Big Bend National Park Border Infrastructure Would Be "The Most Egregious Assault" on Our National Park System, Seven Former Superintendents Say
Former Big Bend superintendents urge Homeland Security Secretary Mullin to not waive environmental and conservation laws in the park
Last Saturday, May 16, I reported that Homeland Security had awarded the largest border wall construction contract in U.S. history for a wall in Big Bend National Park.
The $1.7 billion contract was awarded after Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Rodney Scott had claimed that they wouldn’t build a wall in the national park but pave roads instead.
The contract description, which is visible to the public, specifically says “construction task order for border wall in Big Bend Texas.” The location is specified further as “Big Bend National Park, TX 79834-0007.”
However—and this is yet another pendulum swing in this increasingly complicated story—detailed contract info, which isn’t public but obtained by the staff of a U.S. Senator and shared with me by a trusted source, says otherwise.
The actual contract says, in bold print, that there will be no 30-foot wall built in Big Bend Ranch State Park, Big Bend National Park, or Black Gap Wildlife Management Area.
What it does include is the following:
17 miles of vehicle barriers inside and adjacent to the park
205 miles of “system attributes (patrol roads and technology)” in unspecified locations
Bob Krumenaker, former Big Bend National Park Superintendent and current chair of the organization Keep Big Bend Wild, told me via text that those 17 miles of vehicle barriers would be the four sections of vehicle barrier that are currently displayed on the CBP wall map.
This screenshot from the CBP “Smart Wall Map” shows construction plans for Big Bend National Park.
Green means “technology only (no wall or road)”
Orange means “vehicle barrier (no 30’ wall), technology, and patrol road)”
Yellow means “technology and patrol road (no wall)”
“The middle two [vehicle barriers] make no sense at all. As far as I know there are no roads on the Mexican side there,” he said. “The ones in either end of the park also seem unnecessary, at least within the park boundaries. There’s no risk of vehicles crossing the river.”
It’s those 205 unspecified miles of patrol roads and technology that “is the scariest part,” Krumenaker said. “And of course, without a waiver they can’t do any of this unless they intend to follow NEPA, etc. We have no intel on if/when a waiver will follow to authorized any of this.”
Indeed, a waiver of all kinds of environmental, conservation, and resource protection laws would be legally required for CBP to do any construction in the national park.
There’s precedent, though.
Back in February, then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem waived 28 federal laws to fast-track border wall construction upstream of the national park, including a section of Big Bend Ranch State Park.
And just last week, on May 15, the new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin waived 29 federal laws for construction along the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River, which is just downstream of the national park and Black Gap. He waived the exact same laws, plus one major one: the National Park Service Organic Act, which is the law that created the Park Service itself.
These are no minor laws.
So, in summary, Big Bend National Park is currently surrounded by sprawling areas of private, state, and federal lands that are no longer subject to federal environmental, conservation, or resource protection laws.
Along with most of the adjacent state park, Big Bend National Park is the only remaining bastion of protected land in the entire Big Bend border region.
With a construction contract now awarded for 17 miles of vehicle barriers and 205 miles of patrol roads and technology, the next step in the process is waiving all those laws for the national park, too.
And with that in mind, a group of former Big Bend National Park superintendents, including Bob Krumenaker, today published an open letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin.
In the letter, which is attached below, the former park leaders—who collectively have 259 years of experience in the National Park Service (NPS)—urged Secretary Mullin “to reject the waiver of federal laws that would allow physical barriers and roads, as well as related border security infrastructure, to be built inside the park in the absence of environmental or cultural compliance or public involvement.”
“If a border wall—or other unnecessary and highly destructive border infrastructure—is built inside Big Bend National Park, it would be the most egregious assault on the integrity of the entire National Park System since the construction of a dam in the Hetchy Hetchy Valley in Yosemite National Park more than a century ago,” they wrote.
And that’s a comparison I’ve made before as well. In fact, I’d go even further and say that a border wall in Big Bend National Park would be worse than damming the Tuolumne River in Hetch Hetchy was.
“These temple destroyers, devotees of ravaging commercialism, seem to have a perfect contempt for Nature,” John Muir wrote about Hetch Hetchy in ‘The Yosemite’ in 1912, “and, instead of lifting their eyes to the God of the mountains, lift them to the Almighty Dollar.”
This $1.7 billion border construction contract for Big Bend National Park is the largest such contract ever awarded in American history. It benefits one company that’s friendly with the current federal government.
