Jump to main content.

GNEB 2005 Arizona Meeting Minutes

Good Neighbor Environmental Board Meeting

G N E B: Good Neighbor Environmental Board

Sahuarita, Arizona
October 17-19, 2005

Meeting Summary/Minutes

Monday, October 17, 2005 (8:36 a.m.)

Meeting Participants

Board Members

Federal Board Members and Representatives

Resource Specialists

EPA/OCEM Staff and Management

Speakers

Public Commenters

Guests {Names were taken from a copy of the sign-in sheet and many were illegible.}

Background

The Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB or the Board) is an independent advisory committee that is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It advises the U. S. President and Congress on good-neighbor practices along the U.S.-Mexico border. The focus is on the environmental and infrastructure needs of the U. S. states that are contiguous to Mexico.

Welcome and Introductions

Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM), EPA, welcomed board members and guests to the first meeting of the Good Neighbor Environmental Board (GNEB) on tribal land—the Tohono O’odham Nation. As the new director of OCEM, Mr. DeLeon thanked the board members, the EPA staff, local officials, speakers, tribal members, former board members, and interested members of the public for providing their ideas on how best to balance the critical needs for security and environmental protection.

Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Chairperson, Director, Institute for Regional Studies of the Californias, San Diego State University, stated the importance of the good turnout of Board members and local representatives, because the information provided by them would be helpful in directing messages and reports to the U. S. President and Congress.  He looked forward to the interaction between Board members, Tribal authorities, Tribal members, and other interested participants. 

Ned L. Norris, Jr., Vice Chairman, welcomed participants to the Tohono O’odham Nation and described the Nation’s past and present geography.  He acknowledged two tribal council members Darlene Andrews and John Lawson. Next, he introduced Councilman Edward Encinas, who has operated the Elders Program for the Santa Vera District Council, and who would offer a Tribal Blessing on the meeting.

Councilman Edward Encinas asked the Creator to provide a blessing on the Tribal leaders, Tribal elders, soldiers in foreign lands, meeting participants and the environment.  He asked for the meeting to provide enlightenment to everyone present.

After the blessing, Chair Ganster asked board members, EPA staff, other Federal representatives, and guests to introduce themselves. After the introductions, he introduced the first speaker, Mike Connolly, from the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, who founded the EPA at Campo in San Diego County, is a cultural historian, and plays an important part in border and regional environmental issues.

Speaker Presentations

Mike Connolly, Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians, described the history, territory, and tribal groups of the Kumeyaay Nation, specifically the Campo Kumeyaay, and then discussed the environmental issues of concern to this Nation.  The Campo Kumeyaay Nation’s territory extends into Mexico. The proximity of the Kumeyaay Nation to Mexico provided some protection from the policy of extermination practiced in the 1850s in California. There are four Kumeyaay reservations in Baja, California and 12 different tribal reservations in San Diego County. Some clan names and territories are shared with the Cocopah Indians and the 17 other tribes in San Diego County.

One issue of concern to the Kumeyaay Nation relates to the transportation of hazardous waste, such as propane, by trucks along highways and on a railway that extends into Mexico and back into the United States. The Nation has an emergency response plan, a cooperative agreement with the San Diego County Hazardous Incidence Response Team, and Tribal members are certified with the California Specialized Training Institute for emergency responses.

Other issues are the destruction of vegetation and ground contamination with human waste from illegal immigrants. The clampdown on the border has had cultural impacts, because the Nation extends into Mexico and people have traditionally been able to pass back and forth across the border. Recently, the Kumeyaay Border Task Force was formed to facilitate transboundary contacts.

Technical assistance has been provided to the Kumeyaay in Mexico to improve water quality and the water system. A Mexican law requiring a fee for new drinking water wells makes it difficult for communities to improve their water supply. Agriculture usage is exempt from ground water usage restrictions in both Mexico and the United States. The laws separating surface water from ground water make no sense in this area, because the underground water comes to the surface. Underground water comes from hundreds of small finger aquifers, so using a formula that treats all the aquifers as one large lake is not workable. Each area needs to be evaluated on a basin-by-basin basis.

Urban and suburban development near Indian lands has caused problems for endangered species. Indian lands are used by non-Indian developers for air pollution offsets and as habitats for endangered species. Market trading policy forces tribes to reward nearby communities for volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions offsets, if they want to develop businesses. The Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission has helped by providing up-front allocations to tribes whenever a market trading program is established.

The final issue related to taxes that are paid to the state and not returned to the tribes in California. The only tax not paid by Indians is for earnings on tribal lands. All other earnings are taxed by the State of California, including non-reservation earnings by members, non-Indian reservation worker earnings, commercial profits, property taxes for Non-Indian owned land on reservations, and gasoline and other sales tax. Casino earnings are not taxed because they are government-owned.

Questions and Comments

Steven Niemeyer:Does the Tribal Government receive any portion of state sales tax as municipalities do?
Mike Connolly: Cities and counties receive a portion of sales tax, but this is not shared with the Tribal Government, even though the Tribal Government provides governmental services such as fire protection, ambulance service, safe drinking water, and road improvements.

