DOD seizes 100,000+ acres of BLM land along Mexican border

[elkhunter505]

DOD seizes land

I haven’t seen a map but I know a couple insiders and from what I hear, sounds like a 3 mile wide strip along the entirety of the NM border with Mexico. Prime coues deer country for those with a 26 or 27 tag that has been seized. No public access allowed, I would guess this will also impact ranchers who are running their cattle along that portion of the border.

Also I’m guessing they may try eminent domain on the private land in that stretch. Not sure if that will be the case or not but might be something to keep in mind.

 

[Packin_packout]

This is going to get interesting...expect to see same thing in az. I have not hunted that area of new mexico but in arizona last year down by the refuge it was the usual tons of backpacks and black water cans. Found 3 ID cards and turned them in. Only excitement on this trip was two cbp officers rolling up on quads saying hey we got a couple of guys toting ak's in this canyon....you might want to find somewhere else to be! Will see what this spring brings!

 

[CJ19]

Perhaps the time to address public land issues related to the southern border is when the unchecked illegal activity was occurring there. That illegal activity impacting wildlife and public land users a like. That illegal activity fully known to the public and government officials in power at the time. I did not see a single article about how illegal immigration was bad for hunters, public land users, or wildlife in that region. Not from NGOs like Wilderness Society, Theodore Roosevelt Prtnetshp, or Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Not from advocates like Randy Newberg or Meateater (if so i missed it). Not from public land advocates in elected office. Why? So now that someone is putting a stop to the illegal activity, its an issue?

This is a perfect example of what I typed in multiple threads for years now. Hunters and people in general care about public lands until they are not a priority. Very few people are going to make a public lands a priority when they see a threat to the country and their families futures. So the time to say something is when the issues was occurring, not once the problem has become so bad drastic measures are warranted.

 

[RyanT26]

Good! If that’s what they need to effectively police the boarder then I’m all for it. A safe and secure border is more important to me than going down there and shooting essentially what is a year-old white tail.I don’t see why it would affect ranching operations.

 

[flyfisher117]

Hopefully this does something to "protect the border" I won't hold my breath though.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Hopefully this does something to "protect the border" I won't hold my breath though.

As some that hunts border and has friends with ranches along the border, the current administration as done an outstanding job curbing traffic. With that said a large part of that is just changing the perception to “you aren’t welcome, don’t come”,

The bad bad still come across but not as easy as they aren’t cloaked in the swarms anymore.

I’ve never understood stood the lack of a buffer, but with this, any one caught in a military zone now has no ability to declare asylum due to the Felony trespass, it’s an additional big charge to smugglers also, not to mention the easier ability to justify force. Cartel takes pop shots and it’s no longer hold your fire…

If you look at onx the majority of the AZ border is already federal in some forum so I image it will be next

 

[Ten Bears]

Perhaps the time to address public land issues related to the southern border is when the unchecked illegal activity was occurring there. That illegal activity impacting wildlife and public land users a like. That illegal activity fully known to the public and government officials in power at the time. I did not see a single article about how illegal immigration was bad for hunters, public land users, or wildlife in that region. Not from NGOs like Wilderness Society, Theodore Roosevelt Prtnetshp, or Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. Not from advocates like Randy Newberg or Meateater (if so i missed it). Not from public land advocates in elected office. Why? So now that someone is putting a stop to the illegal activity, its an issue?

This is a perfect example of what I typed in multiple threads for years now. Hunters and people in general care about public lands until they are not a priority. Very few people are going to make a public lands a priority when they see a threat to the country and their families futures. So the time to say something is when the issues was occurring, not once the problem has become so bad drastic measures are warranted.

again you are completely correct.

you did forget one caveat. the reason you really don’t hear from those organizations or people about illegal issues is they aren’t getting paid or subsidized to say it. they are all grifters.

 

[Legend]

DOD seizes land

I haven’t seen a map but I know a couple insiders and from what I hear, sounds like a 3 mile wide strip along the entirety of the NM border with Mexico. Prime coues deer country for those with a 26 or 27 tag that has been seized. No public access allowed, I would guess this will also impact ranchers who are running their cattle along that portion of the border.

Also I’m guessing they may try eminent domain on the private land in that stretch. Not sure if that will be the case or not but might be something to keep in mind.

There are approximately 156 sq miles in 100,000 acres. So at 3 miles wide it would only be 52 miles long.

 

[elkhunter505]

There are approximately 156 sq miles in 100,000 acres. So at 3 miles wide it would only be 52 miles long.

I think that may be because there is a considerable amount of private in that same stretch. No one from BLM has seen a map yet so we’ll see what it comes to in the future. They also revoked bird hunting along the border for 62 miles south of El Paso unfortunately. I am certain there will be a lot of hunters that are upset about that specifically.

 

[Ozarkansas]

Not from advocates like Randy Newberg or Meateater

Meateater definitely talked about illegal inmigration- not within the context of public lands but moreso just Rinella complaining about it. He talked about it a lot leading up to the election.

Anyway, from that one article, this doesnt bother me as much as selloffs. It’s better for wildlife than a physical wall, it’s temporary (for now) and there remains the possibility that they will allow permitted hunting in the future like other military sites do.

I don’t love it, but to me this is 100x better than a border wall and a is legitimate restriction to put on federal lands on the southern border.

 

[elkhunter505]

As some that hunts border and has friends with ranches along the border, the current administration as done an outstanding job curbing traffic. With that said a large part of that is just changing the perception to “you aren’t welcome, don’t come”,

The bad bad still come across but not as easy as they aren’t cloaked in the swarms anymore.

