[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE EXECUTIVE PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKS
A NATIONAL MONUMENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR BORDER SECURITY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 10, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-77
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
91-449 WASHINGTON : 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Michael T. McCaul, Texas, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Candice S. Miller, Michigan, Vice Brian Higgins, New York
Chair Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina Ron Barber, Arizona
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Dondald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey
Jason Chaffetz, Utah Beto O'Rourke, Texas
Steven M. Palazzo, Mississippi Filemon Vela, Texas
Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania Eric Swalwell, California
Richard Hudson, North Carolina Vacancy
Steve Daines, Montana Vacancy
Susan W. Brooks, Indiana
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Mark Sanford, South Carolina
Curtis Clawson, Florida
Brendan P. Shields, Staff Director
Joan O'Hara, Acting Chief Counsel
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
I. Lanier Avant, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina, Chairman
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Ron Barber, Arizona
Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey
Richard Hudson, North Carolina Beto O'Rourke, Texas
Steve Daines, Montana, Vice Chair Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Michael T. McCaul, Texas (Ex (Ex Officio)
Officio)
Ryan Consaul, Subcommittee Staff Director
Deborah Jordan, Subcommittee Clerk
Tamla Scott, Minority Subcommittee Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS
The Honorable Jeff Duncan, a Representative in Congress From the
State of South Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
Oversight and Management Efficiency............................ 1
The Honorable Ron Barber, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Arizona, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight
and Management Efficiency...................................... 3
WITNESSES
Panel I
Hon. Stevan Pearce, A Representative in Congress From the State
of New Mexico:
Oral Statement................................................. 5
Prepared Statement............................................. 7
Panel II
Mr. Brandon Judd, President, National Border Patrol Council:
Oral Statement................................................. 11
Prepared Statement............................................. 12
Mr. Todd Garrison, Sheriff, Sheriff's Office, DonnA Ana County,
New Mexico:
Oral Statement................................................. 13
Prepared Statement............................................. 16
Mr. Marc R. Rosenblum, Deputy Director, U.S. Immigration Policy
Program, Migration Policy Institute:
Oral Statement................................................. 24
Prepared Statement............................................. 25
FOR THE RECORD
The Honorable Ron Barber, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Arizona, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight
and Management Efficiency:
Statement of Billy G. Garrett, Chairman, Donna Ana County
Commission, NM............................................... 44
APPENDIX I
The Honorable Ron Barber, a Representative in Congress From the
State of Arizona, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight
and Management Efficiency:
Statement of John Cornell on Behalf of the New Mexico Wildlife
Federation................................................... 57
Letter......................................................... 58
APPENDIX II
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Brandon Judd 61
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Todd
Garrison....................................................... 62
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Marc R.
Rosenblum...................................................... 63
THE EXECUTIVE PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING THE ORGAN MOUNTAINS-DESERT PEAKS
A NATIONAL MONUMENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR BORDER SECURITY
----------
Thursday, July 10, 2014
U.S. House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Management
Efficiency,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:00 p.m., in
Room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jeff Duncan
[Chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Duncan, Barletta, Hudson, Barber,
Payne, and O'Rourke.
Also present: Representatives Bishop, Salmon, Schweikert,
and Gosar.
Mr. Duncan. The Committee on Homeland Security Subcommittee
on Oversight Management Efficiency will come to order. The
purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony regarding the
border security implications of the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument. I will now recognize myself for an
opening statement.
On May 21, 2014, President Obama designated the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks area in southern New Mexico as a
National monument. The President's action ignored legislation
introduced in both chambers of Congress which had buy-in and
support from a broad coalition of State and local stakeholders
and constituencies.
Specifically, Congressman Steve Pearce introduced H.R. 995,
which would have established an area in the Organ Mountains as
a National monument, while granting law enforcement and other
emergency personnel unfettered access to the monument.
His bill had letters of support from the Governor of New
Mexico, the Las Cruces Hispanic Chamber of Congress, Western
Heritage Alliance, the Donna Ana Soil and Water Conservation
District, Mesilla Valley Sportsmen's Alliance, and the National
Association of Former Border Patrol Officers. I could go on and
on, a lot of support for that legislation.
Instead of allowing the legislative process to proceed, the
President ignored the concerns of State and local law
enforcement, ranchers, sportsmen, and others. He chose to
designate the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks area a monument with
a stroke of a pen.
Due to the President's designation the U.S. Border Patrol,
as well as State and local law enforcement officers will be
prevented from having full access to nearly 500,000 acres of
land near the Mexican border. The Border Patrol must now comply
with the requirements of several Federal land management laws,
including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Wilderness
Act, the Endangered Species Act, some of which will limit
access to the monument, except for on foot or on horseback.
Absent exigent circumstances such as an emergency or active
pursuit of suspects, the Border Patrol will need to coordinate
Federal land management agencies when agents undertake
operations such as maintaining roads and installing
surveillance equipment on Federal lands.
According to Border Patrol a 2006 Memorandum of
Understanding between the Departments of Homeland Security,
Agriculture, and the Interior provides a necessary guidance for
its activities on Federal lands. However, a Government
Accountability Office, GAO, report from 2010 showed that this
approach resulted in delays and restrictions of Border Patrol's
monitoring and patrolling operations.
Given that we are facing a major crisis along our Southwest
Border, any decision that creates yet additional vulnerability
is unacceptable. Human and drug smugglers have used the area
for smuggling in the past. The Donna Ana County Sheriff's
Office has apprehended drug smugglers, confiscated stolen cars
used for human and drug trafficking, rescued injured
individuals left by their smugglers.
Due to the designation of the National monument, law
enforcement at the local level and the Border Patrol will be
restricted to the few paved surface roads, none of which
traverse the entire 500,000 acres. The designation also
prohibits the use of all-terrain vehicles off of paved road
surfaces. The lack of roads throughout and access to all
Federal lands of the monument creates a potential vulnerability
for criminals and others to go unchecked.
As a result, this newly-designated monument is practically
an invitation to drug runners and human smugglers, as if they
needed one. I have not even mentioned the possibility that
those who would seek to harm the United States, including
vicious drug cartels, transnational gangs and terrorist groups
like Hezbollah or others who could try to breach our
sovereignty in order to carry out possible heinous acts. It is
critical for Border Patrol and State and local law enforcement
to work together to determine how they will reduce the
likelihood that this area becomes a sanctuary for these groups.
In addition, despite the good intentions of trying to
protect important environmental areas, this designation may
have the opposite effect of harming this land. I doubt
seriously that smugglers will protect it from pollution. Those
patrolling will have less access to help prevent such abuse.
It is truly ironic that President Obama said in 2008 that
``the biggest problem that we are facing right now has to do
with George Bush trying to bring more and more power in the
Executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that
is what I intend to reverse when I am President of the United
States of America.''
He ignored Congress in this issue. Despite his hope and
change rhetoric the President's aggressive unilateralism
continues. The President's policies along the border continue
to undermine Federal, State, and local efforts to secure the
border and enforce the laws of the land. The President
continues to take Executive Actions such as this to circumvent
the Congress without considering the legitimate concerns of the
very Americans living with the daily threats along the border.
I have got a map here. I just wanted to show the audience.
This is the area that we are talking about in red, right behind
you there, Lou.
It does not include the part at the bottom. It is just the
area outlined in red, 500,000 acres. It is an original
wilderness designated area right now under the border. But it
is contiguous. I believe it is on the screen as well.
El Paso, Texas is here. This is the area that we are
talking about today. This line is the Southern Border with
Mexico and New Mexico.
I appreciate that. The Chairman will now recognize the
Ranking Member of the subcommittee. The gentleman understands a
very similar situation at a National monument in Arizona. The
gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Barber, for any statement he may
have.
Mr. Barber. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
convening this hearing.
Let me start by giving some commendation. I am really
pleased to know that in our second panel, Mr. Chairman, Mr.
Brandon Judd, who is the president of the National Border
Patrol Council is with us and will be talking with us shortly.
One of the things that all too many Americans do not
appreciate is the work that our men and women of the Border
Patrol and the Customs Agents do every single day to protect
their communities and to protect the country. Our Border Patrol
Agents in particular work in very harsh terrains, some of the
terrain that we are talking about today.
Around every canyon is the potential of a smuggler heavily-
armed, ready to do battle. The men and women of the Border
Patrol are courageous in doing their job every single day
without regard to their own safety in many cases.
Unfortunately, right now many of them have been pulled off
this front-line duty. They are working as child-care providers
in Texas and in Arizona. They are not on the line supporting
the mission, carrying out the mission of border security.
They are changing diapers and chasing kids around and
bringing in their own toys and books to take care of these
children. That has to be addressed. It can't be that we isolate
that issue from what we are talking about here today.
In today's hearing we have an opportunity to discuss the
relationship between National monument designations that
include land on or near the border, and the impact it might
have on border security. On May 24--21 rather, 2014, the
President, as the Chairman said, designated the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks as a National monument. This
proclamation includes, as you can see from the map, nearly
500,000 acres of Federal land in New Mexico.
It is important, I think we would all agree, that we
preserve our Nation's lands in a responsible manner and that we
are good stewards of the natural God-given resources and lands
that we have, particularly in the areas that I represent and
that Congressman Pearce represent, the southwest with its long
history of native peoples who have lived there.
Arizona in particular has a proud legacy of protecting and
conserving our natural resources for current and future
generations. It is both vital to our local economy and to our
environment and to our history. It is also critically
important, absolutely critical, that we protect our borders.
The district I represent makes up about 83 miles of this
border with Mexico. I am one of only nine Members of Congress
who represent a district bordering Mexico. It is my job to
ensure that the people who live and work along the border feel
safe and secure in their homes and on their land.
Unfortunately, compared to other sectors, the Tucson sector
has a reported apprehension rate of 28 percent of people and 49
percent seizure rate of drugs. These are some of the highest
levels in the entire country. The system as it stands is just
not working.
When I go to border communities that I represent, and talk
to ranchers and farmers and business owners and other people
who live and work along the border, I hear the very real
concerns that they have about feeling safe and secure in their
homes. Many ranchers have told me that they won't go to town
without taking their children with them because they are
concerned about their safety at home.
So we must do more to secure our borders, including
developing measurements for how the border security is
progressing. We must provide our agents with the tools they
need, with a pay system that makes sense, and to ensure that
they have the resources they need to effectively do their job.
I want to make sure that as we think about and talk about a
National monument we think about the agents and what they have
to do and the security of our Nation. I look forward, Mr.
Chairman, to hearing from our witnesses about the Organ
Mountain-Desert Peaks National Monument and to get the facts
about the monument, its rationale for creation or
establishment, and how it affects or may affect border
security.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the Ranking Member.
I ask unanimous consent that the following Members be
permitted to sit on the dais and participate in today's
hearing. The gentleman from Utah, Mr. Bishop is with us. We may
be joined by the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Salmon, Mr.
Schweikert, and Mr. Gosar. Without any objection, so ordered.
Our first panel today consists of the Honorable Steve
Pearce. Steve represents the Second Congressional District of
New Mexico, which covers the region being designated as a
National monument.
First elected in 2002, Rep. Pearce served until 2009 when
he decided to run for the United States Senate. He returned to
the House in 2010. Prior to coming to Congress, Rep. Pearce
spent time in the New Mexico House of Representatives.
Thank you for being here. Your full written statement will
appear in the record. But I will now recognize Mr. Pearce for 5
minutes to testify.
STATEMENT OF HON. STEVAN PEARCE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
Mr. Pearce. Thank you, Chairman Duncan and Ranking Member
Barber, for the invitation here to discuss the very real
National security threats that can arise from the restrictive
land management policies.
I would also like to join Mr. Barber in recognizing the
work of the Border Patrol. They work very difficult
circumstances, and we all salute them here.
I would also like to recognize behind me Sheriff Todd
Garrison. He is Donna Ana County sheriff. Appreciate your
invitation for him to testify today. He is a fourth generation
resident of Las Cruces, NM area, and has been a great sheriff.
I am pleased to call him friend. We worked together on many of
the issues that affect the second district.
The issue of security along the border that arises from
restrictive land management policies is one that is often
overlooked here in Washington. People are removed from the
situation, don't see it every day.
Again, these big, wide open areas that Congressman Barber
and I represent are very, very difficult to secure. The
situation doesn't just exist on the Southern Border. The
problems of security exist on the Northern Border, as well.
When you get to the Federal lands along the border then the
situation becomes even more difficult. I believe that history
is going to give us some insight as to potential for security
threats within the lands that have been recently designated and
the surrounding communities, the threats that they are going to
face.
For years the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in
southern Arizona has been a human and drug smuggling corridor.
In 2002 a park ranger, Kris Eggle, was killed in the monument
by drug smugglers.
While a vehicle barrier was constructed around the monument
after Ranger Eggle's murder, the border south of the monument
is nowhere near secure. I would put up Slide 1 for you to take
a look at. That slide shows the signs that warn American
citizens not to go beyond the certain point in these areas that
are inside the U.S. jurisdictional boundaries that they lie in
the monuments where it is more difficult for Federal agents or
Federal officials to patrol.
Large portions of the monument are either not accessible to
the public, or only accessible when traveling with armed park
rangers. On the Organ Pipe Cactus Monument website, the Park
Service states that illegal border crossings and activities,
including drug smuggling, occur daily.
Slide 2, if we see that, in some areas you will find
backpacks, abandoned clothes, and trash left behind from people
crossing the border illegally, usually carrying substances that
we don't like to invite into this country, drugs, or whatever.
I don't think that this is what President Franklin Roosevelt
envisioned when he designated that monument in 1937.
On Slide 3, in the eastern half of Arizona sits Chiricahua
National Monument. While it lies north of Douglas, Arizona, a
decent stretch north of the U.S.-Mexico border, it is also a
haven for drug traffickers.
Last year a Park Service employee was the victim of a
brutal assault by a drug smuggler in broad daylight. The victim
was bludgeoned with a rock until she passed out and nearly
died. The suspect stole her vehicle and luckily was arrested
the next day for drug smuggling.
The Chiricahua Monument is known to have cartel lookout
points to signal the optimum time for a smuggler to make his or
her way through the monument. Is this what President Coolidge
had in mind for violators and Park Service--for visitors and
Park Service personnel when he designated this monument?
Keep in mind that many of these nightmare scenarios have
occurred despite a 2006 Memorandum of Understanding between the
Department of the Interior, Department of Homeland Security
designating the facilities better Border Patrol access. These
stories are all too common on Federal lands near the border. I
am afraid that history will repeat itself in the newly
designated Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument.
If we put up Slide 4 at this point, as the following map
shows, all 180 miles of New Mexico's Southern Border are
designated as High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas by the
Department of Justice. The Southwest Border is of course where
the vast majority of people coming across the border illegally
are apprehended and narcotics shipments are seized.
Then finally on Slide 5, the Portrillo Mountains, a part of
the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument, closest to
the border on the map, currently has restrictions on motorized
vehicle use. Local and State officials express strong
objections to the President's unilateral monument designation
because of the Federal Government's questionable law
enforcement record in protected areas.
This is why I offer the legislation that would have created
a smaller monument footprint, far away from the border, with
guaranteed unfettered access for law enforcement personnel.
I fear that what we have seen on the border in Arizona will
happen in New Mexico. My constituents fear that also. There
must be guaranteed access for all law enforcement personnel,
including the ability to chase a suspect while off road--with
an off-road vehicle.
Mr. Chairmen and Members of the committee, again I thank
you for looking into this issue. Many places on our borders are
in precarious and volatile situations, for our tourists and
residents. It is not a matter of partisanship, simply a
reality. The safety of these people visiting our treasured
landscapes is a paramount issue for the Federal Government to
manage and take seriously.
We all want this pristine area protected for generations to
come. But those who have the privilege of visiting the Organ
Mountains and other protected areas have a right to be
protected. I hope that today's hearing will shed some light on
how those who would do harm to our communities take advantage
of restricted access for the public and law enforcement. Yield
back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pearce follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Steve Pearce
July 10, 2014
Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member Thompson, Members of the committee:
Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the very real National
security threats that can arise from restrictive land management
policies. I'd also like to extend my appreciation for your invitation
to Donna Ana County Sheriff Todd Garrison. He's a fourth-generation
resident of the Las Cruces, NM area, and a great sheriff. I am honored
to call him a friend.
This issue is often overlooked by people in Washington, who are far
removed from the reality of the security situation on our Southern
Border. It goes without saying that both our Northern and Southern
Borders are not secure, and this is even truer on Federal lands near
the border, especially in areas that deserve protective status. I
believe that history will give us some insight as to the potential for
security threats within these lands and surrounding communities.