Steven Niemeyer: What type of relationship does the Tribe have with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection?
Mike Connolly: The relationship is good right now. Campo is one of the main headquarters for the border area, so there is a lot of activity including helicopters overhead and sirens. It’s like a war zone.

Ned Norris, Jr.:What is the Campo Tribe doing with alternative energy projects?
Mike Connolly:  The Campo Tribe is building the largest wind energy project on a United States Reservation.

Colin Soto, Tribal Elder Spokesperson, Cocopah Indian Tribe

The Cocopah Indian reservation is located on the Mexican, Arizona, and California borders. The main problems are illegal immigrants, Homeland Security measures, lack of surface water, and endangered species. The last vestige of animal life is on the reservation in Yuma County. Homeland Security efforts to clear the area to find immigrants are destroying the habitat and making it impossible to go down to the river, because it is gated. Agents are flying noisy helicopters over the reservation at night and harassing tribal members in their own homes. Mr. Soto made a plea for the Homeland Security officers to recognize the Cocopah members, treat them with respect, and to allow border crossings by family members.

Questions and Comments

Is the solution better communication between the Cocopah Nation and the U. S. authorities or is it moving the patrolled areas outside the reservation?
Colin Soto Better training for personnel is one solution, so they know how to treat native people.

Amanda Aguirre: Has Sherry Cordova, Chairman of the Cocopah Tribe met with the Border Patrol in Yuma to address this issue?
Colin Soto: They have met on numerous occasions, but often nothing comes of the talks. He reminded the Board that he does not speak for the Tribal Government, but for the Tribal Elders, who have differences with the Tribal Government.
Ned Norris commented that the Tohono O’odham Nation is impacted in the same way as the Cocopah. He suggested that the United States needs to revisit its policy on immigration to allow tribes that have members on both sides of the border to have easy access. He noted that the Board would be visiting one of the most vulnerable places along the border of the Tohono O’odham and Cocopah border with Mexico. He pleaded with the Board for their support in addressing these issues.

Chair Ganster: Is the Mexican Governments doing enough to help the Nation with this issue?
Ned Norris The United States of American and Mexico need to have a concerted joint effort to allow tribes impacted by these problems to actively participate in decision-making on immigration policy.

DFO Koerner announced that reading materials and Board reports were available, and that a public comment session would start at noon. Chair Ganster briefly described the Board’s role as an independent advisory committee to the U. S. President and Congress. The Board does not speak for the EPA, which supplies management and support for the Board. What is learned from public meetings will be included in Reports and meetings with Congress and governmental agencies. Next, he introduced Jonathan Ammon, Southwest Border Specialist, and Rose Whitehair, Travel Liaison, Office of Homeland Security, State of Arizona, who would discuss Homeland Security efforts, cooperation, and effects on the environment.

Jonathan Ammon, Southwest Border Specialist, Arizona Department of Homeland Security, discussed his role in Homeland Security, opportunities for cooperation with environmental interests, secondary degradation due to immigration, and environmental accidents and pollution in the border area. The border area includes six states, 14 cities, 26 U. S. Federally-recognized Native American Tribes, and 6.3 million people in the U.S. and 5.5 million in Mexico. The La Paz agreement between Mexico and the United States, a mutual agreement for environmental protection and conservation, and a framework for a system of notification for emergency situations, is an example of binational cooperation.

The challenges for Homeland Security from an environmental perspective are resource degradation from illegal immigration, potential acid spills from train derailments, and the need for bi-national and tri-national response agreements.  Mr. Ammon then described the goals of four cooperative efforts the Border 2012, the Emergency Management Committee of the Arizona-Mexico Commission, the Bi-National Training Exercises, and the Borderland Management Task Force. 

The goals of the Emergency Management Committee address joint training in hazardous waste, fire fighting, bio-terrorism, resource exchange, and the coordination of critical incident responses.  Bi-National Training Exercises are concentrated on weapons of mass destruction, biological contamination, chemical spills, and responses. Mr. Ammon described a train derailment and environmental acid spill that occurred on August 17, 2005, that contaminated water in both countries, which was dealt with quickly due to the agreements between the two countries. The Borderlands Management Task Force (BMTF) is an inter-governmental forum that includes Federal, tribal, state and local governments that addresses environmental and immigration issues.

Questions and Comments

Chair Ganster: Where does the money come from for all the joint exercises, training, and the BMTF?
Jonathan Ammon: The BTMF is a volunteer organization. The Bi-National Training Exercises receives some Federal funding. The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and the Fire Departments in cities and both countries provide resources. 

Manuel Ayala:  Are you posed to deal with air pollution?
Mr. Ammon: This is a potential problem that needs to be discussed.

Mr. Niemeyer: In regard to the train derailment, how was the notification implemented?
Mr. Ammon: The notification between sister cities was immediate. Contingency plans were implemented and Arizona responders went 40 kilometers into Mexico to help out.

