On Thursday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) clarified that the infrastructure being developed to curb border crossings in Big Bend National Park will be “limited.” The agency emphasized that the park is for the American public and that its mission is to ensure its safety.
CBP specified that there are no plans for imposing towering walls or stadium lighting in the park, as some might have feared. Instead, the efforts will include a new access road, upgrades to existing roads, the installation of detection technologies, and vehicular barriers placed thoughtfully in specific locations.
In a recent tweet, Acting Chief Patrol Agent Josh B. Barrett noted that, in nearby Sanderson, Texas, efforts led to the apprehension of over 20 undocumented immigrants attempting to escape detection in difficult terrain.
Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn reached out to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with an August 7 letter, expressing the concerns of Texans regarding potential border wall construction through the park.
A protest in Santa Elena Canyon earlier this month saw demonstrators voicing opposition against any potential intrusion into the park. Some worried that DHS might “bulldoze” parts of Big Bend for the border project, as one protestor articulated the impossibility of such constructions in a landscape defined by steep cliffs and canyons.
Cornyn also shared his perspective, acknowledging the importance of securing the border, but stressing the need for DHS to collaborate with local officials, especially in regions where the existing geography might already deter illegal crossings.
CBP reiterated that the activities observed were primarily for surveying and design and not a precursor to large construction projects. The agency stated that they are focused on securing the southwestern border while maintaining the integrity and heritage of Big Bend National Park. Their goal is to ensure the area remains safe and enjoyable for American families for years to come, free from the threats posed by cartels.
However, the statement lacked specific details, such as a map or descriptions of where this infrastructure would be placed in the park.