For years, the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Southern
Arizona has been a human and drug smuggling corridor. In 2002, Park
Ranger Kris Eggle was killed in the Monument by drug smugglers. While a
vehicle barrier was constructed around the monument after Ranger
Eggle's murder, the border south of the monument is nowhere near
secure. (Slide 1) Signs warn American citizens not to go beyond certain
points, and large portions of the monument are either not accessible to
the public, or are only accessible when traveling with armed Park
Rangers. On the Organ Pipe Cactus Monument website, the Park Service
states that ``illegal border crossings and activities, including drug
smuggling, occur daily.'' (Slide 2) In some areas you find backpacks,
abandoned clothes, and trash left behind from people crossing the
border illegally. Is this what President Franklin Roosevelt envisioned
when he designated the monument in 1937?
(Slide 3) In the Eastern half of Arizona sits the Chiricahua
National Monument. While it lies north of Douglas, AZ, a decent stretch
north of the U.S.-Mexico border, it's also a haven for drug
traffickers. Last year, a Park Service employee was the victim of a
brutal assault by a drug smuggler in broad daylight. The victim was
bludgeoned with a rock until she passed out, and nearly died. The
suspect stole her vehicle, and luckily was arrested the next day for
drug smuggling. The Chiricahua Monument is known to have cartel lookout
points to signal the optimum time for a smuggler to make his or her way
through the Monument. Is this what President Coolidge had in mind for
visitors and Park Service personnel when he designated this monument?
Keep in mind that many of these nightmare scenarios have occurred
despite a 2006 Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of
the Interior and Department of Homeland Security designed to facilitate
better Border Patrol access.
These stories are all too common on Federal lands near the border,
and I am afraid that history will repeat itself in the newly-designated
Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. (Slide 4) As the
following map shows, ALL 180 miles of New Mexico's Southern Border are
designated as High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas by the Department
of Justice. The Southwest Border is of course where the vast majority
of people coming across the border illegally are apprehended, and
narcotics shipments are seized.
(Slide 5) The Potrillo Mountains, the part of the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks National Monument closest to the border on the map,
currently has restrictions on motorized vehicle use. Local and State
officials expressed strong objections to the President's unilateral
monument designation because of the Federal Government's questionable
law enforcement record in protected areas. This is why I offered
legislation that would have created a smaller monument footprint far
away from the border with guaranteed, unfettered access for all law
enforcement personnel. I fear that what we've seen on the border in
Arizona will happen in New Mexico. There must be guaranteed access for
all law enforcement personnel, including the ability to chase a suspect
with an off-road vehicle.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee, I again thank you for
looking into this issue. Many places on our borders are in a precarious
and volatile situation for tourists and residents. This isn't a matter
of partisanship--it's simply reality. The safety of the people visiting
our treasured landscapes is a paramount issue for the Federal
Government to manage, and take seriously. We all want this pristine
area protected for generations to come, but those who have the
privilege of visiting the Organ Mountains and other protected areas
have a right to be protected. I hope that today's hearing will shed
some light on how those who would do harm to our communities take
advantage of restricted access for the public and law enforcement.
Mr. Duncan. Mr. Pearce, thank you for your testimony today.
The committee greatly appreciates it. You offer a lot of
insight into this issue. I appreciate the legislation you put
forward, which I am sure will be discussed today. So I thank
you for that.
Before I call up the next panel, the Chairman will also ask
unanimous consent. I welcome the gentleman from Pennsylvania,
Mr. Barletta, a Member of the full committee, who will sit on
the dais with us today and participate.
One thing I skipped over, other Members of the subcommittee
are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the
record. You can do so, as needed.
So, Mr. Pearce, thank you so much. We will call up the
second panel.
Since the time--while you gentleman continue to get seated
we will go ahead, and I will introduce each of you and then I
will recognize you in turn.
Mr. Brandon Judd is the president of the National Border
Patrol Council and has over 17 years of Border Patrol
experience. National Border Patrol Council, NBPC, is a
professional labor union representing more than 17,000 Border
Patrol Agents and support staff. The NBPC was founded in 1967.
Its executive committee is comprised of current and retired
Border Patrol Agents.
Our second panelist is Sheriff Todd Garrison, the sheriff
of Donna Ana County, New Mexico, a position he has held since
2005. The monument is located within the sheriff's county, and
the Sheriff's Office has led efforts to apprehend drug and
human smugglers, rescue injured illegal immigrants left behind
by the smugglers, and countered drug cartel violence that has
been prevalent in the area.
The third panelist, Dr. Marc Rosenblum, is the deputy
director of the Migration Policy Institute's Immigration Policy
Program where he works on U.S. immigration policy, immigration
enforcement, and U.S. regional migration relations. Dr.
Rosenblum returned to MPI where he had been senior policy
analyst after working as a specialist to Immigration Policy at
the Congressional Research Service.
Thank you guys for being here today. The Chairman will now
recognize Mr. Judd to testify first for 5 minutes.
STATEMENTS OF BRANDON JUDD, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL BORDER PATROL
COUNCIL
Mr. Judd. Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Barber, Members
of the committee. On behalf of the 16,500 rank-and-file Border
Patrol Agents whom I represent, I want to thank you for holding
this hearing.
During my years in the Border Patrol I have seen how
decisions made in Washington can directly affect border
security. For that reason I am pleased to offer my thoughts on
the impact of designating the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks area
as a National monument.
Two things need to be in place for border security. The
first is sufficient manpower in the way of trained Border
Patrol Agents in a given area of operation. The second is the
ability to deploy a full suite of border security technology.
This includes seismic sensors, cameras, communication
equipment, fencing, and even aircraft.
Currently about 40 percent of the 1,900-mile Southwest
Border is owned by the Federal Government. Border Patrol Agents
need access to the land to track and find illegal aliens and
narcotics smugglers. However, our ability to access Federal
lands has been varied. The level of cooperation we receive from
the Departments of Interior and Agriculture have been dependent
on the attitude and resources of the individual land managers.
As a law enforcement officer I am fully cognizant that we
are a Nation of laws. The 16,500 Border Patrol Agents know that
there are numerous environmental regulations governing access
to Federal land. However, a balance must be struck between
border security and requirements for environmental protection
required under the National Environmental Policy Act, the
Wilderness Act, and the Endangered Species Act.
Several negotiations ultimately led to a 2006 Memorandum of
Understanding between USDA, Interior, and DHS that resulted in
improved access and better interagency cooperation in more
recent years. However, the Government Accountability Office
found in 2011 that about half of the Border Patrol stations
that are assigned to patrol Federal lands experienced delays,
some lasting more than 6 months, in accessing USDA and Interior
land. This kind of delay is unacceptable, and its impact on
Border Patrol operations are real.
In terms of how we can improve the current system, I would
offer the committee two thoughts.
The first is that it has been suggested that Border Patrol
Agents be allowed to use its own funds to conduct any
environmental assessments needed as required under various
environmental regulations. In theory I support this, but
understand that under sequestration we have 5 percent less
manpower on the board than we did last year.
In addition, we do not have enough money for gasoline and
we have resorted to agents riding two to a vehicle instead of
patrolling individually, as we have always done to maximize
coverage. This is a budgetary reality we are in today. I would
not support funding being diverted from manpower to conduct
environmental assessments.
The second comment is that USDA and Interior land managers
need to better balance the impact the Border Patrol's presence
has on Federal land against the potential impact from illegal
immigration and narcotic smuggling. We are often told that no
access to Federal land is possible due to environmental
concerns.
However, Border Patrol Agents go onto Federal land with the
single purpose of tracking illegal aliens. We try to accomplish
this mission as quickly and as efficiently as we can, with as
little disturbance to the environment as possible. I have
personally seen from my time in Arizona how pristine landscapes
can be quickly destroyed after illegal encampment covered in
trash and waste.
What will be the impact to this National monument
designation on the border security? The honest answer is, I
don't know. That will largely depend on the attitude of the
monument's land manager, whether he or she has the proper
resources to respond to Border Patrol's request, and whether
this committee will hold the Department of Interior
accountable.
Again, I want to thank you for having this hearing and
inviting me to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Judd follows:]
Prepared Statement of Brandon Judd
July 10, 2014
Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Barber, Members of the committee,
on behalf of the 16,500 rank-and-file Border Patrol Agents whom I
represent, I would like to thank you for holding this hearing.
My name is Brandon Judd and I am the president of the National
Border Patrol Council. I have been a Border Patrol Agent for 17 years
and I am currently assigned in Maine. Most of my career however has
been spent in the El Centro, California and Tucson, Arizona sectors.
During my years in the Border Patrol, I've seen how decisions made
in Washington can directly affect border security. For that reason I am
pleased to offer my thoughts on the impact of designating the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks area as a National monument.
Two things need to be in place for border security. The first is
sufficient manpower in the way of trained Border Patrol Agents in a
given area of operation. The second is the ability to deploy a full
suite of border security technology. This includes seismic sensors,
cameras, communication equipment, fencing, and even aircraft.
Currently about 40 percent of the 1,900-mile Southwest Border is
owned by the Federal Government. Border Patrol Agents need access to
the land to track and find illegal aliens and narcotics smugglers.
However, our ability to access Federal lands has been varied and the
level of cooperation we receive from the Departments of Interior and
Agriculture has been dependent of the attitude and resources of
individual land managers.
As a law enforcement officer, I am fully cognizant that we are a
Nation of laws. The 16,500 Border Patrol Agents know that there are
numerous environmental regulations governing access to Federal land.
However, a balance must be struck between border security and the
requirements for environmental protection required under the National
Environmental Policy Act, the Wilderness Act, and the Endangered
Species Act. Several negotiations ultimately led to a 2006 Memorandum
of Understanding between USDA, Interior, and DHS that resulted in
improved access and better inter-agency cooperation in more recent
years.
However, the Government Accountability Office found in 2011 that
about half of the Border Patrol stations that are assigned to patrol
Federal lands experienced delays, some lasting more than 6 months, in
accessing USDA and Interior land. This kind of delay is unacceptable
and its impact on Border Patrol operations are real.
In terms of how we can improve the current system, I would offer
the committee two thoughts. The first is that it has been suggested
that Border Patrol be allowed to use its own funds to conduct any
environmental assessments needed, as required under various
environmental regulations. In theory, I support this but understand
that under sequestration we have 5 percent less manpower on the border
than we did last year. In addition, we do not have enough money for
gasoline and we have resorted to Agents riding three to a vehicle
instead of patrolling individually as we have always done to maximize
coverage. This is the budgetary reality we are in today. I would not
support funding being diverted from manpower to conduct environmental
assessments.
The second comment is that USDA and Interior land managers need to
better balance the impact the Border Patrol's presence has on Federal
land against the potential impact from illegal immigration and
narcotics smuggling. We are often told that no access to Federal land
is possible due to environmental concerns. However, Border Patrol
Agents go onto Federal land with the single purpose of tracking illegal
aliens. We try to accomplish this mission as quickly and as efficiently
as we can, with as little disturbance to the environment as possible. I
have personally seen from my time in Arizona how pristine landscapes
can be quickly destroyed after illegal encampment, covered in trash and
waste.
What will be the impact of this National Monument designation on
border security? The honest answer is that I do not know. That will
largely depend on the attitude of the Monument's land manager, whether
he or she has the proper resources to respond to Border Patrol's
requests, and whether this committee will hold the Department of
Interior accountable.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify and I would be
happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you for your testimony.
The Chairman recognizes Sheriff Garrison for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF TODD GARRISON, SHERIFF, SHERIFF'S OFFICE, DONNA
ANA COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
Sheriff Garrison. Mr. Chairman, Chairman Duncan, Ranking
Member Barber, and Members of the committee, thank you for
letting me speak with you today. Also, I am the sheriff of
Donna Ana County and also the chairman of the Southwest Border
Sheriffs' Association.
I come before you to illustrate a beautiful part of the
country that I have called home since the day I was born, and
for which I have been elected by my constituents to protect.
Unfortunately, in my opinion, the safety and welfare of the
people in our part of the country is at risk following the
President's designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
National Monument.
Donna Ana County is where you will find some of the
Nation's most treasured assets. Some would call an agricultural
contradiction: Fertile desert that produces pecans, cotton,
alfalfa, onions, cabbage, and arguably the best green chili in
the world.
We are home to the pristine gypsum dunes of White Sands, El
Camino Real, or the royal highway upon which Don Juan de Onnate
led a group of settlers during the Spanish Conquest in the 16th
Century. We are also home to some of the most picturesque
mountain ranges of the southern-most tip of the Rockies.
The Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office has protected this
area from criminal activity along the border, something we have
been doing day and night since 1852. I feel this designation is
a very real threat, not only to what we are doing, but to our
National security and the safety of the public.
In 2007, in response to an increase in cross-border
criminal activity, the Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office
created a task force dedicated to regular patrols of nearly 51
miles of Donna Ana County that skirt the U.S.-Mexico border.
One of our most valuable assets is Operation Strongwatch, a
mobile eye-in-the-sky surveillance unit with night vision, GPS-
position tracking, and 6-mile camera range that has capability
to take both still pictures--or still photos and video
recordings. This task force has apprehended and documented
several examples of what I have referred to as criminal
activity, criminal border activity.
We have intercepted mules, or individuals who use
themselves as cargo carriers to transport illegal drugs from
Mexico to the United States. Our interdiction teams have made
significant busts, arresting suspects who utilize the remote
areas of our county because they think they are the roads less
traveled. They use whatever they can to get the job done. If
not on their own person, disguised in bags or hidden
compartments of their vehicles.
Aside from bringing drugs across the border, these
transnational networks are also moving human cargo. Sometimes
we discover the bodies of those who have fell victim to the
relentless elements of the desert. Sometimes we find evidence
that they have been there, dumping their supplies along the
way, and trading out traceable footwear for crude carpet shoes
that allow them to go undetected through the desert.
All of this activity happens in the very area that is now
Federally-protected at a cost to National security, known as
the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. The current
administration placed this project on priority status in 2009.
Twice New Mexico Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich brought
the proposition to the people of Donna Ana County and the
people rejected the idea. Twice legislation was introduced in
Congress and twice it was voted down.
Congressman Steve Pearce introduced legislation to protect
the Organ Mountains, which I completely supported. But the two
Senators went around the Organ Mountains bill and straight to
the President to overrule the will of the people by deception
to create the monument. Now why do you think these two Senators
would do that?
I have tried asking them personally, extending an
invitation for a guided tour of our area. The Senators have
never taken me up on that offer. In fact, they have never
stepped foot in my office to discuss with me the mounting
threats to public safety this designation will create.
But they haven't ignored the scores of environmental groups
that aggressively seek extra protection for Federal lands along
the U.S.-Mexico border, and the accessed interest of
transnational criminals that utilize drug and alien smuggling
corridors in the United States on Federally-protected land.
Areas like the one contained in the President's newly-
designated National monument in Donna Ana County.
This so-called groundswell of support for a National
monument was backed by U.S. Senators, State representatives,
county commissioners, the city mayor and city council, some of
which are employed by Wilderness Alliance groups. Is there
anyone here who wouldn't agree that taking a paycheck from an
environmental group with an agenda is a conflict of interest?
Just next door to us in Arizona, and it bears a similar
name, the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. This vast area
along the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona is now a haven for
criminals, so much that signs greet park visitors warning them
that the dangers that lurk in these Federally-protected lands.
It has now caught the attention of the one faction of
international commerce that needs minimally-patrolled areas to
conduct their business, the Mexican cartels.
Both Senators Heinrich and Udall say that they will
continue to grant the Sheriff's Office access to patrol. But I
can't honestly believe that to be true when neither one of them
have given me the opportunity to discuss with them what is
needed on the border to provide adequate protection of the
National monument designations made. It has already been signed
into law.
We cannot continue to rely on the past practices of the
U.S. Government to predict future performance when it comes to
National parks and monuments. As an elected official who is
accountable to my constituents, I have to ask this question for
them. What segment of the population will this monument be
available to, the American citizens or Mexican cartels?
The average person doesn't understand the very real and
very dangerous implications of a National monument designation
on the border. By protecting this land by way of a National
monument we have essentially exposed the people of Donna Ana
County and the rest of the Nation to the pitfalls of criminal
activity along the border.
This designation flies in the face of what the U.S.
Government is already doing to secure the border, adding more
Border Patrol Agents along the U.S.-Mexico border and pumping
millions of dollars of Federal grant money to local law
enforcement agencies like Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office to
put more patrols in the area to mitigate criminal activity.
I would ask: What are the criteria for a National monument?
Are we meeting it? I don't think so. As a New Mexico sheriff
and the sitting chair of the Southwest Border Sheriffs'
Association, I am going on record saying there appears to me a
nexus between environmental groups aggressively seeking extra
protections for these Federal lands.
We have seen this in many of our wilderness and monument
areas in California, Arizona, Montana, New Mexico, and in other
States where people can go and hide from law enforcement. They
have created clandestine drug-growing areas in these Federal
lands, hosting criminals to protect their drug business from
whatever comes their way.
