The four federal agencies  responsible for administering the majority of these lands are the Bureau of  Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service in  the Department of the Interior, and the Forest Service in the Department  of Agriculture. Prior to September 11, 368 Border Patrol agents were  stationed along the nation’s border with Canada. This  situation creates challenges for land management law enforcement  officers responsible for protecting employees, visitors, and natural  resources—all of which face dangers from illegal border traffic. Increased Illegal Activity on Federal Lands in Arizona

Officials from the five land management agencies and the Border Patrol  told us that illegal border traffic, including drug smuggling and illegal alien  crossings, on federal borderlands in Arizona has been increasing by some  measures since the mid to late 1990s. Agencies Attribute Increased Illegal Activity on Federal Lands in Arizona to Border Patrol’s Strategy

According to land management agency and Border Patrol officials, the  increased drug trafficking and illegal immigration on federal lands in  Arizona, and the challenges they present for law enforcement, are a  consequence of the Border Patrol’s increased enforcement efforts to deter  illegal entry along other parts of the Arizona border. 2). In Washington, Federal Lands Have Been Less Affected by Border Patrol Strategy, but Officials Are Concerned that Illegal Activity Will Increase

Overall, evidence suggests federal lands on the Canadian border have not  been affected by the Border Patrol’s strategy to the extent they have in  Arizona, where the Border Patrol has deployed much higher  concentrations of resources. Land Management Agencies Say Law Enforcement Resources for Borderlands Have Not Kept Pace with Illegal Activity

Land management agencies have received varying levels of law  enforcement staffing and resource increases to address the effects of  illegal border-related activity. The  administration’s fiscal year 2005 budget request does not include funds for  this project. As a result of limited coordination, land management agency and Border  Patrol officials told us that threats may not be fully assessed, limited funds  may not be efficiently used, and deployment of personnel and other  resources may be inefficient or negatively affect other agencies. However, as of May 2004, the Border Patrol strategic plan and  implementation plan were not yet issued. Despite these examples of coordination, land management agency officials  also told us about instances where coordination efforts could be improved  at the field level. Coordinating the development of plans for infrastructure and technology  improvements to be placed on or near federal lands. Specifically, this report discusses  law enforcement challenges land management agencies face along the  international borders in Arizona and Washington, the resources federal land management agencies and tribal nations have  received to address border-related law enforcement challenges on  federally managed lands, and   how the Border Patrol and federal land management agencies coordinate  their law enforcement efforts along the Mexican and Canadian borders  and steps taken to meet joint challenges. We interviewed representatives from the Office of Management  and Budget to obtain their views on various budget issues. 1).
Why GAO Did This Study

Since the mid-1990s--and especially since September 11--the government has focused attention and resources on preventing illegal aliens, drug smugglers, and potential terrorists from entering the United States across its land borders with Mexico and Canada. The Border Patrol is responsible for protecting the nation's borders. However, a significant portion of the borderlands are federal or tribal lands managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Forest Service. Realizing the importance of coordinating federal law enforcement efforts, GAO agreed to assess: (1) border-related law enforcement challenges for land management agencies in Arizona and Washington, (2) resources land management agencies have received to address these challenges, and (3) how the Border Patrol and land management agencies coordinate border-related law enforcement efforts.

What GAO Found

Illegal border activities, including alien border crossings and drug smuggling, on federal and tribal lands in Arizona have been increasing since the mid-to late-1990s, creating law enforcement challenges for land management agencies. This situation poses dangers to law enforcement officers, visitors, and employees and damages fragile natural resources. Rising illegal activity on these federal lands results from the Border Patrol's strategy to deter illegal entry by concentrating resources in populated areas--thus shifting illegal traffic to more remote federal lands, where Border Patrol has placed fewer resources. Although the problem is less acute along the Canadian border, land management agency officials in Washington are concerned that as the Border Patrol increases resources in populated areas, more illegal traffic will shift to remote federal lands. Officials from the five land management agencies believe their resource levels have not kept pace with increases in illegal border activities on their lands. Agencies have sought more federal funds to address these problems and have received varying levels of law enforcement staffing and resource increases. According to Office of Management and Budget representatives, agency funding is mission-driven. Thus, land management agencies' proposals for certain border projects have not been included in the administration's fiscal year 2005 budget because they were considered to be more in keeping with the border security mission of the Border Patrol. At the national level, interagency coordination of strategic plans and activities among Border Patrol and land management agencies is minimal regarding the Mexican and Canadian borders. Thus, limited funds may not be used most efficiently, and the impact of one agency's actions on another agency may not be considered. As of May 2004, the Border Patrol had not issued detailed plans to ensure that interagency coordination occurs, nor had it coordinated with land management officials regarding funding for infrastructure and technology improvements. Some coordination had occurred at the field level, as officials from the various agencies had begun meeting to improve operations and to share threat assessments in Arizona.