Rose Whitehair, Tribal Liaison, Arizona Office of Homeland Security, eloquently described the issues and concerns of the 22 tribes and 300,000 persons, whose lands cover 30 percent of Arizona. The major concerns and activities include

Some of their initiatives are outreach to all the tribes, grant application workshops, and one-to-one visits to determine needs and problems. Cultural awareness is needed for the border patrol so they can learn more about Indian customs and history. The Tri-national idea is needed to focus on problems that affect all tribes.  The Arizona Counter Terrorism Information Center has created a category to include sacred sites and holy lands.  Medicine men need to be included in exercises and disaster drills, so customs will be followed.

Questions and Comments

Amanda Aguirre: How many tribes have engaged in tabletop exercises?
Ms. Whitehair: The Navajo and Hopi tribes recently did a tabletop session on a smallpox disaster drill and they have planned a drill for November 3, 2005.  Several other tribes are working together including the Cocopah, the White Mountain Apache, and the Tohono O’odham Nation.

Ms. Aguirre: Are counties and agencies communicating with tribes?
Ms. Whitehair: Cooperation is improving slowly. In Yuma County, a threat mitigation includes three tribes.  The Navajo and Hopi were able to get 50 different agencies to work together on the smallpox disaster drill. 

Ned Norris: Please explain the term Tri-national?
Ms. Whitehair:  Binational focuses on two nations Mexico and the United States. Tri-national includes the Indian nations, because they are sovereign nations. Mr. Norris added that a lot of effort is being made to change the Homeland Security Act to recognize the sovereign tribal nations and to provide funds directly to the tribes.  Ms. Whitehair said that she will be speaking to the National Congress of American Indians to encourage their 250 tribes to focus on the border issues.

Judith Gans, Udall Center for Policy Studies, University of Arizona, Tucson, described immigration in terms of the global context, key issues, politics, and the challenges for reform.  Globally, there are about 200 million immigrants, with roughly 42 million or 30 percent in the U. S. and Canada. Immigration accounts for 60 percent of the U. S. population growth, including births and immigrants.  Arizona has the highest number of undocumented immigrants, about nine percent of the state’s population. Since the l970’s, the immigrants country of origin has shifted from Europe to Latin American, Asia, and Africa. From the mid-60’s, the primary architecture for permanent immigration has been family reunification, but the pressure now comes from economic motivations to provide for scarce labor. It is estimated that about 30 percent of the U. S. foreign-born are undocumented; the rest are refugees or naturalized citizens. The rate of illegal immigration has exceeded legal immigration, including those who have expired visas and illegal border crossers. Immigration laws are out of balance with the global economic realities.

While border control and national security have become intertwined, good intelligence about terrorists is more important for national security than border control. The emphasis on terrorism in immigration laws has created a hostile atmosphere for persons who cross the border for legitimate reasons or for economic motivations. Economic factors have forced the hiring of un-skilled, undocumented workers in employment that is not out-sourceable.    Provision of English language acquisition, education, health care, and welfare services to unauthorized immigrants has an impact on fiscal policy and has created differences between political parties. The cultural impact of immigration is lessened by the fact that the United States has a history of integrating people of diverse cultures.

Questions and Comments

Gary Gillen: Is there research to indicate the amount of money that flows out of the
U. S. because of illegal immigration?
Ms. Gans: Estimates of remittances to people in other countries are probably not reliable.

Robert Varady commented that security is now paramount in immigration policy even though illegal immigrants have rarely been connected with terrorism.   Ms. Gans added that immigration laws and the Patriot Act have created a pretext for arresting people.

Amanda Aguirre: Has the Udall Center done any studies of the impact of low-skilled workers on the economy and specifically individual industries, such as agriculture, hotels, and construction? What is the economic impact of human trafficking?
Ms. Gans:  The construction industry in Arizona would probably collapse without the low-skilled, undocumented workers. Consumers benefit from lower construction costs.  Ms. Gans will look into the industry-by-industry impacts and the financial impacts of human trafficking and report back to the Board. Mayor Rose reminded the Board that the criminal element in human and drug trafficking is a huge issue in border security.  Chair Ganster stated that the laws need to recognize the importance of the global economy in influencing the amount of illegal immigration, so the dangerous situation at the border can be ameliorated.

Public Comments

Joaquin Murrieta, Sonoran Institute, spoke from the Mexican standpoint in noting that some Mexican towns near the border are dependent on employment from helping those who cross the border.  He would like to see more Mexican and Native American representation on the Board, so their perspectives could influence Board decisions. The Sonoran Desert is a shared resource between three nations and everyone needs to understand how people live in the area. Chair Ganster noted that Mexican guest speakers and member of the Consejo Consultivos are valued contributors to the Board’s decisions.

Mary Kasulaitis, Rancher, Arivaca, Arizona, emphasized with pictures and words the huge amount of trash that is left by illegal immigrants on the hundreds of trails in Arizona, Texas, and California. The National Forest Service, the Wildlife Refuge Service, and Indian tribes do not have a budget to hire people to pick up the trash. Both the Federal Government and the state governments need to budget funds for trash pickup.

