Posted on 07/29/2010 5:38:40 AM PDT by VaqueroViejo
Mr. Miller recently reported on S.1689, Senator Bingaman's bill which would designate over a quarter million acres of wilderness on or near our border with Mexico. In that report he stated:
"To address the border region's unique security challenges, they say, the legislation creates nearly three miles of non-wilderness buffer and an additional 2-mile "restricted use area" that would prohibit motor vehicle access by the public. But CBP agents will have access to conduct routine patrols and build surveillance infrastructure, as they would on regular multiple-use land. (Currently, the existing area provides CBP agents with one-third of a mile in which to perform their activities.)"
Miller seems to think the Border Patrol will have more access if the Bingaman bill passes. However, what he has written is not factual.
The lands under discussion are currently designated as Wilderness Study Areas (WSA). These areas are managed according to BLM's Interim Management Policy for Lands under Wilderness Review. That policy states, “existing facilities/uses which did not disqualify the area from wilderness inventory may remain.” The Border Patrol was regularly patrolling these areas before they were designated as WSAs and under the quoted policy continue to do so today.
So the Border Patrol currently has vehicular access to all of the lands, not to just "one-third of a mile" as Miller states.
If Bingaman's bill becomes law, the Border Patrol will have vehicular access to only 5 miles of territory, and will be denied vehicular access to 259,000 acres or 400 square miles.
The Border Patrol's ability to carry out it's mission will be drasticly reduced, not increased under the Bingaman proposal and Miller should correct his error.
Fox News has done an excellent job in reporting on how protected federal lands restrict the Border Patrol and threaten border security, so I was surprised to see this story by Miller which gives over twice the coverage to the proponents of wilderness as he does to those who seek a less restrictive designation (344 words to 160 words). I would have expected a more accurate and balanced report from Fox.
To really see what S. 1689 will do to border security and public safety, watch the short video The Perfect Drug Smuggling Corridor. There you will see the criteria for the perfect corridor (according to the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers) and how Bingaman's bill provides the final leg, much to New Mexico and our nation's detriment.
Fox News aka News Corp is at least 7% owned by Saudi Arabia and they are not our friends. They other networks are far far worse.
They’ve been decent on this issue, at least till Miller’s piece.
I think you may be misinterpreting the statements. There are no roads to access ALL of the lands.........
They’ve been decent on this issue, at least till Miller’s piece.
*sniff*
They have vehicular access to all of the current WSAs. The only prohibition would be geography, not the law.
Thanks. Been here before but couldn’t remember my password.
The area they are talking about is vast and unpopulated and yes, the BP has access to it all right now. I think this is some kind of sop to former Senator Pete Domenici and most non-envirowhackos in NM think it should just stay the way it is.
It is already remote and inaccessible to most vehicle traffic.
By “vehicular access”, do you mean off-road 4WD access?.............
Yes but BP uses 4-wheelers and can access most of it.
You can request it to be sent to your e-mail address.
When Domenici was still in office, he and Bingaman couldn’t agree on a bill, so it wasn’t introduced.
Now that Domenici is gone, Bingaman is pushing it hard.
Make no mistake, this is Bingaman’s baby.
What was your previous 'name'?
The Wilderness Act states,”there shall be no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area.”
As I explained, there is no such prohibition in the Wilderness Study Areas.
I’m told the BP sticks to existing roads when they can, and only go off-road when necessary.
This policy also applies to ranchers, who currently can use the roads to maintain range improvements, etc. but will be prohibited from doing so if it becomes wilderness.
cowpoke.
I never received the email
cowpoke
Since Sep 5, 1999
You might ask one of the Mods how to get your password... After being around this long, I’d want to hang on to my Freeper history.
Good point...how do I contact a moderator?
What the Hell does your comment have to do with this article?
I assume hiking is okay?...............
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.