RUIDOSA, Texas (AP) — Across the southern border, the Trump administration has been moving ahead with a $46 billion border wall project.
But in Texas’ Big Bend region, the administration has run up against intense opposition from landowners. That resistance is complicating President Donald Trump’s signature infrastructure project in a fight that has become a test of just how far the administration will go to fulfill its vision of a fortified southern
border.
The federal government has sweeping authority to force the project through. But a judge has now paused construction across the region, giving a major boost to landowners who have sought to impede the wall by refusing to cooperate with government surveyors, protesting at county meetings and gearing up for court battles.
“Landowner resistance has slowed this project to a crawl,” said David Keller, a landowner suing to stop the Big Bend border projects. The administration, he added, was “woefully unprepared for the hornet’s nest they stirred up.”
Building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border has long been a key campaign promise for Trump. Republicans last year approved money for the project as part of an immigration enforcement package.
The administration says that even with illegal immigration plummeting, the border project is needed to keep the numbers low.
Customs and Border Protection says it’s building 12 miles of barrier a week and recently hit a milestone of more than 200 miles of new walls built since Trump retook office.
In Big Bend, where construction began in September, the administration plans to spend $7.5 billion to fortify the border along a region stretching more than 500 miles or 800 kilometers.
In August, the Border Patrol arrested 8,870 people along the southern border. In Big Bend, which makes up roughly one quarter of the entire U.S.-Mexico border, it arrested roughly 160.
“The American people have already seen the consequences of an unprotected border," said CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott after a lawsuit against the Big Bend project. “We cannot allow any region — including Big Bend — to be exploited again.”
The government must acquire authorization from landowners to survey and build. If they refuse, the government can take them to court to get it — with compensation. The process is called eminent domain and courts generally defer to the government in these cases.
Dianna, 63, and Dan Burbach, 79, began receiving paperwork in July seeking permission to survey their property, along with a map showing where the project would run behind their house on property stretching to the Rio Grande.
The couple arrived 25 years ago and raised four children there. Now retired, they worry construction could worsen flooding and leave 15 acres (6 hectares) of their land behind the wall.
“We’re going to let them take us to court, do eminent domain and we’ll fight it that way,” Dianna said.
CBP has reached agreements with dozens of Big Bend landowners but the administration has also hired eminent domain attorneys in Texas in anticipation of disputes, said a Justice Department official speaking on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the government.
In a win for opponents, a federal judge recently temporarily barred wall construction in the Big Bend area. Plaintiffs argued the administration overstepped its authority to bypass regulations.
It’s not immediately clear how long the judge’s order will slow the government, which late Thursday asked the judge to put aside her decision while they appeal.
Some opponents are pressing local governments not to assist contractors. Charlie Angell, a tourism operator whose property lies in the project’s path, and his partner, Bibiana Gutierrez, attend county meetings throughout the region.
They and other land and business owners have staged protests, patrolled areas where contractors are working to look for possible violations, and hung signs telling contractors they’re not welcome at local hotels or restaurants.
In one county, residents unsuccessfully urged officials not to lease airport land to a barrier contractor, but in another county a proposed agreement allowing another contractor to use a county road has so far not been approved.
“If we had rolled over, the wall would be up,” Gutierrez said.
CBP said it continues seeking voluntary access agreements while completing the project’s design but will refer disputes to the Justice Department when necessary. Landowners will be compensated regardless of how access is obtained, the agency said.
After a yearslong surge in crossings at the southern frontier, border security and immigration were key reasons Republicans voted for Trump and his approval ratings on those issues are among his strongest.
But with illegal crossings way down, even some Republicans have questioned the Big Bend project.
Local sheriffs opposed the project early, and bulldozing in Big Bend National Park prompted bipartisan outrage.
Laura Allen, who voted for Trump twice, is now receiving notices about a vehicle barrier crossing the property where her family raises sheep and goats. She credits Trump with shutting down the border but questions the spending on this project.
“I didn’t vote for a wall,” she said. “I wanted our border secured. He accomplished that.”
Terrell County’s Republican sheriff, Thad Cleveland, who spent 26 years in the Border Patrol, is among those speaking out against the project in Big Bend. He said that in the region's rugged terrain, drones and surveillance towers are more logical than a wall to secure the border.
In some areas, the river is flanked on both sides by steep limestone cliffs, and up and down the region people have to trek through inhospitable desert terrain to get to the nearest paved road or pass through Border Patrol checkpoints.
Reaching Gary Grabowske’s land requires grinding along rocky mountain trails. From the top of a 450-foot cliff (137 meters), the Rio Grande is visible far below. There is no electricity, running water or internet and, Grabowske argues, no plausible route for a vehicle entering from Mexico.
“You can’t take a dirt bike to the bottom," he said. “You can’t take a mule to the bottom. You’re scrambling down there, hand over fist.”
Opponents also see this as a test of how far the federal government can go when landowners stand in the way of one of its priorities.
“If we’re going to be run over and have our land taken by our own government, what makes anybody else in this United States think that they’re exempt?” Allen asked.
The Zuberbueler ranch in Val Verde County was founded in 1898. Brothers Bill and Patrick own and lease thousands of acres of the craggy land stretching to the river where they raise goats and sheep.
Bill remembers receiving a letter back in February giving him five days to respond to a request to access his property for construction and raising the possibility of the government using eminent domain. He worries about how the construction will affect his livestock, especially their water supply.
“There’s not a lot of grass out here, but every square foot is important to my bottom line,” said Bill.
Patrick and Bill say they feel the weight of their family’s legacy and the sacrifices previous generations made to build the ranch up.
“Regardless of what happens, we have to say we tried,” said Patrick.
__
Associated Press writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report from Washington.