Delma Garcia, Tohono O’odham Nation, reported on the large number of trucks filled with illegal immigrants that pass through her community.  The native police force and the U. S. Border Patrol are not controlling human and drug trafficking, which has created a dangerous situation for her family and community. The Border Patrol chases people thorough her property and their fence has been destroyed.  Local citizens have been killed because they were involved in the drug trade, but the family doesn’t know who killed them. Some families house illegal immigrants, who may be responsible for passing diseases to children in the community.

Evelyn Juan Manual, Tohono O’odham Nation, reiterated the concerns about infectious diseases from human waste and trash, which contaminate villages and surrounding communities. Another concern is the attitudes of the border patrol towards people of color.  Her nation works with other nations, countries and municipalities, because they provide mutual support in times of disaster.

Gary Brasha, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council, complained about a Border Patrol checkpoint on I-19, 22 miles from the border, which created a huge trash problem in the river area and foothills from immigrants who avoid the checkpoint.  Property owners have had to hire dump trucks to remove trash from area. Some of the trash included hypodermic needles that requiring gloves to avoid exposure to diseases. Border Patrol policies have created environmental hazards in areas far from the borders.

Rich Bohman, Santa Cruz Valley Citizens Council, agreed that a permanent checkpoint was easy to avoid and created dangerous and hazardous situations for people in the Santa Cruz Valley, because drug smugglers are armed. The main concern is to stop illegal immigration at the border.  He recognized that the Border Patrol had a difficult job.

 

Luncheon Speakers

Paula Stigler, Environmental Department, Pala Band of Indians, described a drinking water system project with the tribal communities in Baja California. The Environmental Department of the Pala Band of Mission Indians made a donation to the Tribal Council in Northern Baja to help attend meetings. The CUNA, a non-governmental agency in Baja, wrote a grant for Border 2012 Program funds for drinking water projects in Mexico. The Pala Band of Indians was asked by EPA to sponsor a grant to fund Mexican tribes working on water infrastructure and drinking water projects. The 2005-2006 grant will fund construction of some new infrastructure for drinking water is several communities.

Hiram Sarabia described the work of Ja Jan (Pai Pai for “Good Water”), a binational coalition of academics, non-governmental organizations, and community members, that address coastal, inland, and drinking water issues at the community level. In addition to generating reliable information sources about water quality in the border region, the coalition provides impacted communities with the capacity to understand the drinking water issues and to do their own monitoring and improve drinking water practices. Communities are also connected to a resource network, including several universities.

Mr. Sarabia showed a videotape highlighting the accomplishments of the U. S. EPA-funded project sponsored by the coalition. They worked with eight indigenous communities in Baja California to improve the quality of drinking water from surface water sources. The coalition supported the work of CUNA in analyzing water contamination and training communities to evaluate the quality of their water supply. The National Commission for Indigenous Development, a Mexican agency, also contributed resources for improving the infrastructure. One of the main problems is the lack of an electric power supply to draw water from wells which are not contaminated. The Mexican Government is investing $500,000 in these communities to improve drinking water.

Questions and Comments

Peter Silva  Are CUNA and the Mexican Indigenous Development Agency (CDI) providing any funding for in-kind services for this project.
Ms. Stigler The CDI has been able to provide almost $600,000 for two projects that will be starting in November to dig some new wells in San Antonio [Enequ ????] and San Jose de La Zorra. EPA will provide funding for lines from the wells to property lines.

Peter Silva Will the communities own the systems, and will they be provided with training on how to operate the systems?
Ms. Stigler  Yes, the tribal communities will own the wells and be responsible for monitoring and maintenance. Training will be provided by Ja Jan and Aqualink.

Stephen Niemeyer  Is the surface drinking water purified or boiled?
Ms. Stigler  People are resistant to chlorination and lack resources to boil water, so there are a lot of gastrointestinal diseases. The new wells will be deep, because many shallow hand-dug wells are contaminated.

Speaker Presentations 

Update on Activities of the Mexican Council for Sustainable Development by
Rene Cordova and Flavio Olivieri, Mexican Consejo Consultivo Liaisons to the GNEB

René Córdova (speaking in Spanish with a translator) described the Consulting Council as a multilateral organization that provides advice to the Secretary of Ecology in the Natural Resources Department in Mexico. Using a series of slides, Mr. Córdova described the structure as composed of six regional councils and one national council. Representatives come from state governments, state congresses, non-governmental organizations, businesses, academia, women’s groups, young people’s groups, and towns and villages. There are four commissions covering matters related to the environment.

