families throughout the Rio Grande Valley ask all those who believe that our elected officials should invest in our families to join us in our petition drive. We will be campaigning from November 8 th, 2007 through March 8th, 2008. We ask that all interested parties please contact the number above if you would like to endorse the petition.
Thanks to:
E. Elizabeth Garcia
achcauhtli06@gmail.com
ARTICLE: Conversations at the Wall
No Borders Reports: Conversations at the Wall
by Seth Porcello
Monday Nov 5th, 2007
This 4.5min report listens to voices from both sides of the border fence in Calexico California, as people meet their loved ones through the barrier that separates them. This report is part of the No Borders Camp convergence on the US Mexico Border. For more information see:
http://noborderscamp.org/
audio:
no_borders_1_ mp3.mp3
MP3 at 5.3 MB
Transcript:
To walk from Calexico, California to Mexicali Mexico is only a matter of walking down a sidewalk, through some steel revolving gates, and out onto the Mexicali streets. To walk from Mexicali to Calexico however, requires papers, visas, interactions with border patrol, and usually waiting in a huge line. The two cities, while divided, are economically and socially one. In any other north american city they would be considered different neighborhoods, but here, they are divided by a steel wall, policed on only one side.
Families and friends who have been separated by the border, often meet on both sides of the fence to talk, or squeeze money through the steel grid to relatives in Mexicali, and see what little they can of their loved ones. Standing in Calexico, I interviewed one man in Mexicali through the border fence.
what I can say about this fence, this fence is a form of discrimination. Its a form of discrimination because all Americans can come to Mexico without a problem but Mexicans cannot go the United States. Every American can enter and leave through this fence, but Mexicans cannot, WHY? Because they need papers. When I look at this fence, it's something that has no right to exist. Why did they put up this barrier? Is it discrimination against Mexicans, or, I don't know, something racial.
I met Maria, who ask that her real name not be used, why she had come to the Calexico side of the border fence.
Seth: Why?
Maria: I came to see my family.
Seth: Through?
Maria: Through the fence, yes. They have to be on the other side of the fence, and me inside. Its a difficult situation, yes, but they have to. We have to be strong, for many things, for our families who we don't see them, for the home. For many things, we have to have courage.
Seth: And you can't cross the border.
Maria: No I can't cross the border.
Seth: Is this fence just?
Maria: No, it's not just, but what can we do. If it could be done I would go. No it's not just.
Reporting from Calexico, Mexicali, and the imaginary space in between,
this is seth porcello
Thanks to:
Monday, November 5, 2007
Take Action: Public Comments on Building the Wall in Wildlife Refuge
BE HEARD!!!
Call for public comments about building the border wall through
our National Wildlife Refuge
Comments are being accepted by the
Here are a few ways to guide your comments:
· While the surveys themselves may cause little immediate damage, their intent is to pave the way for the construction of border walls, an activity which will seriously degrade and fragment the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge and which is incompatible with the refuge mission. According to USFWS regulations, “Fragmentation of the National Wildlife Refuge System's wildlife habitats is a direct threat to the integrity of the National Wildlife Refuge System, both today and in the decades ahead. Uses that we reasonably may anticipate to reduce the quality or quantity or fragment habitats on a national wildlife refuge will not be compatible.”
· We have no faith in the utility and impartiality of the survey process. The private corporation in charge of conducting the surveys, Engineering-Environmental Management, Inc. (E²M), has a vested interest in expediting the construction of the border walls to please their client, the Department of Homeland Security. In addition, E²M has already mismanaged the public comment period of the Rio Grande Valley EIS, allowing technical difficulties with both the official website and the posted fax number to interfere with the acceptance of public comments for several days of the already EIS short comment period. E²M should not be in charge of this vitally important surveying task. It should instead be carried out by local US Fish and Wildlife biologists who are familiar with the natural and cultural resources that are present in the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge.
· The USFWS has expressed concerns that there will not be enough refuge staff to properly oversee survey activities. We share these concerns; there should be USFWS oversight for all activities.
· The natural resource survey is further compromised by its limited duration. E²M employees will only spend 10 days surveying the natural resources in the wall’s path. That is utterly insufficient. Endangered species are by definition extremely rare, and sightings of migratory species are dependent on the time of year, so the odds of seeing one during any 10 day period are next to nothing. If they fail to see a particular endangered or migratory animal during their brief visit the final report may give the false impression that they are not present and will not be impacted by the wall.
