28 October 2010 Report: Border Security Not Harmed by Wild Lands protection Posted by: James Navarro | 2 comments | Share: The 670-mile-long border wall blocks wildlife migration NEW STUDY: Wildlife protections and border security are possible Listen to Defenders’ Matt Clark on Public News Service Radio. By Doug Ramsey, Public News Service – AZ TUCSON, Ariz. – A bill in Congress would exempt Border Patrol agents from observing federal rules protecting public lands along the border. Sponsor Rob Bishop of Utah says the rules hinder national security. But a new report states the contrary: that collaboration among federal land management agencies and Homeland Security is actually helping those agencies pursue their missions. “The protection of our border and the protection of our public lands can be mutually supportive, but the essential ingredient to achieving these win-wins is strong inter-agency consultation and collaboration,” Defenders’ Southwest representative, Matt Clark, says. Report author Dr. Kirk Emerson, University of Arizona School of Government and Public Policy, found many examples where the agencies worked together to protect wilderness and wildlife habitat while helping secure the border. “They’ve cooperated by simply assuring interoperability between radio systems or by enhancing their joint capacity to manage along the border, by coordinating information on the location of illegal entrants or conducting cross-training on security measures or wildlife habitat.” Cooperation leads to fewer illegal border crossings Learn more about the border wall's impacts on wildlands Former U.S. Border Patrol deputy chief Ron Colburn says much of his agency’s success in reducing illegal border crossings, such as a 90-percent reduction in the Yuma sector over the last five years, is the result of inter-agency collaboration and cooperation. “We truly could not have done it without the help of the Department of Interior, Department of Agriculture, Department of Defense, and the local, state and tribal agencies that all reach out and help in protecting America.” Former deputy Interior secretary Lynn Scarlett says her department routinely assisted Homeland Security in the performance of their basic mission. Matt Clark, Southwest representative “For example, at Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge in Arizona, we facilitated the use of a Fish and Wildlife Service airstrip at the refuge by Border Patrol.” Matt Clark with Defenders of Wildlife, Tucson, says the report shows federal land management restrictions are not impeding border security. “The protection of our border and the protection of our public lands can be mutually supportive, but the essential ingredient to achieving these win-wins is strong inter-agency consultation and collaboration.” The report generally echoes a recent study from the Government Accountability Office that also documented increased collaboration among the Border Patrol and federal land management agencies. The report is available at http://kirk_emerson.home.mindspring.com/Interagency_Border_Cooperation.pdf. Learn more about the Public News Service. 2 Responses to “Report: Border Security Not Harmed by Wild Lands protection” Barbara Bussell October 29th, 2010 Border Patrol and Wildlife need to work together. Defenders of Wildlife and others are trying to save wildlife. Especially the Wolves. Post Your Comment Click here to cancel reply. Name (required) Mail (required) (will not be published) You May also be interested in Wolf Weekly Wrap-up In Court for Wyoming’s Wolves; Things Get Worse in Idaho; Delisting Comment Period Closed; Seattle Citizen Hearing A Shark Workshop As part of an international effort to cut down on the devastating impact of the fin trade on shark species, Defenders helped organize a shark identification workshop in Brazil,attended by officials from countries all over the continent. Washington Wolf Supporters Howl for Wolf Recovery & Oppose Stripping Federal Protections In advance of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to strip federal protection for most gray wolves in the contiguous 48 states, the Agency denied Washingtonians the opportunity to testify in opposition by refusing to hold a public hearing in the Pacific Northwest. This did not go over well in Washington! In fact, over 100 citizens decided to host their own hearing on Sunday December 15th to oppose stripping federal protections for gray wolves.