A wall through Big Bend would not only destroy wildlife migration routes, riverside campsites, trailheads, and river access for both humans and wildlife, it would also decimate the local tourism economy, which is something Hetch Hetchy didn’t have quite yet, at least not by modern standards.
It’s no exaggeration to say that there’s more at risk—more to lose—in this particular national park than in any U.S. national park anywhere else before. This is an urgent, dire situation that’s actually developing as I write and as you read this. This is not speculation or hyperbole.
It’s real—and it’s happening.
And the destruction would be permanent, just like Hetch Hetchy, which Muir said rivaled the Yosemite Valley in natural splendor, is still underwater.
“We all agree that we need a secure border at Big Bend. Collectively, we have spent decades working with the Border Patrol and local law enforcement leaders to ensure so. But a physical wall, additional paved roads, vehicle barriers, or other large scale infrastructure projects within the park are not the way to accomplish this,” the six former superintendents and one former deputy superintendent wrote.
“The fact is that the rugged terrain, natural barriers, isolation, and distance from highways in Mexico are the reasons this area already has, by far, the lowest level of illegal activity of the entire border—and the entire Big Bend Sector, which your most recent waivers have invoked. The Sector, and the national park in particular, are not an area of high illegal entry, which is a prerequisite for your invoking the waiver.”
This joint letter of opposition to a wall—or any construction, for that matter—in the national park follows massive backlash from other groups and people as well.
Famously, a bipartisan coalition of all five Big Bend border sheriffs signed a joint statement in March, in which they strongly pushed back against the need for any new major infrastructure.
Then, in April, fourteen judges representing all border counties in the state of Texas did the same. Specifically, they requested more transparency, communication, and coordination between CBP and local law enforcement. So far, that has not happened.
More than 130,000 Americans have signed an online petition, while more than 40 state lawmakers have also voiced their concerns and opposition.
Considering that the new construction contract that’s recently been awarded for Big Bend National Park includes specific language about barriers and roads, the former park officials expressed their worries “that installing vehicle barriers, building new patrol roads, and paving any existing unpaved roads in the park’s remote backcountry are unnecessary for border security and also very harmful to what people care about in the national park.”
“Not only is there no risk of vehicles crossing the river in these locations, but the landscape would be altered forever for minimal improvements to security, if any,” they wrote. “It would require massive infrastructure installation and significant terrain modification to cross dozens of desert washes subject to flash flooding, and it would be vulnerable to damage in future flash floods. It would likely be a significant visual intrusion and almost certainly damage the plants, animals and iconic desert beauty.”
“It is for this reason we urge you to not issue any waivers of environmental or historic preservation laws, and to offer your proposals, with alternatives, for public review and input.”
The letter was published in collaboration with Keep Big Bend Wild and the Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks and signed by:
Bob Krumenaker, Superintendent 2018 - 2023, and Chair, Keep Big Bend Wild
David Elkowitz, Deputy Superintendent 2019 - 2022
Cindy Ott-Jones, Superintendent 2012 - 2017
Bill Wellman, Superintendent 2006 - 2012
John H. King, Superintendent 2003 - 2006
Robert Arnberger, Superintendent 1991 - 1994
H. Gilbert Lusk, Superintendent 1981 - 1986
How You Can Help Save Big Bend National Park
If you care about Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park, the Rio Grande itself, and the greater Big Bend area—all of which are at risk here—please keep the pressure on. Keep supporting the local organizations who are pushing back against this unpopular wall and other destructive infrastructure:
Follow them on social media and share their posts. Check out their advocacy resources. Support them with a donation if you can.
If you live in Texas yourself, contact your Senators and Representative. That includes both national and state politicians, even Governor Greg Abbott himself:
You can also use this super-easy 5calls.org script.
Another meaningful way to push back against the Big Bend border infrastructure, regardless of whether you live in Texas or elsewhere in the country, is adding your signature to the Big Bend petition, which, at the time of writing, has amassed almost 135,000 signatures.
Lastly, help spread the word. Share this article. Tell your friends, family, and neighbors about it. Post about protecting the Big Bend area’s unique character on social media.
Thanks for reading!
See you on our public lands and waters,
Bram
First photo: NPS / Cookie Ballou
Second photo: CBP Smart Wall Map
Third photo: NPS
Thank You So Very Much for this vital information. At first glance it felt like a bit of relief-- no wall-- but your thorough, wide-ranging reporting and privileged contractor data paints a still highly disturbing narrative. How far will these craven idiots go to carry out this boondoggle?? I'll do whatever I can to spread the word..!!!