In my opinion, the ones who are benefitting the most from
this area we are protecting for our future generations are the
transnational criminals who have learned to take advantage of
the fact that these areas are remote, they are limited to
vehicular traffic, and they are now at risk of becoming limited
to local law enforcement that has been sworn to protect it.
Sir, I thank you for this time, and will stand for any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Sheriff Garrison follows:]
Prepared Statement of Todd Garrison
July 10, 2014
Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Barber, and Members of the
committee, thank you for letting me speak with you today.
My name is Sheriff Todd Garrison. I am a certified law enforcement
officer sworn to protect the citizens of Donna Ana County since I took
office in 2005. I also serve as the chairman of the Southwest Border
Sheriffs' Association.
I come before you to illustrate a beautiful part of our country
that I've called home since the day I was born, and for which I have
been elected by my constituents to protect. Unfortunately--and in my
opinion--the safety and welfare of the people in our part of the
country is at risk following the President's designation of the Organ
Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument.
Donna Ana County is where you will find some of the Nation's most
treasured assets. Some would call us an agricultural contradiction--a
fertile desert that produces cotton, alfalfa, onions, cabbage, and
arguably the best green chile in the world. We are home to the pristine
gypsum dunes at White Sands and the Camino Real, or the Royal Highway
upon which Don Juan de Onnate led a group of settlers during the
Spanish Conquest in the 16th Century. We are also home to some of the
most picturesque mountain ranges at the southernmost tip of the
Rockies.
Those mountain ranges--the Organs, the Donna Anas, the Las Uvas,
the Potrillos and the Robledos--are part of the newly-designated Organ
Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument. I'm not before you today to
dispute the value of those beautiful treasures to our generation and to
future generations. I agree they should be protected. My testimony is
how the Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office has protected this area from
criminal activity along the border--something we've been doing day and
night since 1852--and how this designation is a very real threat, not
only to what we are doing, but to our National security and the safety
of the public.
In 2007, in response to an increase in cross-border criminal
activity, the Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office created a task force
dedicated to regular patrols of nearly 51 miles in Donna Ana County
that skirt the U.S./Mexico border. It is a rugged, remote area that is
extremely difficult to patrol. The conditions in that part of the
desert are harsh on both personnel and equipment. One of our most
valuable assets at our disposal is Operation Strongwatch (1), a mobile
``eye in the sky'' surveillance unit with night vision, GPS-position
tracking and a 6-mile camera range that has the capability to take both
still photos and video recordings.
(1) Operation Strongwatch is a mobile surveillance unit used to detect
criminal border activity day and night.
This task force has apprehended and documented several examples of
what I've referred to as criminal border activity. We have intercepted
mules (2), or individuals who use themselves as cargo carriers to
transport illegal drugs from Mexico to the United States.
(2) An example of a ``mule'' or smuggler who use themselves as cargo
carriers in Donna Ana County.
Our interdiction teams have made significant busts, arresting
suspects who utilize the remote areas of our county because they think
they are the roads less traveled (3).
(3) This recent cache of marijuana was made near the newly-designated
Organ Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument, an area that has long
been attractive to smugglers.
They use whatever they can to get the job done--if not on their own
person, disguised in bags (4) or in hidden compartments of their
vehicles.
(4) Bags filled with illegal narcotics are smuggled through the desert
when suspects think they can go undetected.
Aside from bringing drugs across the border, these transnational
networks are also moving human cargo. Sometimes we discover the bodies
of those who fell victim to the relentless elements of the desert.
(5) Food supplies and clothing is often dumped in the desert when
illegal aliens are transferred from one human smuggler to the next on
their journey.
Sometimes we just find evidence that they've been there, dumping
their supplies along the way (5) and trading out traceable footwear for
crude carpet shoes that allow them to go undetected through the desert.
(6)
(6) These carpet shoes were discovered by a Donna Ana County Sheriff's
deputy on regular patrol near the U.S./Mexico border.
Some of our discoveries are historic to the area. Part of our
unique heritage is the fact that our deserts were once used as bombing
ranges for target-practicing pilots of the World War II era. Unexploded
ordnance can still be found in the area, as evidenced by our task
force. (7,8)
(7).
(8).
All of this activity happens in the very area that is now
Federally-protected at a cost to National security--known as the Organ
Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument. Most of you know this history
of this issue. The current administration placed this project on
priority status in 2009. Twice, New Mexico Senators Tom Udall and
Martin Heinrich brought the proposition to the people of Donna Ana
County and the people rejected the idea. Twice legislation was
introduced in Congress and twice it was voted down. Congressman Steve
Pearce introduced legislation to protect the Organ Mountains (9[a])--
which I completely supported--but the two Senators went around the
Organ Mountains Bill and straight to the President to over-rule the
will of the people by deception to create the monument.
(9[a]) The Organ Mountains are an iconic symbol of the Mesilla Valley
and Donna Ana County. Their protection has never been disputed by the
Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office.
Now, why do you think the two Senators would do that? I've asked
myself that same question countless times. I've tried asking them
personally, extending an invitation for a guided tour of the area. The
Senators never took me up on that offer. In fact, they've never stepped
foot in my office to discuss with me the mounting threats to public
safety that this designation will create. They have essentially ignored
it.
But what they haven't ignored are the scores of environmental
groups that aggressively seek extra protections for Federal lands along
the U.S.-Mexico border and the access interests of the transnational
criminals that utilize drug and alien-smuggling corridors into the
United States on Federally-protected land--areas like the one contained
in the President's newly-designated National monument in Donna Ana
County. This so-called groundswell of support for the National monument
was backed by U.S. Senators, State Representatives, county
commissioners, the city mayor, and city council--some of which are
employed by the Wilderness Alliance Group. Is there anyone here who
wouldn't agree that taking a paycheck from an environmental group with
an agenda is a conflict of interest?
Ironically, we've seen this type of land-grab before, just next
door to us in Arizona, and it bears a similar name--the Organ Pipe
Cactus National Monument. This vast area along the U.S.-Mexico border
in Arizona is now a haven for criminals. So much that signs greet park
visitors warning them of the dangers that lurk in these Federally-
protected lands (9[b]).
(9[b]) Although the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in Arizona is
open to the public, sightseeing and travel are heavily discouraged due
to active drug smuggling, human trafficking, and armed criminals within
the Federally-protected lands.
This area sees much of the same cross-border activity that Donna
Ana County does, but now on a much bigger scale (10) because of the
Federal protections U.S. Government has given it. It's now caught the
attention of the one faction of international commerce that needs
minimally-patrolled areas to conduct their business--the Mexican
cartels.
(10) Arroyos in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument have become
littered with trash left behind by human smuggling networks.
As we sit here today, one lone BLM ranger is tasked with patrolling
and protecting the southern region of New Mexico. One ranger. How can
anyone argue that one ranger can properly protect a monument of this
size--in addition to what they are already patrolling? Both Senators
Heinrich and Udall say they will continue to grant the sheriff's office
access to patrol, but I can't honestly believe that to be true when
neither one of them have given me the opportunity to discuss with them
what's needed on the border to provide adequate protection if a
National monument designation is made. And it's already been signed
into law.
We cannot continue to rely on the past practices of the U.S.
Government to predict future performance when it comes to National
parks and monuments. As an elected official who is accountable to my
constituents, I have to ask this question for them: What segment of the
population will this monument be available to--American citizens or
Mexican cartels? The average person doesn't understand the very real--
and very dangerous--implications of a National monument designation on
the border.
By protecting this land by way of a National monument, we have
essentially exposed the people of Donna Ana County and the rest of the
Nation to the pitfalls of criminal activity along the border, and this
designation flies in the face of what the U.S. Government is already
doing to secure the border--adding more Border Patrol Agents along the
U.S.-Mexico border, and pumping millions of dollars in Federal grant
money to local law enforcement agencies like the Donna Ana County
Sheriff's Office to put more patrols in the area to mitigate criminal
activity.
National Monuments should be reserved for pristine, unfettered
areas. This designation includes an area that is absolutely not
pristine--it is rugged, remote, and brutal to anyone who is not
familiar with harsh desert conditions. It doesn't fall into the
quintessential Yellowstone/Yosemite/White Sands monuments. These areas
within the Organ Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument have been
used for ranching, recreation, and a bombing range. What are the
criteria for a National monument? Are we meeting it? I don't think so.
As a New Mexico sheriff, and the sitting chair of the Southwest
Border Sheriff's Association, I am going on record saying there appears
to me a nexus between environmental groups aggressively seeking extra
protections of these Federal lands. We have seen this in many of our
wilderness or monument areas in California, Montana, and New Mexico--
and in other States where people can go and hide from law enforcement.
They have created clandestine drug-growing areas in these Federal
lands, posting criminals to protect their drug business from whoever
comes their way. In my opinion, the ones who are benefitting the most
from these areas we are protecting for our future generations are the
transnational criminals who have learned to take advantage of the fact
that these areas are remote, they are limited to vehicular traffic, and
they are now at risk of becoming limited to local law enforcement that
are sworn to protect it.
I thank you for your time and welcome any questions.
Mr. Duncan. Sheriff, thank you so much.
I will now recognize Dr. Rosenblum. I will remind Members
that votes have been called. There is about 8 minutes on the
clock.
So Dr. Rosenblum, we are going to take your testimony then
we will recess. But you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MARC R. ROSENBLUM, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, U.S.
IMMIGRATION POLICY PROGRAM, MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE
Mr. Rosenblum. Thank you. Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member
Barber, Members of the subcommittee, good afternoon. I am Marc
Rosenblum, deputy director of the Immigration Policy Program at
the Migration Policy Institute, an independent, nonpartisan
think tank in Washington that analyzes U.S. and international
migration trends and policies. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify today.
As you know, there is a bipartisan Congressional consensus
in favor of creating an Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National
Monument, and President Obama recently created a monument there
by Presidential proclamation.
What is in dispute is how much land should be protected in
this way. The President's proclamation matches legislation
introduced by Senators Udall and Heinrich to protect
approximately 500,000 acres, while a bill by Congressman Pearce
to protect about 50,000 acres.
A second set of questions concerns how CBP and other
agencies may access the protected areas for law enforcement
purposes. Under the President's proclamation, CBP access will
continue to be governed by the existing Memorandum of
Understanding between DHS and the Department of Interior.
The President's proclamation also leaves in place about
240,000 acres of existing wilderness study area within the
monument. Under the Wilderness Act, this land enjoys stricter
statutory protection than other Federal lands.
The Senate bill would supplement the existing MOU by
permitting CBP to conduct specified law enforcement activities
within parts of the protected area, including wilderness areas
near the border. The House bill would supplement the MOU by
allowing any Federal, State, or local law enforcement personnel
to conduct all types of law enforcement activities within its
smaller monument. But the House bill does not address the
border wilderness area.
How large should the monument be? What type of access
should law enforcement agencies have? The answer ultimately
depends on how important it is to protect the environment and
ensure sustainable public access to this region, and on the
severity of border threats there.
I am not an expert on the environmental and cultural
attributes of this location. But one point I want to emphasize
is that southern New Mexico is not characterized by
particularly acute border threats. It doesn't look like
Arizona.
The Organ Mountains Monument falls in the middle of the
Border Patrol's El Paso sector, which is generally a Border
Patrol success story. The agency averages fewer than 12,000
apprehensions per year in the entire El Paso sector. That is
about 5 percent of the level observed during the early 1990s. I
don't know if we can show that picture. But I have a figure
that will show you that.
A second consideration is that the existing MOUs between
DHS and DOI are considered a good model for managing the
diverse policy goals that exist on Federal border lands.
Historically certain public lands were vulnerable to illegal
border crossers because CBP had limited access to these areas,
and DOI does not have a border security mission. The MOU
requires that DOI and CBP develop management practices to give
CBP access to DOI roads and trails, among other provisions.
A 2011 GAO study that we have discussed today of border
security on Federal lands concluded that the MOUs provide a
successful framework for DOI and CBP to negotiate access rules.
Most CBP station chiefs reported that Federal environmental
laws had not affected border security in their areas of
operation. This assessment has been echoed in previous CBP
Congressional testimony.
The monument size and access rules are questions that get
at real tradeoffs between border security and other goals that
we also care about at the border, such as protecting the
environment, preserving historical and cultural landmarks and
permitting public access and tourism. In general, many of the
concrete actions that strengthen border security, such as
installing fencing and other infrastructure, and conducting
patrols, can conflict with other goals, such as environmental
preservation and sustainable tourism.
The solution to this tension is to incorporate workable
policies into CBP's enforcement practices. Having National
monuments and wilderness areas and restricting certain
enforcement practices in ways that still permit law enforcement
to carry out its mission are mechanisms to ensure that the
competing priorities are part of the equation.
In conclusion, CBP's own statements, as well as GAO
findings suggest that CBP and DOI have worked together in other
cases to strike an appropriate balance between border security
and conservation. In light of the relatively low level of
illegal traffic in the El Paso sector, existing MOUs should
provide an appropriate framework for the agencies to secure the
new Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks Monument, as well.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I thank you for
the opportunity and would be pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rosenblum follows:]
Prepared Statement of Marc R. Rosenblum
July 10, 2014
Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Barber, and Members of the
subcommittee: Good afternoon. I am Marc Rosenblum, deputy director of
the U.S. Immigration Policy Program at the Migration Policy Institute,
an independent, non-partisan think tank in Washington that analyzes
U.S. and international migration trends and policies. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today.
As you know, there's broad, bipartisan Congressional consensus in
favor of creating an Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National monument,
and President Obama recently exercised his authority to create a
monument there by Presidential proclamation. What is in dispute is how
much land should be protected in this way. Legislation introduced by
Senators Udall and Heinrich (S. 1805) would protect approximately
500,000 acres, while a bill by Congressman Pearce (H.R. 995) would
protect an estimated 50,000 acres. The President's proclamation sets
aside about 500,000 acres.
A second set of questions concerns what type of access U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) and other Federal, State, and local
agencies should have to protected areas for law enforcement purposes.
Historically, some border enforcement operations on certain Federal
lands have been compromised because the Department of Interior (DOI)
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and other Federal land managers
prioritize conservation and their own core missions over the Department
of Homeland Security's (DHS) law enforcement goals. In an effort to
remedy this, DHS and DOI, along with the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA), signed a series of Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) between
2006 and 2009 that established policies and procedures for inter-agency
coordination on Federal lands.
Under the proclamation issued by President Obama, CBP access to the
new Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National monument would be governed by
these existing MOUs. The Senate bill would supplement the MOUs by
explicitly permitting CBP to conduct certain specified law enforcement
activities within parts of the protected area. The House bill would
take the additional step of allowing any Federal, State, or local law
enforcement personnel to have unfettered access to the entire monument
for all types of law enforcement activities.
The House and Senate bills and the Presidential proclamation also
differ in terms of how they handle National wilderness areas located
within the monument. In general, wilderness areas enjoy stricter
environmental protection than other parts of the monument because
wilderness areas are closed to motorized vehicles. The Senate bill
would convert most of the existing Wilderness Study Area within the new
monument into a permanent wilderness area, but would create special
rules within a 5-mile strip of wilderness near the border to permit
unfettered border security operations in that area. The House bill, in
creating a smaller monument, does not address this border wilderness
area, and the President is not permitted to do so by proclamation.
How large should the monument be, and what type of access should
CBP and other law enforcement agencies have to the protected areas?
The answers to these questions depend on how preservation and
public access to this area are valued, as well as how we assess the
severity of border threats in this region.
I'm not an expert on the environmental and cultural attributes of
this location, but one point I want to emphasize in my testimony is
that southern New Mexico is not characterized by particularly acute
border threats. The Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks region falls in the
middle of the Border Patrol's El Paso Sector, which is generally seen
as a Border Patrol (USBP) success story. Between the early 1980s and
the early 1990s, an average of more than 230,000 migrants per year were
apprehended in the El Paso Sector. In 1994, Border Patrol Sector Chief
Silvestre Reyes initiated Operation Blockade, moving a large number of
agents and infrastructure up to the border line. Apprehensions fell by
two-thirds that year, and entered a period of sustained declines over
the next 2 decades after a brief increase in 1995-96. In the last 5
years, the Border Patrol has averaged fewer than 12,000 apprehensions
per year in the entire El Paso Sector, about 5 percent of the level
observed during the 1980s and early 1990s (see Figure 1).
Source: Migration Policy Institute (MPI) analysis of U.S. Border Patrol
data, ``Illegal Alien Apprehensions, by Fiscal Year,'' www.cbp.gov/
newsroom/media-resources/stats.
The El Paso Sector remains both heavily fortified and relatively
safe, even as apprehensions have increased significantly in other Texas
sectors in the past few years. For the last 3 years, El Paso has ranked
2nd or 3rd among the nine Southwest Border sectors in terms of the
number of Border Patrol Agents, while it has ranked 7th in terms of the
number of people apprehended, 5th in number of people prosecuted for
border criminal offenses and between 4th and 9th in drug seizures (see
Table 1). While the Mexican city of Juaarez, right across the border
from El Paso, has been one of the most dangerous cities in the world,
its Texas neighbor is consistently ranked among the two or three safest
large cities in the country.