The Commission on Border Affairs and Pollution Prevention gave several recommendations to the Secretary of Ecology in September, 2005. The recommendations were as follows

The National Council is interested in the Border 2012 Program, reform of the BECC and the North American Development Bank (NADBank), the Tri-National Commission on Environmental Cooperation and the Southern Border Environmental Program.  The multi-laterals favor the Stockholm conventions for the elimination of PCBs and protection of global diversity. Another initiative is to encourage collaboration between Cuba, Mexico, and the United States on reducing environmental pollution in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Mr. Córdova described the results of a May 2005 meeting of the Border Encounter on the Environment, a group of civil organizations and environmentalists on both sides of the border, which called for more collaboration on border environmental issues.  Issues were the social, economic, the environmental impact of NAFTA, and security policies at the border.  Immigration reform must take into account environmental impacts, the destruction of Indian resources, and the imbalance of worker status between the U. S. and Mexico. One suggestion was that if the U. S. would invest in economic development in Mexico’s most depressed places as much as it does on border security, the need to migrate would be reduced.

Questions and Comments

Mayor Rose: In the fast growing border areas, is the Council looking at best management practices of grading, infrastructure, etc.?
Mr. Córdova Yes, one of their concerns was urban development and rapid population growth that require several years of planning to protect the environment.  Another problem is the offering of tax exemptions and other concession to compete for maquiladoras plants.

Chair Ganster:  Why is the Mexican Government considering a reduction of its budget for the BECC?
Mr. Córdova:  The Mexican and U. S. Governments are concerned about the independent role of the Commission in reporting on legalities and compliance with environmental legislation. Monetary participation should be based on the size of a country’s budget or its economy.

Ned Norris agreed that the U. S. should revisit its policy and relationship to Mexico to help Mexico develop its economy, create jobs and opportunities for Mexican peoples to reduce the need for immigration by improving their standard of living.

Melody Sees, Environmental Director, Los Coyotes Band of Indians, San Diego County, spoke of the security and environmental problems affecting the Los Coyotes Reservation, the Cahuilla people, and other nearby border tribal reservations.  The chief issues included

Art Guajardo, Assistant Chief, U. S. Customs and Border Protection, introduced two members of the CBP, David Gueterza, Agent-in-Charge of the Casa Grande Station, and Supervisor Agent David Bemiller, who is responsible for public lands liaison. He described the responsibilities of the Border Patrol as protecting the United States from the entry and weapons of terrorists. The Border Patrol works with the governments in Mexico, South America, and Central America to gain information about potential terrorist threats. The Border Patrol has 11,000 agents to patrol the northern coastal areas and the southern borders of the U. S. His office is responsible for border crossings in Arizona.

San Diego and El Paso have improved, but the weakest link is between Yuma and New Mexico. Borders are out-of-control as illegal entrants move from California borders to Arizona and beyond. In 2004, in the Arizona Corridor, they arrested 438,000 aliens. Recent improvements in border control consist of more agents, new roads, fencing, improved lighting, sensors, cameras, and large expenditures.

The Arizona Border Control Initiative (ABCI) goals are to improve border security, impair smuggling operations, reduce smuggling violence, and reduce smuggling related to criminal activity, such as stolen vehicles. The ABCI coordinates with other entries such as CBP Air, EIS Investigation, and the Transportation Safety Administration. Patrol units are positioned on major and minor roads, so local residents are likely to encounter patrols. Aliens are sent to Nogales for processing and removal. Agents now have the authority to expedite removal without an immigration judge.

The longer an agent stays in an area, the more he is able to identify and develop relationships with local residents. Stopping persons is dependent on actions, location, time of day, and direction, because agents cannot tell who is criminal or not by racial or ethnic identity. Vehicles are targeted by their large capacity, but occasionally small cars are used. If a vehicle escapes into the interior, it becomes the responsibility of the U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency.

In California, local authorities have told them that the quality of life and the environment have improved due to immigration controls in the past 10 years. The main environmental problems are trash, road-building damage, and damage from off-road chases. Dave Bremiller added that the Corps of Engineers helps build roads and fences; and Gulf South Research is employed to do environmental and cultural assessments. Mr. Guajardo described other problems related to trespass on the Tohono O’odham Nation lands, publicly-managed lands, and ranches. Since 97 percent of aliens come from Mexico, the consuls of Mexico could provide cultural awareness training to Border Patrol agents.

Questions and Comments

Robert Varady: How many of the 438,000 arrested might have engaged in criminal behavior if they were not caught? Is everyone treated as a potential terrorist?
Mr. Guajardo stated that 23,000 of those apprehended did have criminal history in the U. S. The act of illegal entry is a violation of the law, punishable by imprisonment. Everyone is treated as a potential voluntary returnee, unless they are caught in a criminal act.

Paul Michel:  Does the Border Patrol have any authority to use apprehended undocumented migrants to help clean up the trash?
Mr. Guajardo:  Those that are apprehended are asked to put their trash into bags.  To ask or force them to pick up trash left by un-apprehended aliens would violate the Slave Labor Act, if they are not compensated.  Mayor Rose commented that Operation Gateway along the California Border vastly improved the environment in the past 10 years.

Roger De Rosa, Refuge Manager, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, discussed issues relating to managing public lands, such as those under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and National Wildlife Refuges on the Mexican Border in Arizona. The Cabreza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge encompasses 860,000 acres with 56 miles on the Mexican border; and is also a Congressionally-designated wilderness area.  The problem comes from illegal aliens or smugglers of drugs and people, who have been driven to the rugged area by actions of the Border Patrol in securing other areas. 