· The cultural resource survey contains a troubling provision for backhoe trenching up to 33 ft deep in areas that have a high probability of cultural resources. This is listed as a “last option,” but it should not be allowed at all. Not only would such an activity be incompatible with the environmental mission of the refuge, it would likely destroy the very cultural resources that are being documented.
Please send comments to:
Refuge Manager
Lower
Rt.
Or email Bryan_Winton@fws.gov (Subject line: Draft Compatibility Determinations: Border Fence)
Draft of Natural and Cultural Resource Compatibility Determination Docs are below:
-----
DRAFT
COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION
Use: Issuance of a Special Use Permit to Engineering-Environmental Management (e2M) to conduct Natural Resource Surveys, directly associated with determining the environmental impact(s) of the proposed Border Fence (PF-225) on several river tracts on the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (LRGVNWR).
Refuge Name:
Refuge Units Affected by Proposed Use:
Arroyo Ramirez Tract, Los Negros Creek Tract (O-1); Rio
Los Ebanos Tract (O-3); Penitas Tract; Kiskadee Wildlife Management Area (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department lands managed under agreement)(O-4); Monterrey Banco Tract (O-7); La Coma Tract (O-8); Rosario Banco Tract (O-10); Phillips Banco Tract (O-18); Boscaje de La Palma Tract, Southmost Tract (O-21).
Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:
- Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 [16 U.S.C. 742f(a)(4)], [16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)]
- An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes [16 U.S.C. 667b]
- Refuge Recreation Act, as amended [16 U.S.C. 460k-1], [16 U.S.C. 460k-2]
- Migratory Bird Conservation Act [16 U.S.C. 715d]
- National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
Refuge Purpose(s): As excerpted from the enabling legislation used to authorize the acquisition of the Refuge, the following are the Refuge purposes:
“... for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources ...” [16 U.S.C. 742f(a)(4)] “... for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude ...” [16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)] (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)
”... particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” [16 U.S.C. 667b] (An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes)
”... suitable for: (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species ...” [16 U.S.C. 460k-1] “... the Secretary ... may accept and use ... real ... property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors ...” [16 U.S.C. 460k-2] (Refuge Recreation Act [16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4], as amended)
”... for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” [16 U.S.C. 715d] (Migratory Bird Conservation Act)
The
- To restore, enhance and protect biological diversity.
- To protect and obtain additional water rights, improve water management, and protect, restore and enhance wetlands.
- To improve water quality and reduce contaminant related fish and wildlife resource losses.
- To protect, maintain and plan for cultural resources.
- To offer compatible wildlife dependent public uses, recreational opportunities, and interpretation and education.
National Wildlife Refuge System
Description of Proposed Use:
Natural Resources Surveys
e2M has been tasked with conducting reconnaissance-level biological surveys within the above described alignments. Intuitive controlled surveys of the fence corridor would be conducted by senior ecologists. The natural resources surveys are scheduled to commence ASAP, and would be conducted over a 10-day period. Surveyors would walk the entire accessible length of the corridor for each fence segment, and examine in more detail areas containing unique species compositions or habitat that might be conducive to sensitive species. Plot data (GPS coordinates, photographs, and plant community composition) would be recorded at regular intervals along the
corridor and where plant communities present substantial shifts in species composition. These
data would be used to generate vegetation classifications and maps to support delineation of habitat types, analysis of potential sensitive species occurrences, and analysis of potential project impacts to biological resources. Lists of state-and federal-listed species potentially occurring within the alignment have been developed. Although, no protocol surveys would be conducted, surveyors would specifically look for evidence indicating the presence of state and federal listed
species and habitats that might support them. These surveys, would be observational only (i.e., they would not include trapping, digging, or other disturbances). In addition, waters of the
Availability of Resources: Additional fiscal resources are needed to permit and monitor this use. A designated Refuge staff person will need to be made available daily to oversee this activity, since the ultimate intent of the natural resource survey is to establish the environmental feasibility of installing significant infrastructure--which is currently not permitted. Therefore, Refuge personnel will need to oversee this activity so that refuge resources are protected throughout the survey, and that un-permitted duties associated with the project are not initiated prematurely. The LRGVNWR staff will provide oversight during all aspects of the investigation, to ensure compatibility stipulations are met, and to insure permit compliance while on-refuge work occurs. The necessary effort required to issue and oversee the natural resource surveys cannot be accomplished with existing resources and staff without undue hardship to other refuge programs. Recent staff transfers and personnel shortage further complicate the Refuge's ability to properly and adequately oversee this activity.
