14 DAY TRIAL // Sometime next week, US's Department of Homeland Security is to officially allow free access to roughly 100 miles (roughly 160 kilometers) of wildlife habitat and wetlands stretching along the country's border with Canada on the one hand, and Mexico on the other.
Apparently, the main drive behind this measure is the need to better secure the borders, by constructing roads and fences. Thus, patrol vehicles could do a much better job in keeping the nation safe and sound.
The Hill reports that, for security's sake, more or less temporary “tactical infrastructure” is also to be deployed here, and that neither the Agricultural or the Interior department will have a say in the matter.
On the basis of this new legislation, the Department of Homeland Security will be entitled to disregard around 30 environmental and land-management laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act.
Naturally, green-heads don't quite approve of this situation. They claim that it is not acceptable to simply dish environmental laws for the (supposed) purpose of making the borders safer than they presently are.
The same source also quotes Jane Danowitz from the Pew Environment Group, who argued that: “the proposed legislation would give unprecedented authority to a single federal agency to destroy wildlife habitat and wetlands, impair downstream water quality and restrict activities such as hunting, fishing and grazing.”
This observation by Jane Danowitz was made nearly a year ago, when this new bill was merely a let's-think-about-it type of project, but we can assume that she stands by her opinion.
Although we do agree that all countries have every right to make their borders as safe as they want them to be, we also believe that due consideration must be given to how various security measures can impact on the natural world.