skip to main content

Listen

Read

Watch

Schedules

Programs

Events

Give

Account

Donation Heart Ribbon

Border Fence Into Pacific Ocean To Be Rebuilt

Above: The current border fence where the U.S.A. and Mexico meet at the Pacific Ocean.

Audio

Aired 11/2/11

Border Fence Into Ocean

— The "surf fence" runs 300-feet into the Pacific Ocean. It was originally built between 1993 and 1994 as a barrier to illegal border crossers and smugglers.

The new fence will look essentially the same: Metal pipes, 6-inches in diameter, rising out of the sand, with 4-inches in between. But it is designed to stay in good shape for as long as 30 years.

"The fencing is just another tool that we have," said Supervisory Border Patrol Agent Michael Jimenez, referring to its design. "It helps to slow down the entry of these people to give our agents a chance to make an arrest. Because a fence alone isn't going to stop people from coming in."

But the fence is designed to be wide enough for fish and other wildlife to make it back and forth across the border.

Rebuilding efforts in this and other parts of the Southwestern border fence have been delayed over the years, due to environmental impact assessments for things like land use, geology, and protected species.

Comments

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | November 3, 2011 at 7:30 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Ugly, waste of money, divisive, doesn't work.

Shame on those wasting money on such stupidity.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 3, 2011 at 11 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Not meant to be pretty, better than spending money subsidizing people who don't belong here, divisive like a fence is supposed to be, part of a suite of countermeasures intended to combat a complex problem.

Or, to be more thorough;
Is there a better color for the fence? We can paint it if you think that would make it prettier.

What do you see as a more cost effective investment in keeping people from crossing that border?

What purpose, other than dividing areas, would you expect a fence to serve?

How do you think we could make it more effective? More frequent patrols? Cameras? Sharks (with lasers)?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | November 3, 2011 at 2:12 p.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

benz72, show me the data.

You seem to have lofty ideas on what this "magic fence" will do, but where is the cost-benefit analysis?

Where is your data with credible sources showing this will make any significant impact?

Even the Border Patrol agent quoted in the article admits fences don't work.

Don't ask me all your little questions about "how to make it better" because I don't support a border fence period.

It should be up to supporters like yourself and the pandering political nit-wits trying to score political points off of the illegal immigration hysteria who should be answering your little questions before using tax payer money to build this useless piece of garbage.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 3, 2011 at 4:18 p.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Let me get this straight, you want me to provide you with effectiveness data on a recently built structure before tax payer money is used to build it?
I'm sorry to say that I can't, but the request seems a bit unreasonable.

And if you will read the entire quote from the agent in the article you may find that it works as part of a suite of tools to deter and slow illegal crossing.

Tell you what, consider it an art project. Then it can be ugly, useless and expensive but still a resounding success. Now we can both be happy.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'HarryStreet'

HarryStreet | November 3, 2011 at 5:55 p.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

The argument needs to be taken to the steps of the Mexican Government and the Mexican people themselves. They have no conception for change, which is why they are still a Third World Nation. Until we argue our illegal immigrant issues on their own ground, they will continue to believe Mexico will never change because this is the way it's always been. Outside influence will not have as much impact as from the inside.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Peking_Duck_SD'

Peking_Duck_SD | November 3, 2011 at 6:02 p.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

benz72, you come on here saying the fence will do this and that, and then when asked to back up your statements with data you get defensive.

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

I guess I am "unreasonable" because I want to see solid evidence border fences actually work before using tax money to expand them.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 4, 2011 at 7:02 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

An interesting avoidance, if inaccurate.

The unreasonableness stems from the timing of the request. It is obviously impossible to measure the effectiveness of something that has not been built. It is also impossible to do that without spending the money to build it.

If you want to look at some effective border control schemes and draw rough comparisons, let's look at the NK-SK border. There is very little illegal immigration. There are also a large number of differences which call the validity of the comparison between those two situations into question.

My point is that each situation may be unique, but there are methodologies for controlling the free access to an area. The more difficult it is to cross, the fewer will be successful at crossing. This isn't rocket science.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 4, 2011 at 9:27 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

@DAVID, your post makes little sense. What change? Change occurs daily. It is political Conservatives such as yourself who resist it . . . vehemently.

Immigration pattersn were established long ago. Agribusiness and the BP created a kind of revolving door.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 4, 2011 at 10:03 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Benz says: "spending money subsidizing people who don't belong here,"

LOL LOL LOL

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'benz72'

benz72 | November 4, 2011 at 10:21 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Mission, was there supposed to be something meaningful in your nine letter commentary on the quote you cited?

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'HarryStreet'

HarryStreet | November 4, 2011 at 1:10 p.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Missionaccomplished - you live in your own world. Mexican culture is to be wary of change because it has brought so little benefit for the people. Their rugged individualism has caused them to live under the motto, "Do it to them before they do it to you."

My statement makes little sense to someone like you because you fail to listen to understand versus listening to respond. As for change, you can't change people who don't have a conception for change. Their lack of belief that change is good is holding them back.

And no, I'm not conservative. I'm of Mexican decent with family still living there. Some of whom are working for citizenship because they see how the true nature of Mexico is.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 8:01 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

Yeah, the fact that when people are LIVING IN THE SHADOWS, they are certainly NOT being subsidized.

Pure common sense for all except for those who haven't none.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'Missionaccomplished'

Missionaccomplished | November 7, 2011 at 8:06 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

DAVID, first line you contradict yourself--you both criticize them for their "rugged individualism" which in turn is held up as a high value by most who Americans who would agree with you on this issue.

What does you having to be "Mexican" have to do with it? Mexican or Mexican-american, you mean? Does it give you a special "insight."? I can certainly tell by your posts it doesn't.

( | suggest removal )

Avatar for user 'DeLaRick'

DeLaRick | November 8, 2011 at 11:16 a.m. ― 3 years, 1 month ago

I'm going to be careful about what I post here. Lord knows I don't want to embarrass myself in the presence of such a renowned scholar on Mexico such as David65. I didn't know being of "Mexican descent" and "having family still living there" makes a person an authority on Mexican politics and culture.

So, our 2nd largest trading partner is a "third world country" like Somalia and Haiti? Who needs the Institute of the Americas, George Grayson or Jorge Castaneda when we have experts such as yourself. Thanks for the wonderful insight.

( | suggest removal )