Mr. De Rosa likened the struggle to warfare and disaster management.  The Refuge and the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument have been declared the most endangered refuges in the nation.  Major damage has been done by illegally created roads and trails used by smugglers and law enforcement alike.  Trash and drug seizures are measured in tons—over 518,000 pounds of marijuana was seized. (Note: Board Member later queried following statement:) On the Arizona border, there were 251 deaths from shootouts between the Border Patrol and smugglers.  Fires started by aliens consumed 3,500 acres in the Refuge and 80,000 acres in the Barry Goldwater Gunnery Range. His major goal in the past three years has been to avoid an environmental train wreck between Homeland Security and environmental laws and regulations

Homeland Security cannot escape the National Environmental Policy Act and the Wilderness Act, which mandates no permanent roads in wilderness areas. Cooperation is needed with the Refuge managers to protect natural resources.  However, there are only two Refuge officers to cover the area.  The placement of barriers along the border has created a funnel for illegal persons into the Refuge. Changing immigration laws could stop illegal aliens, but would not affect criminal drug activity.

Conflicts are basically related to lack of resources to handle the problem. Most of the solutions are unfunded mandates, including funds for additional air assets, search and rescue, criminal interdiction, immigration enforcement, vehicle removal, and trash removal.  Restoration of wilderness areas, protection of endangered species, and destruction of illegal roads are impossible until the border is secure.

Chair Ganster thanked all of the presenters, public commenters, board members and staff for their participation, and the Tohono O’odham Nation for hosting the meeting. The meeting was adjourned.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:20 a.m.

GNEB Business Meeting

Board Members Present Paul Ganster, Ph.D., Chair, Larry Allen, Gedi Cibas, Ph.D., Gary Gillen, Stephen Niemeyer, Ned Norris, Jr., David Randolph, Robert Varady, Ph.D., Ann Marie Wolf, and Keiko Herai, for Douglas Smith, Sony Electronics

Federal Members Present Alven Lam, Rafael DeLeon, Elaine Koerner, James Stefanov

Resource Specialists Manuel Ayala, Jacob Macias, Sally Spener

Welcome Remarks

Rafael DeLeon, Director, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (OCEM), thanked board members for their contributions and looked forward to working with them in the future. DFO Koerner asked members to fill out a questionnaire in their folders that could capture some of the benefits of the GNEB, and to fax completed questionnaires to the OCEM office at 202-233-0060. A copy of the 8th Report’s tracking for distribution report was in member’s folder and outreach activities could be added.

Approval of the Minutes

Chair Ganster asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the May 10, 2005, Washington, D.C., Board Meeting.  Gary Gillen moved, and Robert Varady seconded, a motion to approve the minutes.  The minutes were approved unanimously.  Chair Ganster asked members to send any last minute minor changes to DFO Koerner. 

Membership Update

DFO Koerner provided an update of the board membership.  Four members will be ending their terms on the Board: Peter Silva, Mayor Rose, Larry Allen, and Gedi Cibas. Gedi Cibas said that the GNEB had provided positive benefits for the border region, especially in regard to problems shared with Mexico, such as the aquifers. He noted that a management scheme for the aquifers, which is presently being discussed, could set a global precedent. The new board members include James Stefanov, USGS, Department of the Interior; Carlos Marin, USIBWC; Captain Randy Grinnell, U.S. Public Health Service, HHS; and Carl Edlund, EPA Region 6. 

Performance Measures Workgroup Report-Out

Robert Varady provided some background on the Performance Measures Workgroup.  The Workgroup had developed a list of items, based on quantifiable performance measures that members can use to enumerate their activities on a yearly basis.  A website is being developed by OCEM that will allow capture of more complex activities.  Responses to the questionnaire would be analyzed, and the questionnaire would be revised as needed.

Report-Out from the Transportation/Air Workgroup, 9th Report

David Randolph reported that the Workgroup had drafted a report which dealt with three areas: (1) ports of entry and the related transportation infrastructure, (2) emissions, and
(3) mass transit and other public transportation. The draft was circulated to board members and their comments were incorporated into the present draft.  Mr. Randolph described some of the issues in each area and noted that each issue would have a recommendation.  Comments from the Department of Transportation (DOT) were attached at the end of the report.  For example, DOT would like to have the section about the NAFTA trucking issue deleted.  Comments from the Board on substantive issues were requested.

DFO Koerner stated that the draft report is to be completed for Board circulation on December 8, 2005.  She asked for Board member comments by November 4, 2005. An electronic copy of the report would be distributed for ease of commentary. The time for the next conference call to amend the draft report, based on written comments, was set for November 8th at 200 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. Several members asked to be added to the conference call.  Robert Varady suggested that even though the focus was on environmental issues and transportation, other aspects could be included such as hazardous materials.  It was decided to reference a previous GNEB Report that covered that subject.

