The House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources, subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations convened the hearing, formally entitled The Consequences of Federal Land Management Along the U.S. Border to Rural Communities and National Security, and invited several witnesses to testify who had direct experience or knowledge of the impact of federal land policies in areas along the nation's borders. Mr. Pinkerton was the only witness from the country's northern border, other witnesses being from the U.S. - Mexico border, or from government agencies involved in the issue.
The subcommittee, chaired by Representative Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, with Idaho District 1 Representative Raúl Labrador as Vice Chair, invited Commissioner Pinkerton to travel to Washington D.C. and testify, based on his background as a former Border Patrol agent and his current position as Commissioner of a rural border county. Other witnesses testifying at the hearing included Jon Andrew of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Sue Chilton of the Chilton Ranch in Arivaca, Arizona, Tricia Elbrock who operates with her family a water service company and Elbrock Ranch in southern New Mexico and also represents the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association, and Nan Stockholm Walden, Vice President and Counsel for Farmers Investment Company and Green Valley Pecan Company in Sahuarita, Arizona.
Border counties such as Idaho's Boundary County are at the frontier of border protection and security for the United States. It happens that very many of these border counties are rural communities, with economic challenges, and often have remote, isolated wildlands within their reaches.
The subcommittee convened to discuss and hear testimony on how federal land management policies impact our national security, the nation's border counties, their communities, and the people who reside in those areas.
In its memo issued prior to the hearing, the subcommittee stated "Congress mandated that the Border Patrol achieve “operational control' of the international borders of the United States. Operational control is defined in statute as 'the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.' While Congress has authorized large increases in manpower and equipment for the Border Patrol, it has left regulatory obstacles in their path which make operational control less attainable."
The memo went on to say that Border Patrol agents often find their access to restricted areas of Forest Service land or other federal lands to be limited by federal land policies and regulations, which significantly impacts their ability to patrol the border and enforce border security. "On federal land, the Border Patrol must obtain permission to place monitoring equipment, to move equipment, to place temporary camps nearer to the border, and even to maintain roads. Land managers can take months to grant these authorizations to Border Patrol. At times, permission is not given, leaving heavily trafficked areas unprotected," according to the subcommittee memo.
Part of the problem is illustrated in the following graphic, obtained from the subcommittee memo, which illustrates how many federal agencies and departments are involved in the administration of federal land along the southern border. In this graphic, at least five different federal agencies are seen as administering different areas along the border, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Forest Service, who oversee a variety of national forests, national monuments, national parks, recreation areas, designated scenic areas, a wildlife refuge, and other lands. The Border Patrol has to deal with all of these entities in trying to access all the land along the border to carry out its mandate of operational control of the border.
In his testimony before the subcommittee, Mr. Pinkerton outlined his view of how this problem affects border security in our area. "The U.S. Border Patrol shoulders the daunting task of patrolling the rugged and remote land masses of the Selkirk, Purcell, and Cabinet Mountain Ranges, as well as all areas in between," Mr. Pinkerton told the subcommittee members. "The overwhelming majority of the area is mountainous and timbered. Access is vital to the success of securing the border and affords the Border Patrol the ability to secure these remote areas, maintain a secure border, and expand into adjoining areas."
"Access restrictions create debilitating effect, and vast areas of the border go infrequently monitored, or go without patrol altogether," he continued. "Resource managers have placed these restrictions primarily because of [Endangered Species Act] standards and biological opinions to limit motorized traffic into recovery zones of the grizzly bear . . . each patrol into the recovery zone is subject to the administrative trip cap, being shared among all agencies. The land managers put up gates on roads and do not provide a key, remove culverts, decommission roads, etc. They seldom give any notification or forewarning."
