Border Wall going up in Big Bend National Park

30,608 Views | 305 Replies | Last: 9 days ago by HollywoodBQ
1939
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pantera said:

Updated map from DHS website as of this morning. The entire project in the park will be a 24 foot wide road, with clearings up to 160 feet wide around it. Maybe if there was any transparency from the DHS or CBP regarding there actual plans, people would have a better idea of what is going on.



I'm all for the use of drone tech, cameras spread out (with no lights because why? we have night vision and heat mapping), satellite imagery, and other "non-invasive" border protection measures, but clearing this region for a huge road when less than 1% of all border crossings occur in the region (of which the park is only a small portion of) is asinine. The only good thing is now that there is largely bipartisan opposition at the state level, Trump's ego may make him back down from the proposed project and use the tech we have instead of needing a physical barrier of any sort in the park itself.


Where are you getting your information on width, clearing width etc? Seems like pure speculation. Someone else claimed they are going to dynamite a mountain to build a road but again that's pure speculation. Same with the technology that people are sure will be nothing more than stadium lights, again, fear porn.

The funny part is that there are already roads all over the park including a paved one that goes through the mountains to get to Santa Elena Canyon. And of course there is the road from Lajitas to Ojinga which is considered one of the most scenic drives in Texas, yet somehow a road along the river in the park is the most destructive thing ever that's going to ruin the entire Big Bend region. In 6 months this will blow over and a year or two from now people won't even know anything changed.
TRD-Ferguson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No, they're not. Further, a few well placed large boulders in those areas would be much less expensive and less invasive than the road they are building.

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Such a stupid waste of taxpayer money. But, what's new.

YellowPot_97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Apparently the land that is being used for equipment staging and providing road materials is own by Yeti co-founder Ryan Seiders. He is also a board member of the Borderlands Research Institute. Their missions statement is "to help conserve the natural resources of the Chihuahuan Desert Borderlands through research, education, and outreach."
Guess that doesn't apply when there's money to be made.
Joseph Parrish
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe I'm crazy, but every time one of you says 'there's absolutely no way' …it makes me think there definitely is a way.
Tree Hugger
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.


Except that, under scrutiny, this project doesn't appear to accomplish that.
nai06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.
there were 3096 apprehensions last year. The contract for the Big Bend Sector is 1.7 billion. Seems like a pretty poor ROI.
YellowPot_97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nai06 said:

Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.
there were 3096 apprehensions last year. The contract for the Big Bend Sector is 1.7 billion. Seems like a pretty poor ROI.

A cost of $550,000 per apprehension. Extremely poor ROI indeed. At the same time as construction to replace the rapidly aging lodge and restaurant in the park have been cancelled due to budget short falls.
AgGrad99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That number is only based on the apprehensions. Not those who made it through.

What if the new tech allows for quite a few more apprehensions? The cost-per goes down drastically. if there is a physical deterrent across the rest of our border, it stands to reason this will be a more popular route, especially if we don't have safeguards.

And what is the cost, for all the government subsidies these migrants will absorb, into perpetuity?

This really seems overblown, when we're talking about some additional roadways and monitoring via technology. If it were a physical border, I'd be more inclined to agree.
Kibbles n Bits
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
YellowPot_97 said:

nai06 said:

Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.

there were 3096 apprehensions last year. The contract for the Big Bend Sector is 1.7 billion. Seems like a pretty poor ROI.

A cost of $550,000 per apprehension. Extremely poor ROI indeed. At the same time as construction to replace the rapidly aging lodge and restaurant in the park have been cancelled due to budget short falls.

Are we allowed to consider the ROI over thirty years?

Or is this project - whatever it is they're doing - only designed to last one year?

What a bizarre way to calculate ROI.
Ol Jock 99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me.

Man, I'm old enough to remember when you were a conservative...
Aston 91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rossticus said:

Such a stupid waste of taxpayer money. But, what's new.



I'll admit I'm not an expert on large scale construction projects, but does anybody who sees this amount of equipment think they're really just going to put in a couple of access roads and some surveillance equipment? Especially when they're spending $1.7 billion?
Apache
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Are we allowed to consider the ROI over thirty years?

Or is this project - whatever it is they're doing - only designed to last one year?

What a bizarre way to calculate ROI.

While we're at it, are we also allowed to consider the cost of maintaining all the new infrastructure ad infinitum?
1939
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The number of apprehensions was low last year because Trump is president.
revvie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My idea would be to build a borderwall along the entire border except for Big Bend area. Concentrate border enforcement on the few roads exiting the area.
JFABNRGR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FWIW

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Db_BhduRSs7/?igsh=MTRnNGRjNDMxMGptYw==
“You can resolve to live your life with integrity. Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me.”
- Alexander Solzhenitsyn
YouBet
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Apache said:

Quote:

Are we allowed to consider the ROI over thirty years?

Or is this project - whatever it is they're doing - only designed to last one year?

What a bizarre way to calculate ROI.

While we're at it, are we also allowed to consider the cost of maintaining all the new infrastructure ad infinitum?


The Dems will simply not fund it and let it degrade on its own. Remember, Biden just flat out halted further development on it and let equipment sit there and rust.
tio
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The narrative on my social media timelines seems to be shifting from an unnecessary wall destroying the park to lights ruining the dark sky reserve.
1939
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tio said:

The narrative on my social media timelines seems to be shifting from an unnecessary wall destroying the park to lights ruining the dark sky reserve.