Focusing on the Organ Mountains area in particular, the scale of
illegal activity is also held in check, to a degree by the region's
remoteness and by its tough desert terrain. Thus, there is nothing
about this section of the border that makes it stand out as
particularly vulnerable to border threats.
TABLE 1.--EL PASO SECTOR PROFILE AND RANKINGS AMONG ALL NINE SOUTHWEST BORDER SECTORS, 2011-2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marijuana Cocaine
USBP Agents Rank Apprehensions Rank (Pounds) Rank (Pounds) Rank Prosecutions Rank
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013................................... 2,631 3 11,154 7 66,940 4 215 4 8,503 5
2012................................... 2,718 3 9,678 7 39,933 6 206 7 7,086 5
2011................................... 2,738 2 10,345 7 43,667 8 116 9 6,906 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source.--MPI analysis of U.S. Border Patrol data, ``Sector Profile, FY2011-FY2013,'' http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/media-resources/stats.
My second point is that the existing MOUs between DHS, DOI, and
USDA appear to be a successful model for managing diverse policy goals
on Federal border lands. Prior to developing the MOUs, certain public
lands were particularly vulnerable to illegal border crossers because
CBP had limited access to these areas and other Federal land managers
do not have a border security mission. Before turning to the MOUs'
effectiveness, let me explain that in general, they require that
Federal land managers and CBP develop management practices to ensure
that CBP has access to DOI and USDA roads and trails, as well as
minimize the adverse impact of border infrastructure construction,
encourage the sharing of information about law enforcement activities
in border regions, and conduct certain joint training programs, among
other provisions. In short, the goal of the MOUs is to ensure that land
managers and CBP work together to balance conservation and border
security on public lands.
Turning now to the question of the effectiveness of the MOUs, a
2011 Government Accountability Office (GAO) study of CBP access to
Federal lands evaluated how the agreements have worked in practice. GAO
reached the following conclusions:
In general, DHS, DOI, and USDA have used the National-level
MOU and established interagency liaison mechanisms to
successfully negotiate DHS access to Federal lands and the
installation of border infrastructure in several different
locations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Southwest Border:
Border Patrol Operations on Federal Lands, GAO-11-573T (Washington, DC:
GAO, 2011), 8, www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-573T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A majority of Border Patrol station chiefs (17 out of 26)
reported some type of delay or restriction in obtaining access
to certain Federal lands in their jurisdictions, but an even
larger majority (22 out of 26) reported that such delays had
not affected border security in their areas of operation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ibid., 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAO found, in some cases, that when the Border Patrol faces
delays in adding infrastructure, such as fencing and other
tactical infrastructure, the agency can mitigate wait times by
assigning USBP resources to work directly with partner agencies
to expedite environmental reviews. USBP did not always dedicate
the resources to do so because many of the stations
experiencing delays were in remote border regions where CBP did
not perceive pressing border security threats.
Overall, scarce Border Patrol resources were seen as more
fundamental constraints on DHS's ability to secure the border
than were requirements imposed by Federal environmental and
other laws. Border Patrol station chiefs interviewed by GAO
reported that the most important factors influencing their
ability to secure Federal lands near the border were the number
of Border Patrol Agents and the availability of adequate
surveillance technology and tactical infrastructure. GAO
concluded that these investments in border security per se were
more important for controlling the border than were limitations
on DHS' access to Federal lands.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Ibid., 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This assessment has been echoed in DHS Congressional testimony, as
Border Patrol officials have told Congress that the existing MOU allows
the Border Patrol to adequately carry out its border security
mission.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Statement of U.S. Border Patrol Deputy Chief Ronald Vitiello
before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign
Operations, 112th Cong., 1st. sess., April 15, 2011, http://
naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/vitiellotestimony04.15.11.pdf.
At the hearing, Deputy Chief Vitiello described in detail how U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) collaborates with the Department of
the Interior (DOI) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to fulfill
CBP's border enforcement responsibilities while respecting and
enhancing the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, CBP has described the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
monument designation as ``in no way limiting'' CBP's ability to perform
its border security mission, and giving the agency ``important
flexibility'' to do so.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Phil Taylor, ``National Monuments: DHS Says Organ Mountains
Designation Won't Impede Border Security,'' E&E Publishing, May 21,
2014, http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059999955/print.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, it's important to emphasize that the monument's size and
access rules are questions that get at real trade-offs between border
security and other goals that we as a Nation also care about at the
border, such as protecting the environment, preserving historical and
cultural landmarks, and permitting public access and tourism. In
general, many of the concrete actions that strengthen border security--
such as installing fencing and other physical infrastructure and
conducting high-profile patrols--can conflict with other goals, such as
environmental preservation and sustainable tourism.
In light of the fact that U.S. policy at the border must grapple
with this more diverse set of concerns, the solution is to develop
workable policies and tools that can be incorporated into the
enforcement practices of CBP and other agencies. Creating a National
monument and restricting certain enforcement practices within the
monument--in ways that still permit law enforcement to carry out its
missions--are mechanisms to ensure that these competing priorities are
part of the equation.
In conclusion, CBP's own statements as well as GAO findings suggest
that CBP and BLM have worked together in other cases to strike an
appropriate balance between border security and conservation--including
in border sectors with higher levels of illegal activity. In light of
the relatively low level of illegal traffic in the El Paso sector,
existing MOUs between DHS and DOI should provide an appropriate
framework for the agencies to secure the new Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks monument as well. Congress may wish to consider additional
changes to existing wilderness areas, which could further strengthen
law enforcement activities in the border region.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I thank you for the
opportunity to testify and would be pleased to answer any questions.
Mr. Duncan. I thank you for that.
Unfortunately votes were recently called on the House
floor. So without objection the subcommittee will stand in
recess subject to call of the Chairman. Subcommittee will
reconvene approximately 10 minutes after the conclusion of the
last vote.
[Recess.]
Mr. Duncan. Subcommittee on Oversight Management Efficiency
will come to order. Thank you guys for bearing with us through
votes. I know that was a long vote series. I will now recognize
myself for 5 minutes.
Let me first off say that I have in my lifetime enjoyed a
lot of the wilderness areas and National parks. Just last week
I was in Montana Glacier National Park, another area that is
like a wilderness area near Terriot Pass on the Canadian
border. So I understand the significance of setting aside some
of this Federal land for future generations and protecting it
against development and just conserve these wild and scenic
places.
But I noticed in Mr. Rosenblum's statement that
historically some border enforcement operations on Federal
lands have been compromised because of the Department of
Interior and Bureau of Land Management and other Federal land
managers prioritize conservation and their own core missions
over the Department of Homeland Security's law enforcement
goals.
Now we have got a situation, as exemplified in Arizona, as
we heard, where these wild and scenic places are being violated
by smugglers and human traffickers and others that are coming
through. Mr. Pearce showed on the screen a picture of piles of
dirty diapers and refuge that has been dumped over and over and
over.
We have people from Arizona. I was talking with Mr.
Schweikert from Arizona earlier and he said you know civic
organizations would go down and they would work with CBP, who
would actually be there with them, and they would police the
area and they would clean up all the garbage through these
canyons. When they were talking to the CBP officers they said
this will last for about a week, last for about a week.
Mr. Judd, have you or any of your agents that you represent
ever encountered human or narcotic smuggling groups or any
other group of illegal aliens that made an effort to protect
the environment?
Mr. Judd. No, sir.
Mr. Duncan. Don't you think, and wouldn't you agree with me
that the members of Customs and Border Protection, Border
Patrol that are trying to do their job working within the
jurisdiction of other agencies, don't you think they would do
all in their power to make sure that these significant areas
where there might be some sort of flora or fauna that is
sensitive, wouldn't they try to make every effort to protect
that?
Mr. Judd. Yes, sir. In fact, we just had an agent out of
Ojo that was issued an accommodation for finding pottery and
not spoiling the area that was estimated to be a couple hundred
years old. This just happened 2 weeks ago I believe. So yes, we
take every effort to----
Mr. Duncan. Drug cartels are going to take the path of
least resistance if they are trying to evade and escape from
law enforcement and get into this country and bring their wares
in. Wouldn't you agree?
Mr. Judd. Well, you just have to look at Arizona to see
that that is what is happening.
Mr. Duncan. So should the public expect to see an area like
Organ Mountain and Desert Peaks, should they expect to see
increased pollution as a result of Border Patrol's reduced
presence?
Mr. Judd. If you take out law enforcement from any area you
can expect to see crime go up.
Mr. Duncan. Let me ask you this. In the 2006 Memorandum of
Understanding with the Department of Interior and Agriculture,
all parties acknowledge that CBP operations and construction
within the 60-foot Roosevelt Reservation of May 27, 1907. It is
along the U.S.-Mexico border. And the 60-foot Taft Reservation
of May 3, 1912, and that is along the U.S.-Canadian border, 60-
foot-wide strip.
Is that consistent? It is consistent with the purpose of
those reservations and that any CBP activity, including but not
limited to operations in construction within the 60-foot
reservation is outside the oversight and control of Federal
land managers. That is a fact, okay. The Memorandum of
Understanding states that.
Let me ask you this: Is 60-foot enough to effectively
ensure and secure the U.S.-Mexican border?
Mr. Judd. Absolutely not.
Mr. Duncan. Do you think that--well let me ask you this.
What is wide enough? Is it a mile? Is it 5 miles? What sort of
exclusion zone should we have along----
Mr. Judd. Well, every area is different. But what you have
to have is you have to have a series of roads that allows us to
get ahead of the trafficking. Because again, if we are reduced
to 60 feet, once they get past us then we are pushing from
behind them. If we can't get ahead of them we don't even have
the opportunity to arrest them. They are going to be what we
call got-aways.
Mr. Duncan. Right.
I am going to get back to the National monument there, and
ask Sheriff Garrison, which I appreciate your efforts. I
appreciate you being willing to come here, sheriff.
Shortly after the National monument designation by
President Obama you were quoted by the Associated Press as
saying ``We have no ability to patrol that area. Crime is going
to increase. It will be akin to the Organ Pipe National
Monument in Arizona. I wonder how many years it will be before
we have to post signs that say `Enter at Your Own Risk'.''
Those are your words. So can you explain the similarities
between Organ Pipe in Arizona and the Organ Mountain in New
Mexico and what we may or may not see?
Sheriff Garrison. Thank you, sir. I think the only thing I
can say is you know I have learned from my experience in seeing
what has happened there in Organ Pipe because the way it is set
up and because of its proximity to the border and everything
else. I believe the same thing is going to happen in the
Organ--in the new one that was just created.
It is close to the border. It has the same kind of nexus to
the border with the criminal activity going on the same. It is
not as much as in Arizona, but I believe it will grow stronger
and become more as time goes on.
So speaking with some of the city council and county
commissioners in my community, I told them the same thing. They
said, well that is in Arizona, that is not here. I said, but it
is the same thing.
Mr. Duncan. You have been patrolling--you and your deputies
have been patrolling this area for years before----
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir.
Mr. Duncan [continuing]. It had the Federal designation.
You know the area. You know the routes that may be used. Do you
feel like your efforts will be hampered by the closure of this
to your entry?
Sheriff Garrison. I do. I feel like the local law
enforcement is the only law enforcement that has never been at
the table in these conversations. I think Federal--the Border
Patrol and other Federal agencies have been at the table
whenever they discuss these things.
My problem with that is--I don't have a problem with the
Border Patrol. We work hand-in-hand with each other. We help
each other out. We have backed up a number of Border Patrol and
they come and help us out at times.
But when a crime happens on this land, Border Patrol
doesn't take care of that. That falls into the hands of the
Sheriff's Office. If there is a murder or a dead body in the
desert, we have to respond to that.
So if we lose access to this land, I don't know how we are
supposed to get out there to do it. I do believe that the
patrols that we have been doing out there have curbed the
criminal activity down some.
There are always going to be those people who get through,
hauling drugs or other people. But the fact that we are out
there as much as we are, I believe that we have kept them
pushed over into Arizona and into Texas.
Mr. Duncan. Do you believe that this area will become--that
the drug cartel recognize this open area where there is a void
of law enforcement and it will become a corridor for human
smuggling, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration issues
through this corridor?
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir, I do. You have right across the
border is Juaarez, Mexico, and has been one of the most
deadliest cities in the world for quite some time. With all the
criminal activity and the cartel activity over there being one
of the largest heroin producers, I believe that this corridor
will open that up and it will get worse. Yes, sir.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you. My time is up.
I will yield to and recognize the Ranking Member, Mr.
Barber.
Mr. Barber. Well thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for
your testimony. As I said in my remarks, I am really here today
to get the facts about what the problems really would be or
are. I appreciate what you have shared so far.
I have a few questions. But first before I ask a question
of you, Mr. Judd, I want to associate myself with your remarks
about the Department of Homeland Security's budget. We can't
afford to put any more burden on that budget with a budget that
is cut back that is reducing over time for agents that is
really struggling to get the job done.
I fully agree with you that we shouldn't be using the
Department's funds for environmental impact studies. There are
other ways to do that.
But I have a question for you, Mr. Judd, because as an
agent you have been on the ground. You know what it is like day
in and day out. A lot of people you know talk about the border
but have never been there and you have been there. So have the
men and women you represent.
You talked about the MOUs, Memorandum of Understanding with
the Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture. As a
practical matter, how does it work? I mean if you--your agent--
you are part of a team. You are pursuing illegal activity, be
it smuggling of humans or drugs. You see someone going into an
area that is under the jurisdiction of these departments. How
do you get access under this MOU? How difficult is it, given
your experience?
Mr. Judd. Theoretically we should have complete access to
the lands without having to call and ask for permission. But
what you have is you have a series of locks. If there are areas
that are not accessible to the public, you have a series of
locks.
Those locks, if you don't set--because each agency will
have their own lock for security purposes on these gates. If
you don't lock it right you could lock some other agency out.
Like I could lock the Sheriff's Department out if I placed the
lock on there incorrectly.
So it can be frustrating to try to get access to the land.
But the major problem that we have is the number of roads that
are provided to us in these areas. Again, we might have one. We
might have two roads. We have always got one. But we might have
two roads.
If we don't have more roads to be able to interdict the
smuggling that is taking place, they are going to get away.
They are going to use these lands over and over.
Buenos Aires, Organ Pipe. Buenos Aires was shut--down 3,500
acres. The Federal Government shut 3,500 acres of taxpayer land
down because it was too dangerous for citizens to go on that
land.
So it becomes very difficult when we add extra
restrictions.
Mr. Barber. With the MOUs in place do you as an agent, or
if you are on the ground, do you have to call somebody? Or is
it a given that you know what the rules of procedure are of
getting onto the land, the locks notwithstanding?
Mr. Judd. It is a given. It is a given. We already know the
rules. The rules are given to us and we operate within those
rules.
Mr. Barber. Thank you. Again, thanks to your men and women
for all that they do for us. I am a real fan.
Sheriff Garrison, I also want to thank you for your service
as a law enforcement leader in your community and for being
here today. I wanted to go to a similar question I just asked
Mr. Judd about access.
Given that the monument is established and these MOUs are
in place obviously for the Border Patrol and I would assume
other Federal entities, are you a party to those MOUs? Do you
have the same access or same ability to get on that the Border
Patrol would have?
Sheriff Garrison. Sir, at the current time we are not part
of the MOUs.
We utilize the roads that are there and the roads that go
up and down through this area now. We have used them for a
number of years.
These roads have been around. I don't know. Some of them
have been around 30, 40, 50, 60 years. I don't know that they
are--how long ago they have been put out there or were out
there. But the roads that we are using now are the ones that
are currently in place.
Having seen the maps that this monument would entail, I
believe most of those roads would be shut down. The only road I
know of that has east-to-west traffic is one road that I think
Border Patrol would have access to with a locked gate.
There is no north-to-south traffic, or no north-to-south
roadways. We are talking areas that span 15, 20 miles in
certain areas that you know if we have to get out there to some
of these places I don't know how we would get out there.
Mr. Barber. Before I run out of time I just want to ask Mr.
Rosenblum to respond to that question.
Is it your experience from what you know about how these
lands are protected that roads would be shut down? Or what do
you know about how these MOUs have actually worked as a
practical matter?
Mr. Rosenblum. Sure. So there is nothing in the
President's--in the designation of the monument that would
cause any of the roads to be shut down. What will happen now
that the monument--so it is all already Department of Interior
land that has been made into the monument. So it is already
governed by the MOU.
What will happen now that the monument has been created is
that DOI will create a management plan. That is--I mean that is
a public process that Border Patrol and local law enforcement
are invited to participate in. So they will decide you know if
they should change the roads.