"An example of this is the Ball Creek Road closure. It's closure can add up to 3 1/2 hours of travel in making responses, rendering about 25 miles of the border unsecurable. This type of conflict is largely repetitive in many locations and jurisdictions along our northern border. "
Aside from national security issues at the border, Mr. Pinkerton also outlined his concerns on the economic impact of federal land policies to rural areas, stating that courts are inappropriately involved in land management. "Due to litigation, the courts essentially make critical forest management determinations," he said. He went on to state that restricted land management policies have also contributed to the increased risk of wildfires in our area.
Representatives on the Congressional subcommittee questioned Mr. Pinkerton further on these issues. Representative Raúl Labrador asked Mr. Pinkerton how secure the northern border is today. "I wouldn't consider it secure in any fashion," he replied. "As a matter of fact, if you date back to the 1970s, it's probably somewhere in the same realm as far as being secure. It's not secure."
Representative Labrador later asked Mr. Andrew, who is the Interagency Borderland Coordinator for the U.S. Department of the Interior, about cooperation between all the different federal agencies in protecting the borders. "There's obviously some issues, as Mr. Pinkerton has pointed out, that we need to work on, but in other areas the implementation of the [interagency Memorandum of Understanding] has been very successful," he replied. He later went on to add, "It has worked well in some places. At Ball Creek in Idaho it's been a challenge, to be honest. We're getting better at it, I think we're on the right track now. And we've had some discussions here with Mr. Pinkerton that have been very educational for me."
Representative Labrador asked if Border Patrol agents are hampered by denied access to certain areas of the border. "I hope not, it's not my intention, replied Mr. Andrews. "I work to assure that the Border Patrol has the access they need when they need it. I can't say that we're perfect with it, but I'm very willing to work on making that better wherever needed."
Mr. Pinkerton was later questioned by subcommittee member Amata Radewagen, the Delegate for the United States House of Representatives from American Samoa: "Commissioner Pinkerton, as someone with decades of experience in Border Security, particularly on federal land, how do environmental restrictions hamper border security operation and how has this problem become better or worse?"
"Well, I would echo that the Memorandum of Understanding has been put in place to solve some of these problems," he replied. "To be able to improve upon border security, the access is of the utmost importance. Where these roads exist, I don't believe you should have to go through and get another environmental impact statement put on it before you can drive a vehicle across it again. I don't believe your law enforcement should be hampered by having to stop every four or five miles to open another locked gate."
The full video of the subcommittee hearing, which includes Commissioner Pinkerton's testimony, can be found by clicking on this link. (If by chance that doesn't work, try this link).
In the hour and a half video, Mr. Pinkerton's testimony is located at the 36:00 mark, where he is introduced by the chairman, Representative Gohmert. In the video, Mr. Pinkerton answers additional questions from subcommittee members Raúl Labrador at the 48:48 mark and Amata Radewagen at the 1:12:20 mark.
On his return back home to Boundary County, Mr. Pinkerton was asked what it was like to testify before Congress. "I was deeply honored to represent Boundary County before the committee," he replied. "After all, the impacts that forest management has on our community is extremely important to all of us who live here. In addition, as a career Border Patrol Agent, I am somewhat uniquely experienced to able to answer any questions the committee may have had regarding the border security issue and the access needs of the Border Patrol."
He was further asked if his trip, which was paid for out of the Boundary County Commissioner's travel budget, afforded any time for sight-seeing in the nation's capitol. "Unfortunately, I had no spare time to explore the city," he said. "I flew in late Wednesday night, testified on Thursday, and flew home early Friday. Luckily, the building where I gave testimony was directly across the street from the capitol building. At least I was able to see that—from a distance."
Mr. Pinkerton further stated, "I only hope that my testimony had meaning. That it will provide some help to Congress in getting our forests back to supplying our community with the resources we need, and that our public accesses will be revived.
"I would also like to add that Representative Labrador represented the needs of Idaho admirably during the hearing. I was proud of his actions and his leadership to the subcommittee with this issue."
A full transcript of Mr. Pinkerton's testimony and remarks can be viewed by clicking here.