Environmental Impact of the Border Wall in the Lower Rio Grande Valley

Introduction

The emotionally charged issues of immigration law and border security continue to define life for many people living in the border regions of the United States. Many face daily questions that weigh the need for more stringent security against the need for greater refinement of federal immigration laws — and both of those ambitions against the needs of those local to the border regions. Within this matrix of sometimes divergent interests, an oft-overlooked consequence of policy decisions is the damage to natural ecology. In the case discussed here, this damage is likely to be extensive, even catastrophic, with natural wildlife, natural landscape, and human habitability all suffering considerably.

This discussion and research center on the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV), which encompasses extreme southern Texas and northeastern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Here, the steady influx of undocumented immigrants from Mexico and other parts of Central and South America has become a regular part of life, with such immigrants woven into the culture, political landscape, and labor economy of the Valley region. Responding to pressure from anti-immigration advocates, conservative lawmakers, and constituencies marked by considerable hostility toward immigrant populations, the Department of Homeland Security enacted the Security Fence Act of 2006, approving the construction of the Southwest Border Fence (Mattei, 1).

The fence, which began full-time construction in 2008, ran counter to local opinion and the objections of environmentalists, conservationists, and wildlife advocates. The research conducted here is designed to support those objections, which argue that the 175-mile-long border fence constructed parallel to the Rio Grande will be damaging to the biota of the region (Mattei, 1). The specific focus is on the Lower Rio Grande Valley region, which is the site of both a vibrant and ecologically unique wildlife habitat and a 55-mile stretch of the Border Wall. With each portion of the wall requiring the clearing of a 50-foot radius of land on either side, the ecological impact on wildlife, landscape, and human habitability has the capacity to be enormous (Mattei, 1).

The research endeavor is divided into three major objectives, each of which guides a distinct element of the research process. Together, they underscore the central thesis — that the Border Wall is damaging to the biota of the LRGV — through three distinct ecological effects.

Research Objectives

The first objective is to illustrate that the Border Wall constructed in the LRGV will damage animal migration patterns, mating habitats, and food chains. This requires demonstrating a direct correlation between the erection of the border wall and the resulting interruption of animal ecosystems. This objective proceeds from the finding that the wall cuts directly through a number of wildlife sanctuaries and conservancies that serve as crucial protective lands for several species and their ecosystems unique to the Valley region.

Many of these sanctuaries have been forced either to surrender significant portions of their land — now separated by the concrete barrier — or to close their doors altogether. The consequences for the previously fertile lands along the shores of the Rio Grande are likely to be extensive. As one source notes, "federally listed endangered species, including the ocelot and jaguarundi, depend upon riparian habitat along the Rio Grande for their continued survival. Naturally solitary animals, they require large territories in which to hunt, find mates, and disperse after they are weaned. But South Texas has lost roughly 95% of its historic vegetative cover to urban development and agriculture" (Daily KOS, 1). This means that the sanctuaries being disrupted for wall construction had previously served as the last line of defense against extinction for some species. The objective in this regard is to illustrate that the Border Wall is directly responsible for such critical wildlife consequences as reducing mating opportunities, eroding lands suitable for feeding, and outright destruction of living habitat.

The second objective is to demonstrate that the Border Wall will have markedly negative consequences for the natural landscape. The landscape encompasses topography, vegetation, tree growth, soil quality, air quality, and water quality — making this perhaps the largest and most general area of concern. This objective proceeds from the view that a full environmental survey is likely to reveal the extent of the damage the Border Wall has produced to the Valley's biota. Regarding the connection between wildlife and landscape, research projects that "habitat fragmentation, in which disconnected 'islands' of habitat are separated by large areas cleared of vegetation, split by roads, or divided by other impediments to movement, poses a tremendous threat to these species' long-term survival. Ocelot and jaguarundi trapped within too-small habitat 'islands' may not have sufficient prey or access to water, and often show evidence of inbreeding. Today, the Rio Grande Valley is home to fewer than 80 ocelots and 40 jaguarundi that are still believed to survive in the United States" (Daily KOS, 1).

This points to a clear connection between wildlife viability and landscape integrity. The swath of land cleared for the construction of the Border Wall is considerable, much of it comprised of the deeply fertile stretches lining the north shores of the river. The elimination of these stretches has created a crisis for an ecosystem specific to the region. As the research notes, "dense groves of sabal palms followed the river up to 80 miles inland, but today the last stands are confined to one tract of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the former Sabal Palms Audubon Sanctuary, and the Nature Conservancy's Southmost Preserve. All three are now behind the border wall" (Daily KOS, 1). The alteration of the landscape is expected to be devastating to the viability of certain vegetation, and the research intends to illustrate this.

The third objective is to illustrate that the manner in which the landscape has been altered for construction of the Border Wall has diminished human habitability. By damaging ecological conditions that supported the survivability of those living in the Valley, the Border Wall is likely to have compromised the safety and environmental viability of the farming operations, commercial enterprises, and private residences comprising the region's population. As the research notes in light of the wall's construction, "a huge gap exists between the concrete Border Wall and the south face of the original (now excavated) levee, which shows the same evidence of destabilization — loose and friable texture — as the north side. After viewing these images, try to visualize how a flood-control levee in this destabilized condition might perform if the region is impacted by another hurricane and areas such as Granjeno are subjected to torrential rainfall and the floodway to the south becomes submerged in deep water exhibiting strong currents and eddies" (NBW, 1).

It is therefore a primary objective of this research to demonstrate that there are notable human consequences to the ecological disruption produced by the Border Wall. Specifically, the research aims to show that certain environmental effects of the Border Wall — and in particular its erosion of the flood protection provided by the levees — have produced negative consequences for human habitation in the region.

Conclusion

From the resolution that the Border Wall is inherently destructive to the ecology will emerge several recommendations for future research. It is the overarching goal of the research to produce findings that may serve as an imperative for policy action — to alter a present course with potentially irreparable long-term consequences. In particular, it is recommended that the Department of Homeland Security be augmented with an agency to oversee the intersection of environmental and security concerns. An Environmental Security Agency would be charged with finding resolutions to security concerns — such as the nation's southern border challenges — that do not overlook ecological considerations. With respect to the impact of the Southwest Border Wall, a survey of the sanctuaries and conservancies in the Lower Rio Grande Valley region demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that no such considerations have been made to this point.