But the President's declaration and the MOUs both permit
you know road construction for public safety purposes. So they
will just sit down and make a plan about, well where do we need
roads in light of our public safety needs and in light of our
environmental concerns. So they will make a plan to
specifically manage that monument.
So there is nothing that we have seen so far, and nothing
in the existing rules that would cause roads to be taken away,
although that could be considered.
Mr. Barber. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Rosenblum.
I yield back. I have just run out of time.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the Ranking Member.
The Chairman will now recognize the other committee Member,
Mr. O'Rourke, for 5 minutes.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for holding this
hearing and working to determine whether or what the
implications for border security are here in this new National
monument. I would also like to welcome Sheriff Garrison.
You said you were born and raised in Donna Ana County. I
was born and raised in the neighboring county of El Paso
County. For those who don't know, Donna Ana, El Paso, and
Juaarez all come together at a point right in between where the
sheriff and I live, so good to see you up here.
We welcome you to Washington, DC. I have appreciated
hearing your testimony so far. I agree with you about the power
and the flavor of the green chilies in Donna Ana County. They
are just awesome.
I guess my question for the sheriff and for Mr. Judd is
what are you doing today, or what were you doing prior to the
designation of this monument that you will not be able to do
going forward, precisely, specifically? Maybe I will start with
Mr. Judd and then we will take Sheriff Garrison.
Mr. Judd. Prior--well, first off we don't know what the
rules are concerning this land that was just designated by the
President. So I really couldn't say what the difference is
right now. Frankly I don't know that there will be any
differences.
All I want to let you know is we have to have access. If
you want to designate the land, designate the land. Just give
me the access that I can do my job.
Mr. O'Rourke. Great.
Mr. Judd. I want to be able to do my job.
Mr. O'Rourke. Yes. Message received. I couldn't agree more
with you.
Sheriff.
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir. I would say the same thing. I
believe that it has been my experience whenever dealing with
things like this that access is taken away, that we lose access
to some of the roads that we have had access to.
At one time, I think in 2006 or 2007 there was a 1-month
stretch there where we took off 25 vehicles that were stolen
out of this area that we are talking about that were used to
haul drugs through that area. That was just 1 month. That is
when we really started patrolling this area a lot more and
since that time have really curbed that stuff down.
I believe that if we lose access to that area to be able to
do the patrols we do now, that the same thing will come back.
Mr. O'Rourke. Dr. Rosenblum, is it your understanding that
the land designated for the National monument is already, prior
to its designation, Federal land, either BLM land or Department
of Interior land?
Mr. Rosenblum. That is correct. Yes.
Mr. O'Rourke. So it is not like we are taking land and some
other designation, local-owned land, or State-owned land, or
private-owned land and converting it to Federally-owned land.
We are going from Federal to Federal, staying within the
Federal department.
I have got to tell you, as I mentioned, I am from the area,
very familiar with the places in question. In fact I was just
there on Sunday. I hike in Dripping Springs Canyon on the Organ
Mountains. I have been to the Portillo Mountains, to Mount
Riley on the road to Columbus right along the border.
I live there. Our family plays there. We hike there. We
camp there. I have got to tell you the illusion was brought
that we are somehow going to create a dangerous corridor. We
are projecting fears based on things that might have happened
in your district, Mr. Barber, that we might be afraid of from a
distance.
But I live on the border and I live in the safest city, not
just on the border, not just in Texas, but in the United
States, El Paso, Texas. Thanks to the men and women of the
Border Patrol. Thanks to the men and women of local law
enforcement. Frankly, thanks to the general population that
lives there, that does a great job of keeping our communities
safe.
I don't, from my perspective, from living there, from being
there----
Mr. Duncan. And former mayor, right?
Mr. O'Rourke. What is that?
Mr. Duncan. And former mayor of El Paso.
Mr. O'Rourke. I was on the city council.
Mr. Duncan. Oh, okay.
Mr. O'Rourke. Yes.
Mr. Duncan. City council. I am sorry.
Mr. O'Rourke. I will take the promotion, but--so I got to
tell you. I definitely understand the concern.
To the Chairman, that is our No. 1 job, is protecting the
homeland and identifying these threats before they develop and
affect the people that we represent. But I really don't see the
problem here.
I am certainly open to any different information than what
has been presented today. But I don't think anything is going
to change.
But, Mr. Judd, if any agents within the Border Patrol, or
Sheriff Garrison, if any of your deputies encounter locks
through which you can't pass, roads that were open to you
yesterday and are closed to you tomorrow, please let me know. I
would love to be an advocate for law enforcement in that area
to make sure that you have the same access yesterday--that you
know you should have that today, going forward, and tomorrow.
So thank you all for being here, for the testimony. I am a
big supporter of this designation. I think it is great for the
area, great for the country, and is not a danger to the
homeland.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the gentleman.
The Chairman will now recognize Mr. Bishop, from Utah.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Being able--in my
other job I am chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and
Environmental Regulations, Committee on Natural Resources. So
this is all on public land. This is all normally--if it had not
been done by an Antiquities Act designation, this would have
gone through our committee and our subcommittee. So I
appreciate that.
Let me talk first to Sheriff Garrison. Mr. Judd pointed out
that our access issues are not really based on need, not even
the MOU. It is actually based on the personality of the land
manager. We have seen examples where the land managers have
either cut off access because they have quibbled about the
definition, or waited months before they actually managed or
actually allowed a movement or a change within it.
So, Sheriff Garrison, I think in your answer to Mr. Barber
you said that you don't have in local law enforcement any
guarantee of access in the MOU.
Sheriff Garrison. No, sir, we don't.
Mr. Bishop. So I am assuming that if we are going to do
something about this, and both the two Senate Democrats from
New Mexico as well as Congressman Pearce over on our side, they
both had an area they wanted to have designated for a buffer
zone and an area for access. It would be essential then to
allow State and local governments to have that same kind of
access, but it would have to be put into statute I am assuming.
Mr. Judd, you have seen how quickly and dramatically border
traffic can shift. If you allow actually with inside this
monument, or underneath the monument, which is a wilderness
study area, which has the same problems as far as access. If
you have less access for law enforcement, does that anticipate
a change in activities?
Mr. Judd. My main concern is simply that what is great
about this is I can get on the phone and I can call a Border
Patrol Agent right now and ask him: Hey, what is going on? In
fact I did that right before--while we were on break.
I asked an agent, I said: Hey, is it more difficult to
arrest smugglers on the Organ Pipe as opposed to the public
lands? The agent, who is one of the most senior agents at the
Ojo station, he said it is a lot more difficult to arrest a
smuggler on the National parks as what it is on the public land
because there just isn't the same access.
Mr. Bishop. It is a change of the designation of what you
are allowed to do, especially if it is wilderness lands. That
is the problem you have underneath this one that goes down to
the border itself.
So here is the difference. In the Senate language it didn't
say--it allowed access for exigent circumstances. In the
designation the President did it allowed access for
emergencies. We haven't defined that. That is what is going to
go in the land management process that will start from here on
in, what it actually means by emergencies.
But in the Pearce bill, what he wanted to provide is patrol
access. How is patrol access different, Mr. Judd, than exigent
circumstances or hot pursuit?
Mr. Judd. Well patrol access allows us to ensure that the
crimes don't take place. Exigent circumstances means that we
are already responding to something bad that has happened.
Mr. Bishop. All right. So I assume if we are going to
rewrite something else to allow border security, patrol access
really is a key element to allow that to stop issues from going
forward.
I have got 2 minutes. I am going to get this done very
quickly. That will never happen.
Sheriff Garrison, do you make the assumption that there
would be community support for Mr. Pearce's approach to provide
that buffer zone and that patrol access not only in the
monument itself, but also in the WSA below the monument?
Sheriff Garrison. To that, sir, I am not sure. I know there
has been a lot of community support for it. Then I hear of
other things against it. But I don't know who is from where
anymore whenever it comes to that in the community.
Mr. Bishop. Sheriff, I am going to give you a minute to
tell me your experience as far as the public meeting that was
held down there to get public input before this monument was
designated. But I do want to say one thing to Mr. Rosenblum
first.
In your written statement you have made an inaccuracy. On
Page 3--and you also said it orally as well--you wrote down
that an even larger majority, 22 out of the 26 reported--
sectors reported that such delays had not affected border
security in their areas of operation. You are misquoting the
GAO report.
On the first page it said 22 of the 26 agents in charge
reported the overall security status of their jurisdiction was
not affected. That means they were not downgraded. But
unfortunately four of those who said their status was
downgraded happen to be in this area we are talking about in
New Mexico. That was one of those.
They also went on to say 17 of the 26 said there were
delays. Fourteen went on to say what those delays were. In this
particular area of New Mexico they had an 8 month's delay in
allowing the agency, the Border Patrol was trying to move a--
shoot. I am looking at my time here.
They had an 8 month's delay in allowing the Border Patrol
for moving a mobile surveillance device from one point to
another. You had to bring in three different groups to access
the road that you wanted to go in as far as the Border Patrol.
In the footnote of that report it also said that even if
BLM gives you that access, and they do all the ports by
bringing in a reality specialist and a biology specialist, an
archeological specialist. They don't always designate the
entire road, only a section of the road where you will actually
be. If you want to change that again you have to go through
that entire process again.
I didn't even give you your minute to tell me what happened
to you down there in your public meeting. I apologize for going
on. I am over time.
Mr. Duncan. I will allow a little more leeway. I do want
to--this is a fact-finding hearing. So----
Mr. Bishop. I would never do that.
Mr. Duncan. I appreciate Mr. Bishop yielding back. I
appreciate him being on the committee. The reason we talked
about this is he serves on Natural Resources Committee as well,
and the National monument, National park, wilderness areas all
fall under the jurisdiction of the Natural Resources Committee
here.
So we have worked on that a lot. I knew you would bring a
lot of experience to this.
So if you would reset the clock to 5 minutes and I am going
to recognize Mr. Gosar. You can yield to Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Well maybe what I could ask is if you could
tell Mr. Gosar what happened to you as you tried to attend the
public hearing, the only public hearing they had. If you could
keep it to a minute I would--he would be grateful.
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir. Thank you.
I received word from Senator Udall that they were going to
have a public meeting in Las Cruces regarding this monument
area, and that Secretary Jewell would be there. I also received
an invitation to meet and greet with her before that time.
I arrived 30 minutes early and the parking lot was so full
that security was turning people out and wouldn't let anybody
into the parking lot. There were a number of parking spots
open, but we weren't allowed to go in there. They said those
were for employees.
I told them I was the sheriff and I had a meeting there,
and I needed to talk to her. They said sorry, you can't come
in. So I drove around until I found a spot, parked. Every
business around there had signs up saying don't park here
because they knew what was going to happen.
I found a place, walked about 15 minutes to get back to the
building. By the time I got there the meeting was over. Then
was at the--met at the front door by security stating that I
couldn't go into the general meeting that was being held. Not
the meet-and-greet with Secretary Jewell, but the meeting that
was going to be held, because it was already packed and that
the fire marshal had already exceeded the limits for the room.
I told him well I am going in anyways. I am the sheriff and
I am going to go in.
I left probably 150, 200 of the country residents in the
parking lot who could not go in. It is my understanding I saw
the busses where a lot of people who were bussed into this
area, said to be residents, but I didn't recognize them. The
residents I did recognize were out in the parking lot. So.
Mr. Gosar. So from--taking a little bit further, so it is a
sham.
I mean you know when we start talking about wilderness
designations it implies a whole different aspect. Doesn't it,
Mr. Judd?
Mr. Judd. It gives us different rules on how we have----
Mr. Gosar. Well, I want to take those rules even further.
Because I mean up around Flagstaff where I was from we had a
wilderness area. We had a fire. You can't even go in with
motorized vehicles without the pretense of getting permission.
So there is no difference in Flagstaff versus this National
monument. Would you agree?
Mr. Judd. I would. In fact I would take it one step
further. Again the senior agent that I talked to, we have been
trying to put a mobile surveillance scope in the most pristine
area on the Organ Pipe and we can't get permission. We have
been trying to get permission for a long time.
Mr. Gosar. It is over and over again. What we see is, is
this pronouncement by Mr. Rosenblum about that we will work out
these MOUs. But they never work out for the local people ever,
ever, ever.
There are these roadless remanagement plans. They have good
intentions at the beginning. But all the sudden what they do is
they restrict it over and over again.
So we see this time and time again in regards to wilderness
areas and Federal designations. I am getting tired of this
aspect where they don't work with local people. Local
jurisdictions like Congressmen and Senators from the State of
jurisdiction. It is over and over again.
That is why I want to make the comment, Mr. Chairman,
because I am very happy that you brought this hearing because
it brings to me that the President is overreaching his use of
power granted to him by the Antiquities Act, plain and simple.
The 1906 law was enacted mostly to protect prehistoric
Indian ruins and artifacts, collectively termed antiquities,
which were found on Federal lands in the west. By definition
these sites were to be the smallest area compatible.
Since given this power many presidents, Republicans,
Democrats, have abused it. Today there are over 100 National
monuments located in 26 States covering some 136 million acres.
Due to its enormous size, many of these monuments fall outside,
along the U.S.-Mexican border and become host to a range of
illegal activities such as drug and human smuggling.
I want to ask you, Mr. Rosenblum, are you very familiar
with the corridors and what they look like by the trash heaps?
Mr. Rosenblum. I am somewhat familiar with them.
Mr. Gosar. You had better be very particularly. Is there
trash there all the time? I mean you come here as a
knowledgeable person here in regards to it. So I hope that you
are a scholar about this. I mean there is lots of trash.
Mr. Rosenblum. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gosar. Is that very environmental?
Mr. Rosenblum. I would just--I would----
Mr. Gosar. I am asking a question, yes or no. Is that
environmental?
Mr. Rosenblum. Obviously the trash is not environmental. It
is not----
Mr. Gosar. Do the people putting the trash there, are they
environmentally sensitive?
Mr. Rosenblum. People who put trash in wilderness are not
environmentally sensitive.
Mr. Gosar. It seems like the corridor for these folks that
are the illegal drug trafficking and human smugglers could care
less about the corridors, do they?
Mr. Rosenblum. I don't think there is any evidence that
the----
Mr. Gosar. Oh, wait a minute. Come on, sir.
Mr. Rosenblum. I don't think there is any evidence----
Mr. Gosar. If you would actually been in the corridor----
Mr. Rosenblum [continuing]. That the environmental
designations cause illegal migration. People illegally migrate
through Arizona because there is travel infrastructure that
they take advantage of. There are smuggling routes that have
operated through that region after the last decade----
Mr. Gosar. This just only hides it even worse.
Mr. Rosenblum. I mean I think--I give some credit to
environmental organizations that follow these issues. All of
them that have endorsed this monument feel that on net this is
going to protect those lands more than it is going to harm it.
I don't think that the environmental groups that prioritize
environmental protection would favor this designation if they
anticipated it was going to cause additional environmental
degradation.
So I, you know I find that to be an implausible----
Mr. Gosar. I find it is a very----
Mr. Rosenblum [continuing]. That it is going to cause more
traffic because traffic is driven by you know such a wide range
of factors that smugglers take advantage of. The environmental
designation, I mean we have got pretty good access to these
areas.
So--and I will give you, you know just to respond to Mr.
Bishop on the southwest New Mexico thing that the GAO talks
about. It is a perfect example where this system exists, the
MOU for the Border Patrol and DOI to sit down and talk about
it.
In this particular case where there were delays, what the
GAO reports is that the supervisory agent for the sector did
not request additional access through that area for a road.
What DOI said was that they would have been willing to work
with Border Patrol to facilitate that access if requested.
So you know the point is to put a process in place that you
can do the law enforcement mission and build the roads where
you need to build them.
Mr. Gosar. It seems to be a one-way street over and over
and over again. The environmental community and DOI, the
Federal Government always knows better.
I yield back.
Mr. Duncan. The gentleman's time is expired.
Chairman will now recognize Mr. Salmon from Arizona.
Mr. Salmon. Well thank you.
Congressman Schweikert, who was here when you initially
made your testimony, asked that I share his experience. I guess
he and his wife were called with a group of volunteers to go
into the Arizona, the Organ--excuse me--what is it, Organ
Mountain--yes, National Monument. They went to clean up a very
terrible environmental situation where there was trash all over
the place.
He said that the dirty diapers were you know just--his
exaggeration was a mile high. But he was saying that it was
just very prolific throughout there. I guess my point is, and I
would like to ask Mr. Judd and Mr. Garrison. Do you think that
the Border Patrol folks would be better environmental stewards
than the drug cartel people?
Mr. Judd. I know they are. Not that they would be, they
are.
Mr. Salmon. Right. So, and Mr. Garrison, either one of you,
would you believe that if you were allowed to do your job in
those areas where--I mean the cartels aren't stupid, or the
coyotes who traffic the humans. They are going to take the
course of least resistance. If the law enforcement people are
prohibited from doing their job in those areas, then the drug
cartels take those over.