Report-Out from the Cultural Resources Workgroup, 9th Report

Ann Marie Wolf noted that the latest version of the Cultural Resources Workgroup Report should be dated October 17, 2005.  Ms. Wolf recognized the contribution of former GNEB member, John Klein.  Jim Stefanov had reviewed previous GNEB reports and determined that natural resources had been dealt with significantly in the 6th Report, but that cultural resources was barely mentioned in previous reports.  The draft report has a section on natural resources which updates the 6th report.  The rest of the report focuses on cultural resources. Items from this meeting would be incorporated in the next draft.  The committee wants input on examples, partnerships, projects, etc. from Board members from all the states represented, as the main focus has been on Arizona. The present report will be sent out electronically for member’s comments.

DFO Koerner asked members to send comments on Cultural Resources Workgroup report to OCEM by November 4, 2005.  A conference call was set for November 8, 2005, at 300 p.m. EST.  Sally Spener, USIBWC, asked that the prehistoric sites and Spanish Colonial ranch sites near Falcon Dam, as well as, other 20th Century sites that need protection, be included in the report.  Ms. Rose agreed and requested Ms. Spener to send the relevant text to her for inclusion in the cultural issues report. 

Ms. Koerner brought up the idea of asking Federal Agency representatives on the GNEB to write a brief synopsis of their border environmental activities through 2005 for the 9th Report.  A sample write-up, prepared by Sally Spener, would be distributed as guidance.  Mr. Varady added that incorporating brief reports from non-Board Federal agency’s border environmental work could also add to the Report’s value.  In response to Chair Ganster’s question about a regular meeting of Federal agencies with border control interests, it was decided that the GNEB was the main forum for Federal Agency’s border environmental discussions. Larry Allen, Malpai Borderlands Group, noted that in the Department of Agriculture, the NRCS, the Coronado National Forest, and the Cleveland National Forest all have active programs with Mexico.  Mr. Varady thought that the Department of Homeland Security’s border activities should be included.

Selection of Theme for the 10th GNEB Report

To prepare for the discussion on the theme of the 10th GNEB Report, Chair Ganster listed several suggested themes and topics on a flip chart. DFO Koerner suggested the following basic criterion for Board Reports

  1. Relevance to the Board’s mission of advising the President and Congress on border environmental issues
  2. Utilization of board member expertise.
  3. Relevance to current administration’s interests
  4. Need for national attention on pressing border issues.
  5. Potential for Federal action.

Chair Ganster listed and described the following themes for discussion

During the break, members voted on the list of items.  The theme receiving the most votes was Homeland Security and the Border Environment. {Not stated, but implied.}  During the discussion, it was suggested to re-name the topic Border Environment and Security.  The problems of border tribes, fences and roads, and the environment, could be subsumed under this theme. The impact of roads on Federally-protected lands might be incorporated also.Another suggestion was to add the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes, because criminal acts would involve customs and border people.  Although, the focus would be on the environment, the theme was timely in relationship to changes taking place in the President’s policy on immigration and repatriation. The theme also met the criteria proposed by DFO Koerner.

DFO Koerner would pursue obtaining a representative from the Department of Homeland Security on the Board so they could have direct input into the topic. In terms of process, it was suggested moving quickly to take advantage of the knowledge learned at this meeting.  A conference call would be set up for Tuesday, October 26, 2005.

Gary Gillen requested that an electronic copy of Roger De Rosa’s presentation on the Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge be sent to Ann Marie’s Workgroup. Ms. Koerner would send them a copy. 

Choice of Meeting Sites and Dates for 2006

Chair Ganster and DFO Koerner proposed a March14-15, 2006 GNEB meeting in Washington, D.C. that would coincide with the U. S. Mexico Chamber’s Annual Border Briefing in order to get more public attention to the Board’s issues and the launch of the 9th Report.  The Chamber could be asked to allow a small block of time to present the GNEB 9th Report. The Board’s Strategic Planning Session could also be done at the March Meeting, so that all Board members could be present.  Visits to members of the Administration and Congress could take place on the day after the meeting on March16, 2005. It was determined that the meeting dates did not conflict with meeting dates of the Fourth World Water Forum or the Environmental Council of States. 

Members indicated their site preferences for the summer and fall meetings as Alpine, Texas, Calexico, the Imperial Valley, and San Diego.  New Mexico was considered difficult because of the loss of board members who could help with planning. Both the Imperial Valley and San Diego had many border issues. Alpine, Texas has adequate facilities and would offer a field trip to Big Bend National Park. The Texas NRCS staff could help with planning, as could US IBWC. The issues of site selection were reviewed for proximity to the border, border issues, opportunities for field trips, attendance by state, local and Federal officials, tribal concerns, and climate. Other considerations favoring the San Diego site were the Tijuana River and border issues, the Campo tribe and riparian water restoration, border fencing and security issues.