Anticipated Impacts of the Use: This Phase of the proposed project will have negligible impacts to Refuge resources. Only hand-trimming of branches (native vegetation) will be allowed. No loss of habitat will be permitted. No new roads or trails will be permitted. Natural Resource Surveys, as permitted, could actually have benefits to the refuge if surveyors identify (and disclose) additional locations of rare and endangered plants, assuming surveys are sufficiently thorough and adequate. All flagging and stakes will likely remain upon cessation of this Phase of the project. This will enable Refuge leadership to view the survey work and ascertain whether sufficient modifications to Project alignment were considered in order to minimize/avoid destroying Refuge vegetation and threatened/endangered species habitat will be sufficiently safeguarded. Special Use Permit issuance for subsequent phases of the project could be contingent upon findings and proposed alignment resulting from the natural resource survey work. Some wildlife disturbance, excess survey flagging, contractor garbage/trash, and un-retrieved stakes/flagging is likely to result from this Phase of the proposed project.
Associated inadvertent impacts of this activity could be negative press coverage associated with the proposed project. Very little local support is present for the proposed project. Refuge staff cooperation in authorizing E2M to access Refuge lands under Special Use Permit for any reason could be perceived by environmental supporters and conservation groups as unsatisfactory.
Public Review and Comment: Public notices of the Draft Compatibility Determination will be advertised in local newspapers (The Valley Morning Star,
Determination (check one below):
___ Use is Not Compatible _X_ Use is Compatible with Following
Stipulations
Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility:
Prior to the implementation of the project:
1. No work will begin without obtaining a Special Use Permit from the Refuge and without daily notification and coordination with the Refuge Manager regarding particular sites/locations of that days' activities; Any and all federally mandated consultations (by Ecological Services or otherwise) and the procurement of any other necessary permits (access rights-of-way, etc.) will be obtained by E2M and its assigns, including, but not limited to, those required by the COE and the Texas State Historic Preservation Office (a.k.a. SHPO).
2. Vegetated areas will be accessed/surveyed on foot only.
3. All efforts will be made to recognize and avoid terrestrial wildlife to reduce the risk of unnecessary mortality.
4. While work is being conducted, vehicles and equipment must remain on designated Refuge roads. No off-road access is permitted.
5. All other stipulations and/or rules from General Conditions and Operating Procedures While on the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge will be strictly adhered to.
Justification: The Refuge acknowledges that this phase of the overall project is a component (natural resource surveys) that can be justified since the presence of threatened or endangered species, and otherwise rare species could be observed during this course of the investigation. For the sole purposes of evaluating appropriateness and compatibility, natural resource surveys will not materially interfere with or detract from, and may actually add to our basic understanding and knowledge, of the resources present on refuge lands. Natural resource surveys, albeit affiliated and associated with the proposed Border Fence (PF-225) initiative, will enable Refuge leadership to better evaluate what the measurable, site-specific impacts of the fence could/will be in the event that the project proceeds. Without authorizing natural resource surveys, the impacts of the project cannot be fully and accurately measured.
Submitted by: Refuge Manager____________________________
(Signature and Date)
Signature: Project Leader___ ___________________________
(Signature and Date)
Concurrence: Regional Chief _______________________________
(Signature and Date)
Mandatory 10- or 15-year Re-Evaluation Date: __October 21, 2017__
Fish and Wildlife Service policy states that after November 17, 2002 no uses on a refuge will be permitted for a period longer than 10 years, unless the terms and conditions for such long-term permits (e.g., easements) specifically allows for the modification to the terms and conditions of the permit, if necessary, to ensure compatibility.
DRAFT
COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION
Use: engineering-environmental Management, Inc. (e2M) proposes to conduct cultural resources surveys on fourteen (14) Refuge tracts within the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge (LRGVNWR). These surveys are directly associated with determining the environmental impact(s) of the proposed Border Fence (PF-225) in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas.
