Senator Blutarski said:

---

Or maybe, just maybe, I'm a landowner on the river that is about to lose a significant piece of property to the other side of the wall but doesn't want to disclose too much on a public forum. Maybe that's also why I'm saying the same thing I said in February . . . I didn't realize making a consistent argument six months later on a different forum was against the rules, my bad.

---

You own land in Big Bend Nat Park or Big Bend Ranch State park?

There's private land in the river between them for a long ways.

Senator Blutarski said:

---

Aggieangler93 said:

---

I have never questioned if I was on the OB or the craptastical politics zoo board, more, before today.

---

I know what you mean - I thought this was the Outdoors board too . . . you know, where people care about rivers, wildlife, nature, national parks, and private property rights more than just toeing the line drawn by a politician.

I have provided a lot of facts and original thoughts on this thread, and the primary counterargument so far has been to call me a liberal (which I am not) and say that the pictures are fake (which they are not).

---

I think some of the things you think are facts, are from highly biased sources with an agenda to push. So I guess call it what you may. I could care less that you are a liberal. But, anyone that gets their "news" from mass mainstream media sources and expects truth without a slant, well that has been proven to be bull**** time and time again. I think your are leaning too hard on believing your social media finds as gospel. But that's just my two cents. The pictures are surely real. They are being used out of context with someone to push a false agenda, as far as I can tell.

And, I happen to care greatly about our State and it's resources. About 90% of my free time when not fishing is spent in coastal fisheries habitat and conservation work. What do you spend your free time on?

I spend my "free time" trying to protect a ranch that has been in my family over 100 years so that my kids might also enjoy it one day. Unfortunately, the government is hastily constructing a wall that cuts off our direct access to the river - gates are only installed every two miles on my stretch, and that will have lights, cameras, patrol roads, and they are vastly under sizing stormwater drainage in the name of speed (the contract says it has to be vertical by the end of 2027 or there will be penalties).

This comes after years of being very cooperative with border patrol and putting up with SUVS, ATVS, cameras, horse patrol, helicopters, and air boats all interfering with our quiet enjoyment. And no, that is no an indication of traffic across our property - that is a result of all of these so called "border surges" and "operation whatevers" that politicians like to tout. So, forgive me if I am a little sour about this project and question its necessity and insane amount of government waste when we are $40T in debt.

There is no way I want to see them take title to XX acres of land for the wall / patrol road on one side / maintenance road on the other, lights, cameras, etc. Then there is all of the land between the wall and the river - what am I supposed to do with that land? It's the prettiest part of the property, and I'll need to drive a mile, go through a federal barrier, then drive back on the other side of the wall.

Here is their process -
- they send a letter saying they are building a wall on your property
- they send a right of entry to do survey work
- at the same time, they also send a request to start construction
- if you sign either one, they will survey or start construction, whichever one you sign
- once they survey, they appraise
- once they appraise, they make you an offer
- whether you accept that offer or not, once they have an appraisal amount, all they have to do is have a federal judge sign a Declaration of Taking saying this is a "necessary" government project, then you can request the appraisal amount that was put on deposit with the federal court when the judge signed.
- my best guess from all of the landowner groups I belong to is that about half of the landowners are not cooperating. They aren't signing the right to survey, much less the right to start construction. The feds have already started their process to condemn land in these areas where they are ready to start construction - I fear it is not going to go well for these folks, but they are adamant about not giving an inch. Again, once the feds have a dollar amount, it's as easy as a signature and a money transfer.
- about half the landowners are trying to work with the feds - get a gate on their stretch, help fix their river pumps so they can pump water under the wall, etc. This is still playing out on my stretch of river.
- this is not an easement. The feds take title to that strip of land.
- trust me, this project is being managed for speed, not cost or quality. I've seen it first hand, and it's having a direct negative impact on my property.

This is completely different than the State project a few years ago. The state said upfront they would not use eminent domain, so most of us just put the package back in the envelope and forgot about it.

As an aside - what has this country come to that I'm actually scared to be posting this online - that it may have some negative impact on me.

ETA - thank you for asking that question. I've been living this nightmare for 9 months, and it helps me realize that most folks probably don't realize how forceful the government is being with this project. They suspended a boatload of federal laws (environment, river related, etc.) for this project.

And for those who keep insisting I'm a damn liberal Trump hater . . . I'm actually a "libertarian conservative". You can look it up - free markets, fiscal discipline, strong defense of private property, socially conservative, but minimal government.

To add a few clarifying points to the above post:
- if you don't cooperate by signing the right to survey, the government's appraisal is based on a "drive by inspection" not an actual site visit. You have to sign the right to survey if you want to have the appraiser actually set foot on your property.
- most (not all) of the companies who won bids for this work are from out of state. I've met contractors from Mississippi, Arizona, and Montana. They get to go back home when this wall is finished.
- the strip of land they are taking for the wall is 200 feet wide for the entire length of my river frontage. This is for the wall, roads on each side of the wall, and an "enforcement zone" towards the river.
- out of all of the laws that were suspended for this project, they are all related to making construction faster. None of the laws suspended help landowners at all. For instance, I was told that for federal projects, the landowner does not get a "reversion" clause if the project is ever abandoned. And what about an ag expemption - the land on the river side of the wall is going to be its own separate tax tract. I can't practically run cattle over there or build a house on that side of the wall. Do I just donate it to the Nature Conservancy?
- not all of the land on the river side of the wall is in the floodplain. I was told it isn't practical to have the wall zig and zag that much. So, it follows the floodplain for the most part, but takes shortcuts any time they want it to.

I appreciate the first-hand accounts and it helps personalize what is going on down there.

And I'm sorry you are having to go through all that.

Developer needs to be told (again) to pound sand. He probably also needs his ass kicked.

Decide for yourself if the content of this video is AI or inaccurate.

https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000011128810/big-bend-construction-border-wall.html