It is like a balloon. You squeeze it, that balloon goes
over in this direction. Isn't that correct?
Mr. Judd. Well, I have only got experience. But I can tell
you that there is more smuggling taking place on the Organ Pipe
and Buenos Aires, which are Nationally-protected lands, than
what is taking place on the public lands.
Mr. Salmon. Well, if I was one of those drug cartel members
it would be a no-brainer to me to take the place where you are
forbidden to be. I guess my point I am trying to make is that
if we really care about the environment--actually, we care
about the environment and we care about protecting our borders.
But if we really care about our environment we would
actually want our law enforcement people there making sure that
the ones that actually are damaging the environment with all
the trash they are leaving behind and walking over all the--you
know, the plant life there. Mr. Garrison, what are your
thoughts?
Sheriff Garrison. Sir, I agree with you, sir. We currently
have an MOU in place with BLM to help them patrol those lands
because they have one ranger for that entire area----
Mr. Salmon. Right.
Sheriff Garrison [continuing]. Who is often not around. We
work that area as hard as we can for all those kinds of the
same reasons he would be there.
Mr. Salmon. But do you think that if--you know if the land
we are talking about in New Mexico is given the same
designation that you might have the same problems that they are
having in Arizona?
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir, I believe we would.
Mr. Salmon. You believe you would?
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir.
Mr. Salmon. So it actually is going to be not only harmful
to our border activities, but it is going to be harmful to the
environment, isn't it?
Sheriff Garrison. Yes, sir, I believe it will.
Mr. Salmon. I guess that is a point that is getting lost on
a few of us.
I am going to yield back my time.
Mr. Duncan. Gentleman yields back.
We have got time, if the panel doesn't mind, to go through
another series of questions because this is an important issue
to me personally and I know to the other Members on the
committee.
So, let me just say this. I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
I don't totally disagree with the comments of the gentleman
from Texas earlier. This is a special place or it never would
have been Federal land in the first place. It never would have
been set aside as a National monument. I get that.
As I said in my earlier statement, I appreciate these
wilderness areas and these National parks and National
monuments. I have enjoyed them, just recently even.
But I do believe that past performance predicts future
results. I don't think that is just a saying you hear on a
stock performance commercial or whatever. I believe that to be
the case.
What I don't want to see is Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
National Monument area experience the same kind of abuse. That
is the word that comes to mind that we have seen over in Organ
Pipe in Arizona. The refuse you were talking about earlier the
folks in Arizona have experienced, I don't want to see that
happen at Organ Mountain.
I want the O'Rourke's of the world to be able to continue
to use that without run-ins and signs that say hey, you may
encounter drug smugglers, illegal aliens, folks that don't
speak English and other things, because the signs and the
warnings are there.
I can talk about the websites for the Fish and Wildlife
Service National Refuges in Arizona. I can talk about the signs
that are--and the warnings on the website for Organ Pipe. They
are real realities for those areas. Americans are having to
deal with that. I don't want them to have to deal with that
necessarily in, or ever at Organ Mountain.
So I hope we can facilitate ways, and that is the reason I
think this hearing is so important, I hope we can facilitate
ways for the CBP and local law enforcement to work with these
Federal agencies to make sure that they can do their jobs. To
protect this country from smuggling, protect this country from
illegal immigration and to protect this country for any other
illicit activity whether it is U.S. citizens conducting that
activity on this Federal land or whether it is other foreign
nationals coming across.
You got to be able to do your job. I think that is
important. I think that is why Mr. Bishop's legislation that I
am reviewing may give us an avenue for that. I hope something
good comes out of this that enables the CBP Officers to be able
to do their jobs, but also protecting, Mr. Rosenblum,
protecting those sensitive areas.
I can tell you this. I don't believe that the smugglers and
the cartel will necessarily protect those areas. They haven't.
Past performance predicts future results.
So let's find a way, a segue to make sure that we do
protect these areas but also make sure that our country is
protected as well, that our citizens are protected in these
counties. That is why it is so important.
I had another question but I am about out of time. So what
I would like to do is just yield to the Ranking Member for 5
minutes.
Mr. Barber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thanks to the
witnesses and our colleagues for being here today.
Mr. Chairman, I just received a document that I haven't had
a chance to read other than the final statement on it. It is
from the Donna Ana County Commission in New Mexico. It was
dated July 10, which is today. It is a resolution adopted, it
appears to be adopted unanimously by the commission, which I
assume is the governing body for the county in question, which
is supporting the designation of the monument. So without
objection I would like to submit that for the record, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Duncan. Without objection so ordered.
[The information follows:]
Statement of Billy G. Garrett, Chairman, Donna Ana County Commission,
NM
July 10, 2014
Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson, my name is Billy
Garrett and I am the chairman of the Donna Ana County Commission in New
Mexico. Donna Ana County was established in 1852, before New Mexico
State-hood, and is the second-most populated county in the State with
approximately 213,500 residents in 2013. We are also home to one of the
fastest-growing communities in the United States, the city of Las
Cruces. Our quality of life is characterized by a strong sense of
community that is enhanced by a multicultural heritage and beautiful
desert setting--portions of which are included in the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks National Monument. As the subcommittee examines the
implications of the designation of this new monument, I appreciate the
opportunity to provide information and a local perspective for your
consideration.
Donna Ana County has supported both legislative and executive
protections for the areas now included in our Nation's newest monument.
Residents have been studying and advocating for designation since the
1970's, and strong local support has continued to build over the
decades. Local governments such as Donna Ana County, the city of Las
Cruces, the town of Mesilla, and even the city of El Paso, TX; tribal
governments; and the All Pueblo Council of Governors have passed a
series of unanimous resolutions in support of designation to maximize
opportunities for the preservation of the natural, cultural, and
historical resources entrusted to us as Americans; education and
scientific inquiry about these resources; recreation; and economic
development.
While some of these resolutions have called on Congress to pass
legislation to this effect, we have also passed a number of resolutions
requesting that President Obama use the authority delegated to him by
Congress in the Antiquities Act of 1906 to permanently protect the
Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks. (Please see Donna Ana County's resolution
below.) Donna Ana County has also written to President Obama and
visited administration officials and staff in Washington, DC to provide
information from the local point of view and to request Executive
Action.
In addition to understanding the high level of support of my
constituents through their communications with me, recent polls show
that strong, bipartisan majorities of both Donna Ana County residents
(72-83%) and New Mexicans (82%) support National monument designation
in the areas President Obama included in the establishing proclamation.
In a poll conducted after designation, 75% supported the President's
action.
This past January, our community was pleased to host a visit from
Secretary Jewell. Senators Udall and Heinrich held a public meeting
while she was here to hear from constituents about the proposed
National monument. More than 750 constituents attended the meeting.
Congressman Pearce was invited to participate, along with a diverse set
of stakeholders, and many views were represented in the form of both
presentations and public comments. During that meeting, the public
showed overwhelming support for the creation of a monument like the one
established by President Obama. Veterans, local businesses, sportsmen,
faith leaders, and culturally-based organizations have all embraced the
idea of such a monument; many specifically requested that Executive
Action be used to establish the monument. Editorial boards of our
newspapers have also supported the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
National Monument and the use of the Antiquities Act to create it.
Everyone in Donna Ana County cares deeply about keeping our
communities safe. After talking with and hearing from the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), Border Patrol, and local law enforcement
officers, I am confident that the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National
Monument will not impede law enforcement and border security
operations. Nothing has changed with respect to Federal, State, or
local law enforcement authorities, jurisdictions, responsibilities, or
access since designation.
Local law enforcement agencies continue to have the same
jurisdiction over the types of activities in the monument that they
handled before. They continue to have exactly the same access to the
area to conduct routine patrols (via motor vehicle and other methods)
and respond effectively during exigent circumstances as they did before
designation. No prior notification to BLM is required to even drive or
land aircraft off-road if necessary during an emergency, including for
search-and-rescue and body recoveries. It would be highly unusual for
road access to change in the management plan, and the proclamation also
specifically allows for new roads to be constructed if needed for
public safety.
It is worth noting that while the monument designation as outlined
in the proclamation does not hinder law enforcement activities, all
entities will have multiple opportunities to share their precise
concerns and needs to ensure that they are addressed in the monument
management plan. Mitigation has also not been an issue here in Donna
Ana County and the BLM policy on mitigation will not change with
designation.
If local law enforcement agencies feel clarification on management
and continued cooperation is helpful, they are still welcome to pursue
interagency agreements with the BLM. To my knowledge, the Donna Ana
County Sheriff's Office has never felt the need for a formal agreement
with the BLM, and has not pursued one post-designation. Our colleague
to the west, Luna County Sheriff Raymond Cobos, has been confident and
supportive of Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks designation, sharing the
following thoughts with the press: ``After learning more about national
monuments, I am satisfied that the President's action on 19 May 2014
will not hamper the ability of the Luna County Sheriff's Department to
enforce applicable New Mexico statutes within the area covered by the
proclamation. I am comfortable with the manner in which local law
enforcement jurisdiction and authority is preserved. I am always glad
to see protection of our environment balanced by the safety of New
Mexicans particularly in my jurisdiction.''
In addition to the work of local law enforcement, the success of
Federal law enforcement activities, especially that of the U.S. Border
Patrol along our border with Mexico, is critical to our county.
President Obama's proclamation honors the careful work done by the New
Mexico delegation--first with our Border Patrol stations and sectors,
and later with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) headquarters. The
boundaries of the monument take into account the Border Patrol's
operational planning and long-term strategies.
The language of the proclamation also makes clear that the terms of
the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Interior, and Department of
Agriculture Regarding Cooperative National Security and
Counterterrorism Efforts on Federal Lands along the United States'
borders are not changed in any way and still apply. This MOU
specifically allows for work in and access to public lands, including
those such as National monuments. While the MOU is signed by Federal
agencies, the BLM has extended its provisions to all law enforcement
entities, including non-Federal agencies such as Sheriff's offices and
others. I have been assured that the MOU is working well in New Mexico,
and that the Border Patrol is very comfortable with the establishment
of the new monument.
The Border Patrol has a long history of working well with the
Bureau of Land Management in the area designated, and the El Paso
Sector is used to working with the National Park Service in and around
White Sands National Monument, which has existed since the 1930's. As
well, sensors and other infrastructure can continue to be used and new
infrastructure installed if necessary, although the areas cited by
Border Patrol as critical for infrastructure flexibility and other key
areas have been purposefully excluded from the monument. Secretary
Jewell and BLM Director Neil Kornze also had the opportunity to tour
some of these areas and those proposed for legislative designation with
local Border Patrol Officers and field agents in January. They
discussed the challenges on the border, access needs in the area, as
well as ``the productive working relationship'' the BLM has with DHS
and local law enforcement.
For these reasons, CBP has officially supported efforts to
designate the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks since 2010, and the National
monument specifically since January of this year as demonstrated by
Acting Commissioner Winkowski's letter (below) and the administration's
decision to move forward with establishment of the monument. After
designation, CBP Spokeswoman Jenny Burke provided the following
statement: ``This designation will in no way limit our ability to
perform our important border security mission, and in fact provides
important flexibility as we work to meet this on-going priority. CBP is
committed to continuing to work closely with the Department of the
Interior and the U.S. Forest Service to maintain border security while
ensuring the protection of the environment along the border.'' As well,
the Truman National Security Project; Ron Colburn, retired National
Deputy Chief of the U.S. Border Patrol during the George W. Bush
Administration; and 68 retired generals--including seven four-star
generals--from the U.S. Armed Service (see below) have also been
supportive and cite that security concerns have been adequately
addressed.
As a county commissioner, I value the ability for agencies,
landowners, and managers, and stakeholders at all levels to work
cooperatively to secure our border. The New Mexico Borderland
Management Task Force, regularly attended by BLM, DHS, the Donna Ana
County Sheriff's Office, and other local entities, has been very
helpful in this regard. New Mexico's task force is one of the most
successful in the Nation in fostering good relationships,
communication, and collaboration. As well, the Border Security Task
Force (BSTF) was convened in 2003 to facilitate agencies working
together with the public to keep our border safe. This forum continues
to address related issues--both small and large--to ensure that the
missions of law enforcement are executed as effectively as possible
while the needs of those living and working on the border are met. When
the opportunity for open dialogue on the monument was offered at the
BSTF meetings, the discussions have been generally positive or neutral.
Discussion will also continue at these meetings.
Finally, we can all agree that decisions should be made based on
the facts of each situation and place. We need to pay attention to the
special circumstances in each of our communities and landscapes rather
than use sweeping ideology or one-size-fits-all approaches. Comparisons
have been made between the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and other areas
in other States. While we should certainly learn from experience
elsewhere, the comparisons made here are neither constructive nor
accurate. The El Paso Sector has more miles of border than the Tucson
Sector, for example, and yet has had dramatically lower apprehensions
than the Tucson Sector. The El Paso Sector has also had significantly
greater rates of decrease in apprehensions and incidents than the
Tucson Sector as more work has been done and resources provided to
bring the border under control in the last decade or so.
In the area specifically in and near the Organ Mountain-Desert
Peaks, the lack of infrastructure (such as major roads heading north),
rugged topography with strategically high ground on the U.S. side and
features forming natural barriers to crossing, fence completion, and
history of proactive border enforcement distinguish it from other areas
and allow it to be a relatively quiet stretch of the border. The area
closest to the border has also been a Wilderness Study Area since 1980,
established by the Reagan administration and recommended for full
wilderness designation by the George H.W. Bush administration. National
Monument status does not change these factors, nor invite additional
illegal activity.
I would also ask subcommittee members to look at ``security'' in
terms of the overall health of our communities. This is what county
commissioners are tasked to do every day. Donna Ana County may lie on
one side of an international boundary, but we share economic, social,
cultural, and environmental interests with our Mexican counterparts.
Those of us who live along the border are well aware of the benefits
and potential threats of this relationship. We also share a common
perspective that the border is not so much a line as it is a place of
great vitality, significant challenges, and National importance.
Building on this vitality, addressing the challenges, and recognizing
the importance of this area is essential to regional well-being. In
this sense, public safety cannot be separated from the social,
economic, and physical conditions of our region.
Development within the borderland ranges from large cities to small
communities, widely-distributed homesteads, ranches, and other isolated
facilities. Many of the families living in this region get by on
incomes well below the poverty level. We live with the very real threat
of flooding from summer thunderstorms, substandard housing, inadequate
utilities, insufficient job opportunity, and rapidly deteriorating
roads. A trip to the doctor or to shop for groceries or to participate
in a parent-teacher conference can be a major challenge.
The borderland is also an important center for international trade
and regional business activity. To stay at the forefront of job
creation and entrepreneurial initiatives, substantial investments are
needed in education, utilities, and transportation systems. And it goes
without saying that ports of entry must be sufficient is size, number,
and staffing to safely and efficiently move materials, products, and
people across the border--in both directions. Looked at in terms of
distribution networks, trade through southern Donna Ana County can be
linked to business interests throughout the United States.
Tourism and related business development is also an important
component of economic opportunity here. An independent economic impact
study on the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument estimates
that Donna Ana County and the Paso del Norte region stand to earn more
than $7.4 million in additional economic activity each year and
$560,000 more in State and local tax revenues. The report also projects
that jobs related to tourism and outdoor recreation will double based
on increased spending at privately-owned hotels, restaurants, and
retail establishments. These projections are consistent with the
positive economic benefits already being realized in northern New
Mexico in the first year following establishment of the Rio Grande del
Norte National Monument. As we saw during the Government shutdown last
October, National parks and monuments are important to local economies.
Not only does Donna Ana County's new monument celebrate our
borderland history and the unique enterprise of the United States that
is our public lands, but I strongly believe that the monument will
support the kinds of change described above that are essential to
strengthening the borderland as a whole.
______
______
______
June 18, 2014.
The Honorable Barack Obama,
The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20500.
Dear President Obama: We extend a sincere thank you and
congratulations for the designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
National Monument on public lands in New Mexico.
As you know, this region is filled with natural wonders and
incredible hunting and recreational opportunities. Its protection will
ensure that future generations will be able to enjoy diverse mountain
ranges and expanses of Chihuahuan desert, a rich archaeological record,
and numerous important historic sites, all while supporting new jobs
and economic activity far into the future.
From a veterans' perspective, we understand the importance of
protected public lands as a place for men and women serving in our
armed forces to recreate after returning from strenuous overseas
missions to recuperate and reconnect with family and friends. Three
significant military installations (Fort Bliss, Fort Huachuca, and
White Sands Missile Range) and a large population of military personnel
and retirees live within a 2-hour drive to the monument, and we are
convinced the monument will directly contribute to the health and well-
being of these veterans and their families. And we are pleased that the
new monument protects some of the Deming Bombing Targets, where World
War II military history unfolded as bomber pilots and crew practiced
using the Norden bombsight technology.