Refuge Name:
Establishing and Acquisition Authorities:
- Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 [16 U.S.C. 742f(a)(4)], [16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)]
- An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes [16 U.S.C. 667b]
- Refuge Recreation Act, as amended [16 U.S.C. 460k-1], [16 U.S.C. 460k-2]
- Migratory Bird Conservation Act [16 U.S.C. 715d]
- National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
Refuge Purpose(s): As excerpted from the enabling legislation used to authorize the acquisition of the Refuge, the following are the Refuge purposes:
“... for the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish and wildlife resources ...” [16 U.S.C. 742f(a)(4)] “... for the benefit of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services. Such acceptance may be subject to the terms of any restrictive or affirmative covenant, or condition of servitude ...” [16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)] (Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956)
”... particular value in carrying out the national migratory bird management program.” [16 U.S.C. 667b] (An Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes)
”... suitable for: (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of endangered species or threatened species ...” [16 U.S.C. 460k-1] “... the Secretary ... may accept and use ... real ... property. Such acceptance may be accomplished under the terms and conditions of restrictive covenants imposed by donors ...” [16 U.S.C. 460k-2] (Refuge Recreation Act [16 U.S.C. 460k-460k-4], as amended)
”... for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose, for migratory birds.” [16 U.S.C. 715d] (Migratory Bird Conservation Act)
The
- To restore, enhance and protect biological diversity.
- To protect and obtain additional water rights, improve water management, and protect, restore and enhance wetlands.
- To improve water quality and reduce contaminant related fish and wildlife resource losses.
- To protect, maintain and plan for cultural resources.
- To offer compatible wildlife dependent public uses, recreational opportunities, and interpretation and education.
National Wildlife Refuge System
Description of Proposed Use:
Cultural Resources Surveys
e2M has been tasked by the Corps of Engineers – Fort Worth District, with conducting cultural resources surveys within the above listed Refuge tracts. The nature of the cultural resources survey would depend upon the potential of the specific portion of the alignment to contain cultural resources. The least invasive approach, which would be used for areas determined to have low potential for cultural resources, would be simple pedestrian surveys of all the identified alignments. There are no known cultural resource sites within the proposed corridors of the surveys. However, e2M has included in their request contingencies for areas that present a moderate or high potential for presence of cultural resources. In areas that present moderate potential, shovel testing would be employed. Shovel testing involves the careful excavation of areas up to 2 feet in diameter and 5 feet in depth. Depending upon the level of perceived potential in an area, shovel tests may be conducted at up to 16 points per mile. Finally, in areas that have a high probability to contain cultural resources and present deep alluvial sediments, backhoe trenching may be required. Ditches would be up to 33 feet deep, approximately 3.5 feet wide, and may extend for up to 60 feet in length. Backhoe trenching would be the last option utilized for documenting cultural resources. The cultural resources surveys are scheduled to commence as soon as possible (pending the issuance of a special use permit) and would be conducted over a 10-day period. Follow-up surveys to further investigate and/or archive sites potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places may be required. Any collections of cultural resources would require the issuance of a permit under the Archeological Resources Protection Act and the Antiquities Act. This permit is issued by the Regional Director.
Availability of Resources: No additional fiscal resources will be needed due to this use as long as surveys are carried out utilizing pedestrian surveys (only). If areas are identified during the surveys that indicate moderate or high potential cultural resources, additional fiscal and staff resources may be required. The LRGVNWR staff will provide oversight during all aspects of the investigation to ensure compatibility stipulations are met, and to insure permit compliance with on-refuge work. The effort required to issue and oversee the special use permit can be accomplished with existing resources as long as pedestrian-only surveys are employed. More intensive surveys for moderate to high potential sites will require additional staff and fiscal resources as well as permits.
Anticipated Impacts of the Use: Cultural resource surveys conducted by e2M will be conducted on foot or using existing trails or roads within each of the listed Refuge tracts. Vehicles will be permitted only on existing roads and only hand-trimming of tree branches will be authorized. Cultural resource surveys will disturb and temporarily displace wildlife but this affect is expected to be temporal and insignificant. Surveys would occur during daylight hours only and would not affect nocturnal species. Due to the methods employed in areas of low potential for cultural resources, there should be little if any damage to wildlife or vegetation. This use is expected to have negligible impacts to Refuge resources. However, upon the identification of moderate to high potential sites by the contractor and proposals to utilize hand digging and/or heavy equipment, amended special use permits or archeological permits will be required. These amended permits or archeological permits may contain additional stipulations as necessary to protect wildlife and vegetation. It is also possible that activities prescribed for moderate or high potential sites would not be permitted. Depending on the proposed action, it may be necessary to reevaluate this Compatibility Determination. If a new Compatibility Determination is required, it would include additional public comment.
Public Review and Comment: Public notices of the Draft Compatibility Determination will be advertised in local newspapers (The Valley Morning Star,
Determination (check one below):
___ Use is Not Compatible _X_ Use is Compatible with Following
Stipulations
Stipulations Necessary to Ensure Compatibility:
Prior to the implementation of the project:
1. No work will begin without obtaining a Special Use Permit from the Refuge Manager. Daily work activities will be closely coordinated with the LRGVNWR Refuge Manager regarding particular sites/locations and access routes.