I’ve never understood stood the lack of a buffer, but with this, any one caught in a military zone now has no ability to declare asylum due to the Felony trespass, it’s an additional big charge to smugglers also, not to mention the easier ability to justify force. Cartel takes pop shots and it’s no longer hold your fire…

If you look at onx the majority of the AZ border is already federal in some forum so I image it will be next

What I am curious about is why the section has to be so large if they’re already doing that good of a job. They’re bragging with pictures all over social media about how good they’re doing but yet they need that amount of land? It’s just confusing to me. A mile seems like more than enough with the amount of money and troops they’re going to pump into there. Additionally, I’d be curious if the grazing permits for those areas stay intact. I know the Coronado has some excellently managed grasslands out there but I haven’t been all the way to the Guadalupe Canyon area in my time so I’m not sure if it is managed as well.

 

[elkhunter505]

Meateater definitely talked about illegal inmigration- not within the context of public lands but moreso just Rinella complaining about it. He talked about it a lot leading up to the election.

Anyway, from that one article, this doesnt bother me as much as selloffs. It’s better for wildlife than a physical wall, it’s temporary (for now) and there remains the possibility that they will allow permitted hunting in the future like other military sites do.

I don’t love it, but to me this is 100x better than a border wall and a is legitimate restriction to put on federal lands on the southern border.

They’re asking for funds within the budget bill to build up the wall more so I don’t think this is a replacement for the wall.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Meateater definitely talked about illegal inmigration- not within the context of public lands but moreso just Rinella complaining about it. He talked about it a lot leading up to the election.

Anyway, from that one article, this doesnt bother me as much as selloffs. It’s better for wildlife than a physical wall, it’s temporary (for now) and there remains the possibility that they will allow permitted hunting in the future like other military sites do.

I don’t love it, but to me this is 100x better than a border wall and a is legitimate restriction to put on federal lands on the southern border.

Open up that wall and allow some jaguar migration while they're at it too. I think it'd be very cool to have more jaguars in the US.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

Open up that wall and allow some jaguar migration while they're at it too. I think it'd be very cool to have more jaguars in the US.

There are gaps in the wall to funnel humans through. Deer and predators do regularly move through those gaps. There are plenty of photos out there showing furry critters, even bears, climbing over the wall.

As far as jaguars, this is RS where many members are fully committed to killing all apex predators whether it is legal to do so or not; there are plenty of threads on this site that morph into pro SSS commentary.

 

[cuerro viejo]

What I am curious about is why the section has to be so large if they’re already doing that good of a job. They’re bragging with pictures all over social media about how good they’re doing but yet they need that amount of land? It’s just confusing to me. A mile seems like more than enough with the amount of money and troops they’re going to pump into there. Additionally, I’d be curious if the grazing permits for those areas stay intact. I know the Coronado has some excellently managed grasslands out there but I haven’t been all the way to the Guadalupe Canyon area in my time so I’m not sure if it is managed as well.

they are doing an exponentially great job compared to what happened over last 4 years, but the threat is still not zero. Military zone would decrease the threat even more. 53 miles of strategic areas it’s smart play IMO

the amount of foot traffic across area I hunt and that friends own is WAY down, but cartels are still moving product

 

[Hydra6]

If DOD "owns' that strip along the border, then DOD is legally allowed to secure that border. It is a long narrow strip I believe assigned to FT Huachuca. It is actually a genius move.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

If DOD "owns' that strip along the border, then DOD is legally allowed to secure that border. It is a long narrow strip I believe assigned to FT Huachuca. It is actually a genius move.

Being on the border and "owned" by the military has not stopped traffic from going through the BMG Missile Range.

Now I don't know if being "military" prevents the environmentalists from suing to stop any activity but being federal agency (including the DoD to some extent) offers no protection. There is a ton of information available online and here are some tidbits:
* https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...perly-analyze-environmental-impact-of-border/
* https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-environmental-law-of-the-border-wall
* https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ju...vironmental-law-halt-border-wall-construction
* https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/new...nstruction-trump-environment-lawsuit-11337489
* https://www.theblaze.com/news/2011/...ironmental-regulations-limiting-border-patrol
* https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-dec-31-mn-59338-story.html


While I applaud attempts to improve security along the southern border, I am not naive to believe that it will come as envisioned. The various groups on the Left, combined with far too many activist judges, will grind things to a halt.

 

[Hydra6]

The military has been incentivized to not secure the border - seems like they are incentivized to secure the border.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

The military has been incentivized to not secure the border - seems like they are incentivized to secure the border.

Will see what the courts and Congress do. Remember Orange Man is bad and lots of folks with a black robe can stop whatever he/she/it wants to.

 

[Hydra6]

1) USA Today article - Army "seizes" border land. Provocative and hardly a "neutral" source.
2) The land in question is Federal property - one government agency transferred responsibility to another agency - in this case the US Army.
3) If the property is Department of Defense managed, then the DoD can establish the land usage and access rules - just like any DoD property.
4) Not much for the "courts" to say in the matter - it is Federal land managed by Federal agencies.
5) Since it is now DoD managed - no longer "Posse Comitas" issue as DoD is just enforcing security of the property it manages (same as any military base).
6) As long as Republicans in charge, doubt there will be a legislative issue.
7) If Democrats take back Presidency - then they can direct the Federal land management to another Federal agency and look the other way again