Does Environmental Impact Trump Border Security?

By Tom Remington

The United States is a sovereign country. To remain that way, we must control who comes and goes. The people voted that we wanted to secure our borders particularly between the U.S. and Mexico where an estimated 12 million illegal aliens have infiltrated our country through the southwest border. That’s 12 million people in this country that we know nothing about.

I’ve covered a few stories about the environmental impact being felt in border areas of the southwest.

Illegal Immigration Is “Garbage”!
Scientists Want To Protect Wildlife By Opposing Border Wall In The Southwest.
What Illegal Immigration And Drug Smuggling Is Doing To The Southwest’s Wildlife
There’s More To Illegal Immigration Than Crossing the Border
A Different Affect From Illegal Aliens

Illegals crossing the borders between the U.S. and Mexico are completely destroying the habitat of just about every species of animal and plant living in that area, yet what do we hear about that from the environmentalists? Nothing really!

Instead we see a campaign by organizations such as Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity on what impact putting up a fence will have on animals and vegetation.

The people voted to have a fence built to stop the flow of illegals from Mexico into the United States. Now Homeland Security is proposing a virtual fence, with towers, sensors and lights. What happened to the fence?

Before a virtual fence or any other fence for that matter can be erected, Homeland Security must conduct public hearings and receive written comments from people about the environmental impact. As would be expected, DOW and CBD showed up to voice their opposition to a virtual fence.

In a one-sided, Bush hating biased article in the Tuscon Citizen, a spokesperson for the Center for Biological Diversity reveals which is more important, protecting our national security of worrying about a long-nosed bat.

Greta Anderson, conservation advocate from the Center for Biological Diversity, was most concerned about damage to plants and animals.
She said there is more to assessing environmental impact than trying to avoid harming endangered species. It also includes protecting habitat to help the species recover.
She said the area has a range of wildlife that traverse the border, including many endangered species, from the lesser long-nosed bat to the jaguar.

There was even complaining that light pollution would hinder star gazing in the area.

As I pointed out in previous articles, not one of these groups has had a thing to say about the destruction caused to the environment from the illegals living in the desert while waiting to be transported to a work destination. They leave behind tons of waste, garbage and human waste, that is killing plants. This out of control land destruction is taking away the valuable habitat of our wild species yet not a word from these groups. It clearly shows their interest lies more in providing for illegal aliens than protecting wildlife.

As hunters and outdoor enthusiasts, we all want to see our wild species protected. After all, we would have nothing left to hunt if we all didn’t do our part to conserve our game species. We are now presented with a decision. Do we compromise the security of our nation during a time that we are at war with terrorists whose aim it is to kill Americans, in order to prevent disturbing the wildlife in an area that is already being destroyed by the activities of illegals?

It is my understanding that Homeland Security has already modified the “wall” in favor of a virtual fence in order to minimize the environmental impact of the area. We must question whether or not resorting to a virtual fence is really in the best interest of our national security. I question whether the people are even aware that this change is being proposed.

Tom Remington