We also appreciate that Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, U.S.
Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich, and others worked diligently to
establish the monument in a manner that does not, in any way, hinder
the ability of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to do their job of
securing our Nation's borders.
A vocal minority continues to make false claims that the
designation of the new monument poses a threat to border security; to
the contrary, we believe the designation of the new National monument
has no bearing on our Nation's security. The portion of the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument near the U.S.-Mexico border--
the Portillo Mountains--has not been a problem area for illegal border
crossings, and will similarly not be one in the future. Highway 9,
which runs just north of the border in this area, is paved, well-
maintained, and well-patrolled, enabling Border Patrol to react quickly
to any incursions. In addition, this area is remote, dry, and wild
country where covering large distances on foot is very difficult.
Protecting this area as a National monument ensures that there is
no encroachment of businesses, residences, or facilities in the area.
It is our experience, minimizing human activity in any area makes the
area easier to monitor and effectively keep secure.
According to the Albuquerque Journal, the Santa Teresa station of
Border Patrol's El Paso Sector apprehended only 13 illegal immigrants
south of the Potrillo Mountains in fiscal year 2009. This was 0.1
percent of the 14,999 total apprehensions in the El Paso Sector, which
covers the entire State of New Mexico and the two western-most counties
in Texas.
We appreciate that your monument proclamation specifically
addresses the issue by stating, ``Nothing in this proclamation shall be
deemed to affect the provisions of the 2006 Memorandum of Understanding
between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Department
of the Interior, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding
`Cooperative National Security and Counterterrorism Efforts on Federal
Lands Along the United States' Borders.' ''
Confirming this, a spokesperson for the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection said: ``This designation will in no way limit our ability to
perform our important border security mission, and in fact provides
important flexibility as we work to meet this on-going priority.''
Moreover, Sheriff Raymond Cobos of Luna County, New Mexico, home to
some of the new monument lands near the border, has said: ``I am
satisfied that the President's [monument proclamation] will not hamper
the ability of the Luna County Sheriff's Department to enforce
applicable New Mexico statutes within the area covered by the
proclamation. I am comfortable with the manner in which local law
enforcement jurisdiction and authority is preserved. I am always glad
to see protection of our environment balanced by the safety of New
Mexicans particularly in my jurisdiction.''
Thank you for responding to local communities and the need to
protect our shared heritage, and preserving the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument. This designation will help our veterans
recover from the impact of over a decade of continuous warfare,
stimulate the local economy, preserve our history, and protect a
beautiful part of our Nation--all while allowing Border Patrol to
continue doing their job keeping these public lands among the most
secure along the Southwest Border.
Sincerely,
Gen. Charles Campbell,
Shreveport, LA, 40 years of service.
Gen. John Coburn,
Lorton, VA, 38 years of service.
Gen. Paul Kern,
Arlington, VA, 38 years of service.
Gen. Leon LaPorte,
San Antonio, TX, 37 years of service.
Gen. Lee Saloman
Gulfport, FL, 37 years of service.
Gen. Thomas Schwartz,
Spring Branch, TX, 38 years of service.
Gen. Johnnie Wilson,
Fort Belvoir, VA, 38 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Steven Arnold,
Huntsville, GA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Steven Boutelle,
Arlington, VA, 36 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. John Caldwell,
Washington, DC, 36 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. John Castelaw,
Washington, DC, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Chris Christiansen,
Alexandria, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Daniel W. Christman,
Alexandria, VA, 38 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Robert Dail,
Reston, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Tony Jones,
Charleston, SC, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. William Lennox,
Alexandria, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Clarence ``Mac'' McKnight,
McLean, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. William Mortensen,
Southport, NC, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Richard Newton (USAF),
McLean, VA, 33 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. David Ohle,
Fairfax, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Norman Seip,
McLean, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Stephen Speakes,
Cibolo, TX, 34 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Mitchell H. Stevenson,
Fairfax, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Theodore Stroup,
Arlington, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Guy Swan,
Arlington, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. Ross C. Thompson,
Alexandria, VA, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. David Valcourt,
Potomac, MD, 35 years of service.
Lieutenant Gen. David Weisman,
Fort Lee, VA, 35 years of service.
Major Gen. Vincent Boles,
Huntsville, GA, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. Guy Bourne,
Arlington, VA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. James Chambers,
San Antonio, TX, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. John Deyermond,
Pelham, NH, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. Jannette Edmunds,
Alexandria, VA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. William N. Farmen,
Fairfax, VA, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. Yves Fontaine,
Rock Island, IL, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Jerry Harrison,
Manassas, VA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Duane Jones (USAF),
Denver, CO, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. Thomas Kane (USAF),
Purchase, NY, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. Michael Lally,
Bothell, WA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Kevin Leonard,
Greenville, SC, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Larry Lust,
Olathe, KS, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. John MacDonald,
Arlington, VA, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. Timothy McHale,
Alexandria, VA, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. John McMahon,
Seoul, South Korea, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. Hamp McManus,
Fort Mill, SC, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. Nordie Norwood (USAF),
Alexandria, VA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Robert Radin,
Charleston, SC, 34 years of service.
Major Gen. James Rogers,
Huntsville, GA, 32 years of service.
Major Gen. Bruce C. Scott,
Alexandria, VA, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Randy Strong,
Washington, DC, 33 years of service.
Major Gen. Keith Thurgood,
Washington, DC, 32 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Steven M. Anderson,
Arlington, VA, 31 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Stephen C. Cheney,
Washington, DC, 33 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Thomas Dickinson,
Atlanta, GA, 30 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Barbara Doornink,
Alexandria, VA, 30 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Robert Floyd,
Fairfax, VA, 32 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. William Forrester,
Huntsville, GA, 31 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Uri French,
Fairfax, VA, 30 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Rebecca Halstead,
Charlottesville, VA, 30 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Jeffrey Horne,
Alexandria, VA, 32 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Michael Kelleher,
Atlanta, GA, 30 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Thomas Landwermeyer,
Clifton, VA, 33 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Ann McDonald,
Arlington, VA, 29 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. David Reist (USMC),
Alexandria, VA, 31 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Guy Sands,
Alexandria, VA, 32 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Douglas Satterfield,
Washington, DC, 31 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. E.J. Sinclair,
Huntsville, GA, 32 years of service.
Brigadier Gen. Paul Wentz,
Dallas, TX, 32 years of service.
Mr. Barber. Here is my take on this. Border security
priority No. 1 with me. It has to be because the people I
represent still don't feel safe on their land. Anything that we
do to impair the ability of Border Patrol to do their job is
not okay with me.
That said, I hope that protecting the environment and
protecting our homeland are not mutually exclusive. It doesn't
have to be, I believe, an either-or situation. The challenges
may be difficult for us to work out, but I hope we can.
Priority No. 1 is border security. Border Patrol needs to
have access. Local law enforcement needs to have access to
chase the bad guys and to capture the bad guys.
I hope that when all is said and done that we will find a
way for you to be able to do your job and your members' job,
Mr. Judd and Sheriff Garrison the same for you and your deputy
sheriff associates. So while we have I think it appears, have
had some difficulties and challenges with implementing these
MOUs, we need to find a way to resolve them.
I want to associate myself with Mr. O'Rourke when he says
that you know if you see a challenge where people are stopping
you or delaying you from getting onto these lands, we need to
know about it. Because I will fight tooth and nail to make sure
you get what you need, because border security is very
important to me and to the people I represent and to the
homeland.
With that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Duncan. All right. Thank the Ranking Member.
The Chairman will recognize Mr. O'Rourke for 5 minutes.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to follow up
on the spirit of the hearing, as you stated, to find the facts
and make sure that we understand the situation.
For Mr. Judd, the El Paso sector within which is this new
National monument. Tell us how big that sector is, from where
to where east to west.
Mr. Judd. Wow. That is a very large sector. We are talking
all of New Mexico extending into Texas going all the way over
to the Big Bend area. It is a huge sector.
Mr. O'Rourke. How many miles if you had to guess----
Mr. Judd. I----
Mr. O'Rourke [continuing]. From point to point?
Mr. Judd. Honestly, I really couldn't guess. But I will
tell you. I believe land-wise I believe it is the biggest
sector and it is the biggest sector by a large margin on the
Southwest Border.
Mr. O'Rourke. Yes. I also understand and believe it is the
largest sector in El Paso, along with Ciudad Juaarez on the
other side, it was mentioned earlier by the sheriff, form the
largest binational community. If you take Donna Ana County and
you take El Paso County and you take Ciudad Juaarez we are
talking about 3 million people there; 22 million legitimate,
legal, proper documents crossings at the El Paso ports of entry
every year.
From 2008 to 2013 there were fewer than 12,000
apprehensions per year in that entire sector, which we have
agreed is the largest sector with the largest population base
next to one of the largest cities in Mexico. We heard this from
one of our experts earlier that by way of contrast, in the
early 1980s to early 1990s we saw somewhere around 230,000
apprehensions per year.
So it is safe, I think relative to other parts of the
border. It is safe relative to where it was 20 or 30 years ago.
It is safe relative to Washington, DC, to South Carolina, to
Arizona. Pick a point in this country. El Paso and the El Paso
sector are the safest part of the country.
I am sorry that you have constituents who don't feel
comfortable leaving their kids at home. Hopefully their kids
are at an age where they--you know it is okay to leave them at
home. But you know El Paso is a place where you can do that.
So I want to make sure, because we have been the recipient
of so much bad public policy based on bad information and
misplaced fears and anxiety, sometimes purposefully, sometimes
unwittingly stoked from Washington, DC, when really the truth
and the facts should prevail and determine what we do.
The facts as I understand them are El Paso and the El Paso
sector in Donna Ana, thanks to the great sheriff we have there,
are among the safest places in the country. We have record low
apprehensions in that area.
We are not taking down any Border Patrol or law enforcement
facilities that are on this land. We are not transferring this
land from local, county, or State control to Federal control.
It is going from Federal to Federal.
Access, which I have heard from the sheriff and Mr. Judd,
are the biggest issues. As far as I can tell there is no change
in the access today.
So this ridiculous proposition that we are somehow going to
take this land away from Border Patrol access and give it to
cartel access is just completely false and ridiculous. There is
absolutely no truth to it.
Let me read this. This comes directly from CBP's
commissioner, January of this year. ``Throughout the entire
buffer zone CBP can operate motor vehicles, build
infrastructure--build new infrastructure, and carry out other
activities as it would on any non-wilderness Bureau of Land
Management Land.''
Furthermore, the southernmost tip of the monument that we
are talking about today is 50 miles away from this very safe
border relative to other parts of the border.
So again, I appreciate the legitimate concern about
protecting the homeland. I want to make sure that we operate
with the facts. When we don't we get things like SBI where we
spend a billion-plus dollars on a solution that doesn't work to
patrol a part of the border that we do. The Arizona High Tech
Border Initiative with these fixed towers, hundreds of millions
of more wasted.
When we should be supporting the men and women of the
Border Patrol and law enforcement and allowing them access,
which we are going to do, and making sure that we make the best
evidence and fact-based decisions. Based on the facts that we
have today, we do not have a problem.
Should we have one, Mr. Judd and Sheriff Garrison, as my
colleague has said here, come to us. We will be your strongest
and most forceful advocates to ensure that any access that has
been denied is reopened. But I do not see a problem based on
the evidence today.
With that, I yield back. Thank you.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the gentleman. Gentleman yields back.
I recognize Mr. Bishop for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you.
Let me just ask two questions of Mr. Judd and then show a
map and give the quotes from the retired sector chief that is
down there who is now teaching, and then go through what I
think is the basis of the issue.
So first of all, Mr. Judd, I was at a meeting--panel with a
member of the Center for Biological Diversity, University of
Arizona, who said that we should not allow greater access to
the Border Patrol because the Border Patrol would devastate
this special land. How would you react to that?
Mr. Judd. It is upsetting.
Mr. Bishop. That is a good-enough word.
Let me do a second one. I should never ask a question
without knowing the answer, but I am going to do it this time.
If a Border Patrol Agent complains about the land manager, what
impact does that have on the future and the career of the
Border Patrol Agent?
Mr. Judd. It depends--the level of the agent. I have seen
some very, very good managers. In fact I am currently fighting
to keep the job of a very good manager that when they voice
their opinion they lose their job.
I am very concerned any time that I am testifying in a
hearing with a high-level manager because they can only say
what the administration wants them to say, whether that is a
Republican administration, whether that is a Democratic
administration. They have to stick to the line that the
administration wants them to say.
Mr. Bishop. That is an overriding problem that we have had
in--unless you talk to people who are retired or sometimes the
union.
I think the map here says something significant as we are
talking about what Border Patrol can and cannot do. The red is
public lands. The white is private property.
So when we are talking about Texas, you don't have a whole
lot of public lands there that are making a difference here. In
New Mexico it is almost all public land. It is not just the
monument that will be created. There is also a wilderness study
area underneath that monument that has the same restrictions as
the monument will have.
Once again, the monument has to be reorganized. The bottom
line is the issue of what we are going to do with those public
lands.
Let me give a quote from the retired sector chief that was
there when he said, ``This leads me to believe there is nothing
in the MOU that guarantees anything to the Border Patrol.''
``We need to learn from our previous mistakes of
designating protected land anywhere near the border. Those
protected lands just become a conduit for transnational
criminal organizations every time and in every place.''
``Only a person who does not care about the border security
would even consider designating or expanding a protected area
near the international border,'' which was seen in the Pearce
bill, which provided a patrol access buffer. It was seen in the
Senate bill where both Senators provided a patrol access border
area.@
It was not done in the President's declaration. Therein
lies the potential problem. The President did not do that. Had
the President actually gone through the NEPA process, as we
talked about before, in which he invited public comment, these
are the kinds of comments that should have been taken and
should have been part of that particular declaration.
So what is necessary in this area to ensure future
viability is: No. 1, there needs to be patrol access. Not just
emergency, exigent circumstances, but patrol access. It needs
to be for the Border Patrol and for local government.
The Senate Democrats had that concern. They recognized it.
The President did not. That becomes the significant aspect that
needs to as we go forward.
If you are going to make sure that this area is going to be
protected in the future, you need that kind of designation, and
you need it to be done legislatively, because right now it is
done by an MOU that has been in place for what, 12, 8 years
now? There are documents after documents, including a GAO
report which shows all the problems that have taken place with
the conflicts between that.
Homeland Security, I am sorry, is at a disadvantage in this
MOU. The MOU should definitely be redone and redone
significantly. There is I think abundant evidence to illustrate
that.
I am rambling on again here. I apologize for that. But I
stayed under the 2 minutes. I am done. I yield back.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Salmon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Salmon. Well thank you. Actually I just--I believe I
would like to make a couple points.
First of all, I think that our job as overseers of public
policy is to make sure that we at least provide a mechanism to
make sure that we do get it right. I don't like the idea of
waiting until we have a crisis to come back and try to fix the
problem.
I think that the gentleman from Utah has made some very,
very important and cogent comments about our role. Our role is
not to leave it to chance. Our role isn't to, you know, pass
the buck onto somebody else. Our role is to try to get it
right.
We represent the people. We are the people's House. We have
seen in the Arizona, comparable to the New Mexico National
designated lands, that we have had some severe problems with
trash and with things that have screwed up the environment. I
think it is just prudent for us to make sure that we have a
mechanism to provide our law enforcement the ability to do
their jobs.
I think that is being good stewards of the environment. I
think it is also being good stewards of our border. So I would
just like to echo the comments made by the gentleman from Utah.
I think that is a very modest proposal. I think it is
reasonable. I would encourage the Obama administration to take
those things to heart.
I yield back.
Mr. Duncan. I thank the gentleman.
I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony
and the Members for their questions. The Members of the
subcommittee may have some additional questions for the
witnesses, and we ask you to respond to these in writing.
I hope you are right, Mr. O'Rourke. I would love to see the
El Paso best practices put in place in Brownsville and in
McAllen and elsewhere, areas that aren't as safe as El Paso. If
it works in El Paso, let's make it work other places.
I hope that Organ Mountain doesn't follow the Organ Pipe
National Monument example. So we are going to continue to
oversight. I think that is the responsible act of Congress and
I think that is why this hearing was so important for us today.
I want to thank the other Members of Congress for
participating, because I know it is a vested concern for the
folks in Arizona, and the gentleman that understands National
parks and National monuments has a vested concern for the
Nation.
So that will conclude this subcommittee hearing. Without
objection the subcommittee will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X I
----------
Statement of John Cornell on Behalf of the New Mexico Wildlife
Federation
July 10, 2014
Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Thompson, my name is John
Cornell and I am a sportsman organizer for the New Mexico Wildlife
Federation. I am submitting this statement for today's hearing on
behalf of the 19,000 New Mexico sportsmen and sportswomen we represent.