After considerable discussion it was determined that the three meetings locations and dates were as follows

  1. Tuesday, March 14, and Wednesday, March 15, 2006—in Washington, D.C. Members could visit Congressmen and Administration officials on Thursday, March 16, 2005.
  2. Tuesday, July 18 and Wednesday, July 19, 2006 – in San Diego, California
  3. Tuesday, October 24, Wednesday, October 25, and Thursday, October 26, 2006 – in Alpine, Texas

Members who volunteered to work on the Washington, D. C. planning committee were Gary Gillen, Alven Lam, David Randolph, and Paul Ganster. Members who volunteered to plan the Alpine, Texas meeting were Gary Gillen, Stephen Niemeyer, James Stefanov, Sally Spener, and staff from NRCS in Texas. The Texas meeting would require two and one-half days to allow adequate time for a field trip to Big Bend National Park.  The planning committee for the San Diego meeting would consist of Douglas Smith and Hirai Keiko, who offered a hotel meeting place near Sony Electronics. {No other names mentioned.}

Board Member Report-Outs

Larry Allen, Malpai Borderlands Group, distributed a report from the Group and announced that the Group was involved in the White House Conference on Collaborative Conservation, in St. Louis last month.

Jim Stefanov, U. S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior (DOI), reported on a cooperative effort by the International Border Area Fire Council to suppress a forest fire in Tecate. A Borderland Management Task Force, formed by DOI and Homeland Security, is leading intergovernmental forums to address issues of security, safety, and resources along the border; and a Binational Corridor Strategic Plan in Otay Mesa addresses economic development, transportation, housing, and the environment.

The project to line the All American Canal is being designed by the Southern California Water Districts. The design, being submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game, will address mitigation, compensation, and endowment of endangered species. 

The USGS is working in the lower Rio Grande Valley on the U. S.-Mexico Border Environmental Health Project that integrates data bases related to hydrology and land use for both the U. S. and Mexico.  The integrated data sets would be extended to satellite imagery, digital elevation models, road, political boundaries, and geology; and could be accessed via the Internet.

In April, 2005, a U.S.-Mexico Border Symposium on the Management of Natural and Cultural Resources was held in Los Cruces to exchange information on transboundary programs, discuss common issues, and identify opportunities for cooperation. The report would be useful to the Board’s Cultural Resources Workgroup.  The contact person for the report is Ramon [Alevas???] in the National Park Service. Dr. P. Patrick Leahy, the new the Acting Director of the USGS, is well informed on border issues.  Mr. Stefanov will email his report to OCEM for distribution.

Manuel Ayala, Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA, reported that the NRCS has established a relationship with SEMARNAT, and will provide technical assistance to a United Nations Natural Resources Training Center in Monterrey, Mexico, that will train natural resource managers on rangeland and watershed rehabilitation. NRCS is also working with Pronatura, a nature conservancy group in Mexico, on the problem of decimated rangeland. NRCS will assist in the development of a technical guide. It is expected that this will develop into an exchange program between U. S. and Mexico experts.

DFO Koerner reported for Paul Michel on EPA Regions 6 and 9 on the following items

Chair Ganster reported on two events sponsored by the Institute for Regional Studies

Robert Varady, Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, said that the Udall Center newsletter could be found on their website udallcenter@arizona.edu.  In August, he met with the Secretary General of the World Water Forum and learned that the San Pedro basin is registered as one of the local action basins for the Forum. In the San Pedro Basin, and NOAA-funded project to trying to adapt a publication called Climate Outlook for the Arizona-Sonora border area.

David Randolph, Arizona-Mexico Commission, reported that the Commission’s Environmental Committee will meet on December 1, 2005, and will focus on water management issues for San Pedro area and Colorado River.  They will be distributing copies of the GNEB report related to water management.

Alven Lam, reporting for Shannon Sorzano, HUD, said that the Binational Commission will meet the following week to discuss housing and cross border issues. They work with the Mexican Government to establish better codes for environmental and community planning.

James Stefanov, USGS, noted that the current issue of the Journal of Groundwater, of the National Groundwater Association, is dedicated to transboundary aquifers mainly on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Stephen Niemeyer, TCEQ, has put in a request to EPA for training emergency responses and risk assessment, using the CAMEO software. This followed an August, 2005, train derailment and truck collision/spill of propane.  In August, TCEQ signed the Texas Nuevo Leon Strategic Plan. In August, under the Border Governor’s Conference, a Water Work Table was created.  PowerPoint presentations on water management are available. They recommended that the Mexican governors use the BGC Declaration, but they were not amenable to using the United States product.

Gedi Cibas, New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), announced that for the first time at the Border Governor’s Conference, a Governor from Chihuahua, Mexico, stated the necessity of dealing with binationally-shared aquifers.  He added that the GNEB publications were influential in this unprecedented change of attitude, but the effect was probably not measureable. The website is being updated for both format and content. Mr. Cibas praised DFO Koerner for her outstanding efforts in supporting the Board; and Chair Ganster for his knowledge and leadership of the Board.

Ned Norris expressed his gratitude for the Board’s meeting on tribal lands, and their commitment to tribal environmental and jurisdictional issues. Chair Ganster thanked Mr. Cibas and other Board members for their participation.

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:34 a.m.

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.