Big Bend National Park in southern Texas, known for its towering cliffs above the Rio Grande, expansive desert, and rugged mountains, is among the most remote protected areas in the United States.
Located along the Mexican border, the park has become a focal point of contention as a border infrastructure initiative advances despite months of public opposition and the suspension of multiple laws to accelerate the work.
The effort forms part of a sweeping tax-and-spending package signed by President Donald Trump in May 2025 that earmarked $46.5 billion for border wall construction. The corridor intersects several protected sites, including Big Bend Ranch State Park and Big Bend National Park.
Accept
Manage my choices
Shifting plans
Repeated revisions to the type of infrastructure proposed for the park have intensified concern among critics.
A February 2026 map from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) appeared to depict a steel bollard wall along a portion of the river, triggering outcry from residents and officials. Opponents cited environmental and economic harms and noted historically low crossing rates in the area.
Accept
Manage my choices
CBP quietly revised the map in March to show only “detection technologies” within the park, without public notice. Current CBP materials describe new “patrol roads” with “technology” and “vehicle barrier systems” across four segments.
In early July, Bloomberg reported a 30-foot border wall was planned for part of nearby Big Bend Ranch State Park. CBP told our team it is “not planning to construct a 30-foot-high barrier” in either park, but will deploy “cameras, sensors, roads, and limited low-profile post-on-rail barriers” to limit vehicle access while using natural barriers.
The agency said it performs environmental and cultural reviews, conducts outreach in the Big Bend Sector, and is seeking input on the vehicle barrier project.
Critics point to CBP’s lack of transparency and the risk of further plan changes.
“There’s a different statement from CBP every day, it seems,” said Laiken Jordahl, a public lands advocate at the Centre for Biological Diversity.
Accept
Manage my choices
‘They’re free to inflict as much damage as they want’
Concerns escalated on June 9 when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) waived 28 environmental and historic preservation laws to speed barrier and road construction in a zone covering Big Bend National Park, including the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act.
Jordahl said the waiver grants CBP broad discretion:
“Just by publishing this notice in the Federal Register, they have eviscerated decades of environmental protections. Environmental law would normally require the opportunity for public comment, input, transparency and require them to consult with experts, whether those are biologists or archaeologists. But empowered by this waiver, they’re free to inflict as much damage as they want with no consequences. Nothing like this has ever occurred in a national park.
This waiver explicitly clears the way for the construction of 30-foot-high physical border walls. If they are not moving forward to build a wall, they have stripped the protections, issued the contracts and given themselves all the tools to be able to decide as soon as they get their machines on the ground that they do want to build a wall. And there’s nothing that the public could do to stop them. Right now, we’re basically relying on the goodwill of the agency. And CBP has never demonstrated any goodwill to the borderlands. It’s a really scary time.”
The Centre for Biological Diversity expanded a lawsuit in mid-June to challenge the waiver as unconstitutional.
Former park superintendents and 18 Democratic lawmakers sent letters to the DHS Secretary opposing the waiver, which DHS justified by labeling the zone a high illegal entry area.
“There is no border security emergency here that warrants giving CBP unfettered authority to unnecessarily destroy some of the wildest parts of Big Bend or to disregard the overwhelmingly bipartisan will of the people, the actual data showing minimal numbers of border crossings inside the park,” the congressional letter stated.
Lawmakers noted the terrain and Mexican land to the south already deter illegal activity.
Data from former superintendent Bob Krumenaker shows CBP made 100–125 annual arrests in the park in 2023 and 2024.
Accept
Manage my choices
‘Almost nobody is crossing through the park’
Jordahl warned a physical wall would block wildlife from the Rio Grande, their primary water source, citing harm seen in Arizona.
“Wildlife would be unable to access the Rio Grande, which is their main – and oftentimes only – source of drinking water. We’ve seen that it had devastating impacts elsewhere in Arizona and other places where border walls have gone up.”
He added that even proposed patrol roads up to 7 metres wide and steel rail vehicle barriers would cause damage through blasting and bulldozing in rugged areas.
“The areas that they want to build these new roads and barriers are extremely rugged. I think the most damaging part of this project is just the amount of dynamite and blasting, bulldozing and scraping of mountain tops.
There is zero justification for any of this. Almost nobody is crossing through the park. And by building these new roads into the most remote stretch of the park, CBP is going to be opening up new smuggling routes.”
Congressional letter writers argued new technology and roads could disrupt the Rio Grande and raise flash flood risk.
‘In Big Bend, everybody is opposed to this project’
Jordahl said opposition has been unprecedented:
“There has been non-stop public outcry from local residents, local businesses, local law enforcement, and even the Republican sheriffs have gone on record opposing this project. In the past, border walls have been kind of a partisan issue: the left was opposed, and the right was in favour. But here in Big Bend, everybody is opposed to this project.”
