Border Patrol Meeting Summary
May 1, 2008
On Thursday, April 10, the Arivaca Community Center hosted the Border Patrol for the latest in a series of meetings on local border issues. Several officials from the Tucson Sector attended as well as the Director of the SBInet field offices in Washington, D.C. Tom King. Some highlights of the meeting:
The Border Patrol does not have any current plans for and is not actively seeking to place a station in Arivaca. They were looking into it in the past fueling much speculation.
The Project 28 towers, though called a “successful” experiment, will be scrapped and replaced with new towers in the same area, though not necessarily in the same exact locations. Director King said that technology has dramatically improved since way back in October of 2006 and the towers will be rebuilt from the ground up. The new towers will feature portable, pre-formed concrete bases without guy wires, solar power with generators used only as backup, and cameras and radar now being used on mobile truck units. Microwave communications will replace P28′s satellite communications. $64 million of custom software will tie it all together.
Boeing is still the lead contractor for the towers and for the SBInet as a whole. Border Patrol officials didn’t know if there are any performance requirements in any of the task orders for the new towers. In fact, the new towers were described by one official as another test, another experiment. The new towers are expected to be in place by the end of 2008. Any existing towers will come down afterward. The Arivaca Surveillance Tower may be moved depending on its operational capability said Director King. It did not perform well in the P28 system. Then again, the entire system did not perform to expectations.
As with the P28 system, the Border Patrol called the Sasabe fence a success even while admitting that people can get past it and it must be manned to be effective. Those who have analyzed barriers and surveillance used to secure borders point out that they are much more effective at keeping people in than keeping them out. The Border Patrol concurred when they said the real advantage was in apprehending crossers trying to get back over the wall after being spotted. They said the number of people seen crossing is down dramatically in the area of the fence but did not address the fact that most simply go around it.
There are plans to build a vehicle barrier along the border from the east end of the Sasabe fence into the National Forest, perhaps all the way to Flat Top Mountain east of California Gulch and just short of Sycamore Canyon. The barrier would be of the rail on post type, similar to the one at Organ Pipe National Monument. A substantial construction road would accompany the barrier along the border in the National Forest. The project has not been funded yet, however, and it is not known when it will be built.
The Border Patrol said they intend to do environmental assessments and mitigation even though the Real ID Act waiver of environmental regulations has been invoked. It is not clear if any assessments will be public ally available. Presumably, no project would be stopped because of environmental concerns.
A special meeting will be arranged with the branch of CBP that operates the helicopters to address issues that many residents have with their operations.
It is the intention of the Community and the Border Patrol to meet more often to discuss issues, perhaps quarterly.
Thanks to Mary Scott for arranging and moderating this meeting.
Copyright 2008 Peter Ragan
Comments
2 Responses to “Border Patrol Meeting Summary”
Got something to say?
I appreciate your article updating the current status re: border patrol plans.
For your interest and that of your readers I want to share a link to a lecture by Wendy Brown, a professor of political science at the University of California, which she gave at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
http://www.resistnetwork.com/research/interviews#Prof_Wendy_Brown_-_Why_do_people_desire_walls
In the lecture she explains why walls and fences basically do not work.
“The list of walls she gave is absolutely alarming, especially considered that she focused on the ones that have risen since the much celebrated fall of the Berlin Wall: the U.S. border with Mexico and the Israeli West Bank barrier (these two share high technology, sub-contracting and they also reference each other for legitimation), Post-Apartheid South Africa’s internal maze of walls and check point, Saudi Arabia concrete structure along its border with Yemen, India’s reinforced border with Pakistan and Bengladesh, Botswana’s electric fence along the border with Zimbabwe, the wall between Egypt and Gaza, etc. But also walls within walls: gated communities so popular in the U.S. (in particular in Southern Californian communities living closer to the Mexico border), walls around Israel settlements in West Bank, walls around the Museum of Tolerance in Jerusalem and the walls that partition the city itself, the triple layer of walls around Spanish enclaves in Morocco, the wall of Via Anelli inside the Italian city of Padua that separate white middle class with immigrants living in an “African ghetto” (i’d recommend Italian readers the documentary Stato di Paura, you can find the trailer here), the Baghdad wall built by the U.S. military, etc. The list goes on and on and the analysis Brown makes of the phenomenon is thought-provoking. I can’t recommend enough the audio file of Prof. Brown’s lecture.”
Reprinted from “Why Do People Desire Walls?” Regine Debatty, June 22, 2009 9:39 AM; http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/010021.html
Oops! I didn’t realize this article was from 2008. Are there current updates?