The next scare tactic. They have no idea if there will be lights or motion/heat detection.
Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tio said:

The narrative on my social media timelines seems to be shifting from an unnecessary wall destroying the park to lights ruining the dark sky reserve.

Like clockwork.
Aggie_Boomin 21
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston 91 said:

Rossticus said:

Such a stupid waste of taxpayer money. But, what's new.



I'll admit I'm not an expert on large scale construction projects, but does anybody who sees this amount of equipment think they're really just going to put in a couple of access roads and some surveillance equipment? Especially when they're spending $1.7 billion?

Yes
Equipment looks right for roads. Cost is likely inflated (but likely not by much, infrastructure costs have exploded) due to how tight of a schedule these projects have had.
Sweep4-2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Maybe CBP should just put in big data centers where the wall is supposed to go. That way it will pretty much make everyone angry (cartels included) and everybody will stay out of the area, making it easier to patrol.

I am a little curious what will happen to all of the new roads when the project is inevitably defunded one day (and who will then start using them).

Consistency: It's only a virtue if you're not a screw-up.
Aston 91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

Aston 91 said:

Rossticus said:

Such a stupid waste of taxpayer money. But, what's new.



I'll admit I'm not an expert on large scale construction projects, but does anybody who sees this amount of equipment think they're really just going to put in a couple of access roads and some surveillance equipment? Especially when they're spending $1.7 billion?

Yes
Equipment looks right for roads. Cost is likely inflated (but likely not by much, infrastructure costs have exploded) due to how tight of a schedule these projects have had.

So I guess they're putting in a road right into the mouth of Santa Elena Canyon. Glad I got pictures last time I was out there, but wish I'd taken more.
AgGrad99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ol Jock 99 said:

Quote:

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me.

Man, I'm old enough to remember when you were a conservative...

National Security and reducing the tax burden are not conservative any longer?

I'm going to need a cheat sheet soon, to keep up.
Secolobo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If only everybody wringing their hands had supported any type of enforcement during the last administration...
...and then they sold all the taxpayers material for pennies on the dollar.

jteAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anyone have any information on what Greg Abbot, John Cornyn, Ted Cruz, or Dan Patrick have said about this desecration of the Big Bend region?
Sweep4-2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Border security is a must. But they could probably apprehend more illegal immigrants in a week by using Flock cameras and drone surveillance in upscale Texas gated communities than they will in 10 years in the park.

But having read part of the Flock thread, I'm thinking that would be a NIMBY thing. (To be fair, I wouldn't want it either).
Consistency: It's only a virtue if you're not a screw-up.
Aggie_Boomin 21
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston 91 said:

Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

Aston 91 said:

Rossticus said:

Such a stupid waste of taxpayer money. But, what's new.



I'll admit I'm not an expert on large scale construction projects, but does anybody who sees this amount of equipment think they're really just going to put in a couple of access roads and some surveillance equipment? Especially when they're spending $1.7 billion?

Yes
Equipment looks right for roads. Cost is likely inflated (but likely not by much, infrastructure costs have exploded) due to how tight of a schedule these projects have had.

So I guess they're putting in a road right into the mouth of Santa Elena Canyon. Glad I got pictures last time I was out there, but wish I'd taken more.


I'd verify this video is real before getting worked up. A lone dozer out there just seems weird.
Aggie_Boomin 21
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
double post
Naveronski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ducks4brkfast said:

Curious why there needs to be vehicle barriers int he park at those two locations. Are mexicans driving cars across the rio grande /border into the US?

No, they're not. Much of the Mexico side has 1500' cliffs. No one is driving back and forth in the park.
HTownAg98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nai06 said:

Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.
there were 3096 apprehensions last year. The contract for the Big Bend Sector is 1.7 billion. Seems like a pretty poor ROI.

The Big Bend Border Patrol Sector is over 165,000 square miles and covers 77 counties in Texas and all of Oklahoma.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Guess there's always a possibility that this is prep work for something along the lines of what's going to be done at Bears Ears, Grand Escslante, and other park and federal lands. Expanded road access to allow for resource exploration and development. Wouldn't be particularly shocking. Makes a lot more sense than spending this money for border control activities/infrastructure in an area with little to no illegal border crossing.
Aston 91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

I'd verify this video is real before getting worked up. A lone dozer out there just seems weird.

Weird isn't the word that I'd use to describe what's going on. Proceed however you wish, but I'm going to believe what's being reported by multiple outlets is real.
Pantera
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
HTownAg98 said:

nai06 said:

Tree Hugger said:

Quote:

The entire project is nonsensical and a waste of tax payer money.

Anything to deter migrants from being leaches on our tax system is fine with me. We have enough "legal citizens" taking advantage of the system as it is.

And yes, username doesn't check out.

there were 3096 apprehensions last year. The contract for the Big Bend Sector is 1.7 billion. Seems like a pretty poor ROI.

The Big Bend Border Patrol Sector is over 165,000 square miles and covers 77 counties in Texas and all of Oklahoma.

And this is just for the national park portion.

That contract is for one of five border barrier projects in the Big Bend region. Others include a $2.6 billion deal for vehicle barriers and patrol roads on a nearly 166-mile stretch of the border east of the park, in Alpine and Sanderson, and a $1.2 billion border wall contract for vertical barrier construction along the border west of the park, from Presidio County to Big Bend Ranch State Park.


They were doing preliminary work ahead of the budgeted $1.72 billion main construction project designated for the area inside Big Bend National Park, the agency said

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.