2. Vegetated areas will be surveyed on foot only.
3. Vegetation may be cut using hand tools only and only for the purpose of conducting the survey.
4. No digging with shovels or heavy equipment is permitted without prior consultation with the Refuge Manager.
5. All efforts will be made to recognize and avoid terrestrial wildlife to reduce the risk of unnecessary mortality.
6. While work is being conducted, vehicles and equipment must remain on designated Refuge roads. No off-road access is permitted. Vehicles will not be permitted on Refuge roads during wet conditions.
7. All survey personnel will be accompanied by Refuge Law Enforcement Officers (as available) or Border Patrol Agents when present on Refuge lands.
8. All other stipulations and/or rules from General Conditions and Operating Procedures While on the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge will be strictly adhered to.
Justification: Though the overall objective of these surveys is to gather cultural resource information related to the development of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and identification of endangered and threatened species related to Section 7 (Endangered Species) Consultation for the future construction of the Border Fence, these surveys have the potential to provide much needed cultural resource information to the Refuge. Little information is currently available to the Refuge Staff regarding the presence or absence of cultural resources on these Refuge tracts. Gathering of cultural resource data on Refuge tracts is important, and can be useful baseline information for Refuge Managers and Biologists assigned to the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Service Policy related to cultural resources is established in Service Manual 614 FW 1-5. Under Section 1.2 Objectives, A. the objectives for managing cultural resources are to: “Protect, maintain, and plan for the use of Service managed cultural resources for the benefit of present and future generations.” The Santa Ana/Lower Rio Grande Valley Comprehensive Conservation Plan goals and objectives include: 5.4 Cultural Resources. GOAL: “to protect, maintain, and plan for Service managed cultural resources on the Lower Rio Grande Valley/Santa Ana NWR for the benefit of present and future generations.” Objectives: 1. “Coordinate with the SHPO to identify cultural resources on the refuge. Evaluate the status of new sites such as the Casa Yanqui ruins in the Starr County District and submit for additional protection (i.e., National Register) if necessary.” These cultural resource surveys will not materially interfere with or detract from the purposes of the Refuge and have the potential to add to the Refuge’s basic understanding and knowledge of the resources present on Refuge lands. Methods and procedures specified in the proposed use are not likely to significantly impact wildlife or wildlife habitat within the Refuge. The fact that these surveys are related to potential future construction of a Border Fence on Refuge lands is not considered a factor in determining whether the use is Compatible.
Signature: Project Leader___ ___________________________
(Signature and Date)
Concurrence: Regional Chief ______________________________
(Signature and Date)
Mandatory 10- or 15-year Re-Evaluation Date: __November 20, 2017__
Fish and Wildlife Service policy states that after November 17, 2002 no uses on a refuge will be permitted for a period longer than 10 years, unless the terms and conditions for such long-term permits (e.g., easements) specifically allows for the modification to the terms and conditions of the permit, if necessary, to ensure compatibility.
Courtesy of:
NO BORDER WALL
noborderwall@yahoo.com
Sunday, November 4, 2007
An open letter to the Organization of American States
Good afternoon...
For over a year many of us in the U.S. have been actively opposing the border wall. Many of us have also been extremely active in opposing the concentration camps and prison camps that exploit the immigrant...in privatized "for-profit" detention facilities. Here in Texas, two such profit prisons are targets of our constant protests. T. Don Hutto in Taylor, Texas that has hundreds of children and their mothers from dozens of different countries...which receives about $10,000 per child per day. The other is in Raymondville, TX, which is a ten tent concentration camp, that has upwards of 2000 immigrants from some 50 different lands. This facility is expanding to add 1000 more beds.
Such facilities are being built all across the country. It is the intent of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to imprison (for profit) and deport the millions of undocumented immigrants that reside in our country. The operation is called the "End Game". ( http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/endgame.pdf ).
On May 8, 2007, the UN Human Rights Commission, Special Rapporteur, Sr. Jorge Bustamante, came to Texas specifically to inspect the human rights violations against the immigrant children at the Hutto children's' prison. We collaborated with Sr. Bustamante and held a protest vigil in front of the prison camp. As you are no doubt aware, Sr. Bustamante was denied access by Secretary of DHS, Chertoff.
We would like you of the OAS to know that there is a vast network here in Texas and all across the US that are vehemently opposed to these crimes against our human family. We have attorneys, professors, journalists, business leaders, faith based organizations, human rights organizations, military and common citizens who are outraged over these atrocities.