The New Mexico Wildlife Federation was established in 1914 by Aldo
Leopold and other conservation-minded sportsmen concerned about the
future of hunting and fishing in our State. Our organization helped
rebuild decimated populations of elk, antelope, bighorn sheep, and wild
turkeys. We convinced our State Legislature to create a professional,
apolitical Department of Game and Fish to manage our wildlife. We
helped establish the world's first wilderness area, the Gila
Wilderness. Over the course of a century we have remained true to our
roots, working to protect New Mexico's wildlife, habitat, and our
hunting and fishing traditions.
Sportsmen in southern New Mexico have been involved in discussions
about protecting crucial hunting areas around Las Cruces for more than
20 years. In the early 1980s, the Bureau of Land Management identified
wilderness study areas in the region including the Potrillo Mountains,
Robledo Mountains, Organ Mountains, and Sierra de Las Uvas. Many of our
members who grew up in Las Cruces learned to hunt in these areas and
knew them inside and out, including where they were likely to find
dove, quail, mule deer, javelina, and the occasional pronghorn
antelope.
Most hunters embraced the idea of permanently protecting these
areas to ensure that future generations could hunt, hike, and camp on
public lands close to Las Cruces, which today is New Mexico's second-
largest city. We did have concerns about access to some of the areas,
but after working with the offices of then-Senators Pete Domenici and
Jeff Bingaman the wilderness proposal was amended to our satisfaction.
After many years of trying unsuccessfully to get wilderness
designation for these areas through Congress, sportsmen agreed to push
instead for a National monument. We helped shape the monument proposal,
as well, working with other stakeholders to craft a plan that had wide-
spread support in our community. We supported the National monument
legislation introduced by Sens. Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich, and
applauded the decision by President Obama to use his Executive
authority to designate Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument
in May.
Border security is not our field of expertise, but after attending
more than 20 years of meetings about all aspects of the wilderness and
monument proposals, sportsmen have not yet heard anything that
convinces us border security will be compromised by designation of
Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. Claims have been raised
about how the monument could limit access by law enforcement agents and
increase illegal activity, but after listening to both sides in the
discussion we believe those concerns have been fully answered by the
U.S. Customs and Border Patrol.
Furthermore, those of us who actually drive these roads and hike
the hills and valleys know how tough the monument area is and what kind
of activity occurs there. We spend more time in that country than any
other group and know from decades of experience that illegal border
activity is not an issue. Unlike some portions of the U.S.-Mexico
border, sportsmen around Las Cruces have no fear about camping, hiking,
and hunting in the areas that are now part of Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument. When representatives of the U.S. Customs and
Border Patrol say the agency can protect the integrity of our border,
we believe them.
In summation, sportsmen in southern New Mexico strongly support
designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument
because it will protect areas that we have hunted in for generations.
We do not have any concerns about border security.
______
Letter Submitted By Honorable Ron Barber
July 10, 2014.
The Honorable Jeff Duncan,
Chair, House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight and Management
Efficiency, H2-176 Ford House Office Building, Washington, DC
20515.
The Honorable Ron Barber,
Ranking Member, House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight and
Management Efficiency, United States House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20215.
Dear Chairman Duncan and Ranking Member Barber: The Wilderness
Society, on behalf of our over 500,000 members and supporters from
across the country, would like to submit the following testimony to be
entered into the record for the July 10, 2014, hearing entitled ``The
Executive Proclamation Designating the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks a
National Monument: Implications for Border Security.''
The Wilderness Society supports the protection of the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks and President Obama's proclamation protecting
the area as a national monument. The President's proclamation came as a
direct response to requests from the local community to protect the
area as a national monument as part of over a decade of local input.
The decision to protect the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks area as a
national monument was not arrived to in haste and has been thoroughly
vetted by the local community. The effort to officially protect this
stunning landscape began with former Senator Jeff Bingaman almost a
decade ago and was continued by Sens. Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich.
During the process of crafting the legislation, the community was
substantially involved and key stakeholders--including law enforcement
and border experts--were consulted and offered opportunities to provide
input. The local community strongly supported the Senators efforts to
protect the area as a national monument, with polling consistently
showing almost 3 out of 4 local residents supportive of the proposal.
Protecting the area as a national monument has also been endorsed by
over 200 local businesses as well as numerous local governments
including the Donna Ana County Commission, and the city and town
councils of Las Cruces, El Paso, and Mesilla.
The President's proclamation creating the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument was created based on this widely supported and
locally-driven legislation. Polling conducted following the President's
proclamation showed that New Mexico residents continue to support
protecting the area, with 75% of residents supportive of the
President's action.
I was involved with the effort to protect this area for several
years and personally grew up hiking and exploring these public lands,
and this new monument status preserves the outdoor heritage of the area
and ensures continued access for hunting, grazing, and outdoor
recreation. I personally witnessed the substantial public involvement
that went into creating the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National
Monument, a decision that will boost southern New Mexico's economy and
protect our culture and way of life for generations to come.
While The Wilderness Society is not an expert on border security,
we can defer to those who are. U.S. Customs and Border Protection--the
agency responsible for patrolling and securing our border--sent a
letter to Senator Heinrich thanking him for his border security efforts
in the legislation and stating ``the provisions of this bill would
significant enhance the flexibility of U.S. Customs and Border
Protection to operate in this border area''. Following the President's
proclamation U.S. Customs and Border Protection reiterated their
position by issuing a statement saying that ``this designation will in
no way limit our ability to perform our important border security
mission, and in fact provides important flexibility as we work to meet
this on-going priority . . . CBP is committed to continuing to work
closely with the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service
to maintain border security while ensuring the protection of the
environment along the border.''
Additionally, the monument proclamation signed by President Obama
clearly states, ``Nothing in this proclamation shall be deemed to
affect the provisions of the 2006 Memorandum of Understanding between
the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Department of the
Interior, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture regarding `Cooperative
National Security and Counterterrorism Efforts on Federal Lands along
the United States' Borders'.''
Local law enforcement officials such as Sheriff Raymond Cobos of
Luna County, New Mexico, have already stated publicly that the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument will not create security
issues or hinder law enforcement personnel from doing their jobs.
Third-party groups with national security expertise have also weighed
in to support the national monument including the Vet Voice Foundation
and Truman National Security Project. Additionally, on June 18th a
letter praising the designation and refuting these false border
security attacks was sent the President on behalf of 70 retired
generals from various military branches.
There is not currently an issue in this area with illegal
immigration and trafficking. According to the Albuquerque Journal, the
Santa Teresa station of Border Patrol's El Paso Sector apprehended only
13 illegal immigrants south of the Potrillo Mountains in Fiscal Year
2009. This was 0.1 percent of the 14,999 total apprehensions in the El
Paso Sector, which covers the entire state of New Mexico and the two
western-most counties in Texas. In the same year the Tucson sector had
241,673 apprehensions. Comparing this sector to the Tucson sector would
be inaccurate and misleading. The area south of the Potrillos has been
protected as a Wilderness Study Area since the Reagan administration
and nothing in this designation will change the ability of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to conduct their current level of security
activities. The fact is, this region has never been a major security
risk and nothing in the management plan for the newly designated
national monument will change this reality.
The Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument protects
incredible scenic, natural, and historic sites including the
petroglyph-lined canyons of the Sierra de las Uvas Mountains and the
sites of numerous well-known western historical figures and events
including Billy the Kid, Geronimo, and the Camino Real and Butterfield
Stage Coach Trails. Protecting this area as a national monument was a
victory for the local community.
Over the course of the past decade the community has worked with
then-Senator Jeff Bingaman and Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich
to arrive upon a consensus for appropriate boundaries that adequately
protect the natural and cultural areas important to the community while
maintaining security and access for ranching, law enforcement and other
existing uses. The community has also had the opportunity to discuss
the proposal with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell during a public
meeting in January 2014 attended by nearly 1,000 local residents. This
local input process resulted in an overwhelmingly locally-supported
proposal that is endorsed by the local elected officials responsible
for the well-being of local constituents as well as the agency
responsible for securing our border.
This overwhelming local support and statements of support from the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Truman National Security Project,
Vet Voice Foundation, military leaders, and relevant local governments
including the Donna Ana County Commission would be impossible if this
action were in any way detrimental to the safety and security of our
border and local communities.
Efforts to use false border security ``concerns'' are a transparent
attempt to use fear-mongering tactics as a way to attack a locally-
driven conservation victory. We urge this committee to respect the
analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and wishes of the local
community by refusing to engage in unnecessary and inflammatory
rhetoric based on false arguments.
Sincerely,
Michael Casaus,
New Mexico Director, The Wilderness Society.
A P P E N D I X I I
----------
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Brandon Judd
Question 1a. Mr. Judd, how many Border Patrol Agents from the El
Paso Sector are assigned to patrol the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks
Monument?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 1b. Should the number of existing agents either be
increased or decreased, and why?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2a. Is there a specific Border Patrol station in the El
Paso Sector that is significant in protecting the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks Monument?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2b. Does the designation of the National monument call for
increased resources from the El Paso Sector to facilitate border
security?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 3. How does the President's designation differ from other
legislative proposals that have been offered by Representative Pearce
who introduced H.R. 995, and by Senators Heinrich and Udall who
introduced S. 1805?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 4. Can the Border Patrol's law enforcement's efforts at
the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument be influenced by the
Department of Interior's management of the monument under its general
authorities, including those in the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 5. New Mexico and Arizona do not have the same issues in
managing illegal border crossings, especially on Federal lands, yet the
difference in attempted border crossings has been stated otherwise.
What evidence can be presented to the committee to indicate that New
Mexico, specifically the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument
is at risk for increased illegal border crossings and other activities?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 6. How does the President's designation affect border
security in the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks region?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 7. How does border security in southern New Mexico compare
to other regions of the Southwest Border?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 8. How might the establishment of the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks National Monument influence the southbound movement of
money and weapons into Mexico?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 9a. How does the designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument affect the level of interagency cooperation
necessary to patrol the land it includes?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 9b. Or, will the monument's designation improve, impede,
or have no impact on fostering interagency efforts between DHS and the
Departments of Agriculture and the Interior?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 10. In what way might the designation of the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument further limit the cross-
deputization of Federal agents?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 11. Are there particular environmental protections or
rules granted by Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks' designation as a
monument that could constrain the Border Patrol's activity in the area?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Todd Garrison
Question 1. Sheriff Garrison, in what ways might the designation of
the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument change the policing
environment in this area?
Answer. From the beginning, our agency has asked for clarification
on this very subject. My answer to this is: I do not know yet. I have
asked to meet with Senators Heinrich and Udall to ensure that our
agency will continue to have unfettered access to the areas that we
currently patrol--up to and including the monument area.
Question 2. Sheriff Garrison, how were local and State law
enforcement agencies able to patrol the area prior to the lands'
designation as a National monument?
Answer. The Donna Ana County Sheriff's Office has a patrol division
and a special projects division that utilized motorized vehicles and
off-road ATVs to properly patrol the area and monitor for cross-border
illegal activity. Our access to these areas is critical to monitor this
activity; historically we know that what affects our county today will
affect other areas in the United States within 24 hours.
Question 3. How does the President's designation differ from other
legislative proposals that have been offered by Representative Pearce
who introduced H.R. 995, and by Senators Heinrich and Udall who
introduced S. 1805?
Answer. Geography is the best example of the differences between
both proposals. Originally, Rep. Pearce suggested the Organ Mountains--
the spherical, iconic peaks that have been used in video campaigns for
this designation--desperately needed to be protected from further
development. No one has disputed this. Since that proposal, Senators
Heinrich and Udall have taken the Organs and added to them every other
mountain range in Donna Ana County: The Robledos, the Las Uvas, the
Potrillos, and the Donna Ana mountains. Most of those areas fall within
our jurisdiction, but we have not been included in any of the
discussions on how the monument designation would affect our agency's
ability to continue protecting the public. The Potrillos already
enjoyed a wilderness designation--the highest level of protection you
can give to an area from public access.
Question 4. Can the Border Patrol's law enforcement efforts at the
Organ Mountains Desert-Peaks National Monument be influenced by the
Department of Interiors' management of the monument under its general
authorities, including those in the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 5. New Mexico and Arizona do not have the same issues in
managing illegal border crossings, especially on Federal lands, yet the
difference in attempted border crossings has been stated otherwise.
What evidence can be presented to the committee to indicate that New
Mexico, specifically the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument
is at risk for increased illegal border crossings and other activities?
Answer. As was presented to the House Homeland Security
Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency on July 10, 2014,
our agency has intercepted many pieces of evidence that suggests
illegal cross-border activity is still a very real problem in the
desert areas we patrol in Donna Ana County. We have every reason to
believe that this monument designation will provide an unmonitored
corridor for this type of activity to skyrocket, much as it has done in
Arizona in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. Why would it not?
This is what everyone on the southern side of the U.S./Mexico border
wants: A straight shot into the United States that is free from law
enforcement security.
Question 6. How does the President's designation affect border
security in the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks region?
Answer. See question 1. I can say that without the ability to
effectively patrol this border area (with unfettered access), all one
has to do is look at what is currently happening in the other border
designated areas in TX and AZ. I believe this designation would be no
different; we will experience the same problems.
Question 7. How does border security in southern New Mexico compare
to other regions of the Southwest Border?
Answer. Our proximity to Ciudad Juaarez, Mexico is one very real
difference. Once ranked as the most dangerous city in the world, we
have been proactive in maintaining front-line patrols in our desert
regions to prevent cross-border fallout from that part of Mexico. We
also have private ranches along the U.S./Mexico border that have been
impacted by illegal cross-border criminal activity.
Question 8. How might the establishment of the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks National Monument influence the southbound movement of
money and weapons into Mexico?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 9. How does the designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument affect the level of interagency cooperation
necessary to patrol the land it includes?
Or, will the monument's designation improve, impede, or have no
impact on fostering interagency efforts between DHS and the Departments
of Agriculture and the Interior?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 10. In what way might the designation of the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument further limit the cross-
deputization of Federal agents?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 11. Are there particular environmental protections or
rules granted by Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks' designation as a
monument that could constrain the Border Patrol's activity in the area?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 12. Given that the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks monument
designation does not greatly alter the on-going management of these
Federal lands, and the monument's southern boundary is about 5 miles
from the United States' border with Mexico []
Answer. I'm not sure what this question is asking? However, please
do not be fooled by the 5-mile expanse from the border to the monument,
this will not make things better. As it is now, people are able to
cross the border and can easily drive or be driven to the boundary of
the monument from El Paso, TX, ``one of the safest cities around'', as
stated by Congressman Beto O'Rourke.
Using GPS, a low-flying ultra-light can easily drop a load of drugs
in the desert which is then picked up and carried to its destination.
A load of people can be driven to the boundary of the monument and
then walk, crossing the monument to their destination.
The real problem is without active patrols in the monument,
criminals will continue to be the ones with unfettered access and the
5-mile buffer will stop nothing.
Questions From Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson for Marc R. Rosenblum
Question 1a. Dr. Rosenblum, how might the establishment of the
Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument influence the threat
posed by transnational criminal organizations smuggling drugs into the
United States?
In what ways might the monument's designation make it either easier
or more difficult for transnational criminal organizations to smuggle
drugs or other contraband into the United States?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 1b. Would Mexican transnational criminal organizations
experience either an advantage or disadvantage as a result of the
monument?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2. Dr. Rosenblum, how could the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument potentially affect the actions of Mexican
transnational criminal organizations?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 3. How does the President's designation differ from other
legislative proposals that have been offered by Representative Pearce
who introduced H.R. 995, and by Senators Heinrich and Udall who
introduced S. 1805?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 4. Can the Border Patrol's law enforcement's efforts at
the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument be influenced by the
Department of Interior's management of the monument under its general
authorities, including those in the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 5. New Mexico and Arizona do not have the same issues in
managing illegal border crossings, especially on Federal lands, yet the
difference in attempted border crossings has been stated otherwise.
What evidence can be presented to the committee to indicate that New
Mexico, specifically the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument
is at risk for increased illegal border crossings and other activities?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 6. How does the President's designation affect border
security in the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks region?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 7. How does border security in southern New Mexico compare
to other regions of the Southwest Border?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 8. How might the establishment of the Organ Mountains-
Desert Peaks National Monument influence the southbound movement of
money and weapons into Mexico?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 9. How does the designation of the Organ Mountains-Desert
Peaks National Monument affect the level of interagency cooperation
necessary to patrol the land it includes?
Or, will the monument's designation improve, impede, or have no
impact on fostering interagency efforts between DHS and the Departments
of Agriculture and the Interior?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 10. In what way might the designation of the Organ
Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument further limit the cross-
deputization of Federal agents?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 11. Are there particular environmental protections or
rules granted by Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks' designation as a
monument that could constrain the Border Patrol's activity in the area?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.