Every day, all across the country, hundreds and sometimes thousands of immigrants are being rounded up and imprisoned like criminals...without any due process or civil liberties. The legislated goal of the ruling elite is to have a daily average of 41,000 immigrants in these for-profit prison camps. This is the darkest form of capitalism since slavery. Now, these facilities are "working" the detainees at the rate of $1 per day. These prison camps are turning into slave labor camps.
When the OAS does investigate the conditions here, we the grassroots citizens, would like to collaborate with your visits with some protests. Our network can provide you with information from all over the US that you would not other be able to gather up as a result of the prevailing secrecy. We have already done much of this info gathering and would be most eager to share the hard facts of this national and international tragedy with you. From some 30 states, we have been actively opposed to the trauma that is being conducted against innocent, desperate and helpless people.
Please help us as we try to help you...
In solidarity...
Jay
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Freedom Ambassadors
Connecting the Dots...Making a Difference
Jay J. Johnson-Castro, Sr.
jay@villadelrio.com
(830)768-0768 (when in Del Rio)
(830734-8636 (cell-when on the road)
Please read my column: Inside the Checkpoints http://www.riograndeguardian.com/columns3.asp
ARTICLE: Service Recalls Dead, Implores Living
Service recalls dead, implores living
Article Launched: 11/03/2007 12:00:00 AM MDT
Video: Their altar was a folding table covered by a white tablecloth.
Their church was the bare desert.
But about 500 people came to the binational All Souls' Day Mass on Friday on the border between Sunland Park, N.M., and Anapra, Mexico.
They tried to ignore the chain-link fence that separated the crowd of faithful into two groups.
"I'm glad to be here," said Prisciliano Dominguez, a resident of Lomas de Poleo in Mexico.
Dominguez and his wife clutched the fence to talk to
Juvenio Ayala prayed Friday along the border fence during the annual Día de los Muertos Border Mass. Ayala was born in Durango, Mexico, and is now a U.S. citizen. (Adriane Jaeckle / El Paso Times)
"It is different from the church. Here we are separated by a fence, but that's how human beings are," Dominguez said. "It's good to be here anyway."
El Paso Catholic Bishop Armando X. Ochoa said the Mass, a tradition on the border, was meant for the living as much as for the dead.
"We gather together to remember all those who have lost their lives and to challenge the living to do what we can to look for a comprehensive (immigration) law," he said.
The faithful waited for two hours for the Mass to start because of a scheduling confusion. A one-hour time difference exists between Juárez and El Paso this week because the two countries did not go on daylight saving time together.
Friday at 2 p.m., Las Cruces Bishop Ricardo Ramirez and Juárez Bishop Renato Ascencio de León took turns leading the religious service, each one on his side of the fence.
Ramirez spoke of the border as "the demarcation that means either 'Welcome' or denial of entry, and these days it means denial of entry."
The Mass was a new experience for Elsa Gual, a recent arrival to El Paso who was in Sunland Park with her children.
"They know the tradition, but they don't know how to celebrate it," Gual said of her children. "This is very interesting. We all gather for the same end."
Antonia Muñoz, of Canutillo, attends every year.
"It's for our tradition and for the tradition of being together," she said. "It's a little sad. It makes one think about our family members who are over there (in Mexico) and can't be here with us today."
State Rep. Paul Moreno, D-El Paso, said the binational Mass is even more meaningful this year because of current events.
"This year is most special because of what our country is doing to Mexican people. It is a great shame to see a fence like that where people can't even shake hands," he said.
Sister Frances Hicks, a member
Las Cruces Bishop Ricardo Ramirez, El Paso Bishop Armando X. Ochoa and Juárez Bishop Renato Ascencio Leon celebrated an Día de los Muertos Mass on Friday along the border fence near Anapra, Mexico. The Mass was in honor of immigrants who have died crossing the border. Participating in the Mass were about 500 people on both sides of the border. (Photos by Adriane Jaeckle / El Paso Times)
"It's a wonderful reminder of why the people are coming (to the United States), not just for a better life but to survive," she said.
Louie Gilot may be reached at lgilot@elpasotimes.com, 546-6131.
El Paso Bishop Armando X. Ochoa, right, and Juárez Bishop Renato Ascencio de León talked on Friday through the border fence near Anapra, Mexico. The bishops said Mass in memory of immigrants who have died trying to cross into the United States.
Border Mass
Courtesy of:
noborderwall@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
