5). Border Patrol Operates under Several Land Management Laws and Coordinates Its Responsibilities under These Laws with Land Management Agencies through National and Local Agreements

When operating on federal lands, Border Patrol has responsibilities under  several federal land management laws, including the National  Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Wilderness Act of 1964, and Endangered  Species Act of 1973, and it generally coordinates its responsibilities under  these laws with land management agencies through national and local  interagency agreements. Border Patrol must obtain permission or a permit  from federal land management agencies before its agents can undertake  certain activities on federal lands, such as maintaining roads and installing  surveillance equipment. Because the land management agencies are  responsible for ensuring compliance with land management laws, Border  Patrol and the land management agencies have developed several  mechanisms to coordinate their responsibilities. The most comprehensive  of these is a national-level agreement—a memorandum of understanding  signed in 2006 by the Secretaries of Homeland Security, the Interior, and  Agriculture—intended to provide consistent principles to guide their  agencies’ activities on federal lands. Land Management Laws Have Limited Border Patrol’s Access to Federal Lands in Some Areas, but Most Agents-in-Charge Reported No Effect on Their Stations’ Border Security Status

Border Patrol stations’ access has been limited on some federal lands along  the southwestern border because of certain land management laws,  according to some patrol agents-in-charge in the borderlands region. Despite these delays and restrictions, 22 of the 26  Border Patrol stations reported that the border security status of their area  of operation has not been affected by land management laws. Specifically, patrol agents-in-charge of 14 of the 17  stations reported that they have been unable to obtain a permit or  permission to access certain areas in a timely manner because of how long  it takes for land managers to comply with the National Environmental  Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. The 2006 memorandum of understanding directs the agencies to  cooperate with each other to complete, in an expedited manner, all  compliance required by applicable federal laws, but such cooperation has  not always occurred, as shown in the following examples:  Federal lands in Arizona. For example, Border Patrol  requested permission to move a mobile surveillance system to a certain  area, but by the time permission was granted—more than 4 months after  the initial request—illegal traffic had shifted to other areas. Instead, factors other than access delays or restrictions, such as the  remoteness and ruggedness of the terrain or dense vegetation, have had the  greatest effect on their abilities to achieve or maintain operational control. For Four Stations Reporting That Their Security Status Has Been Affected by Land Management Laws, Agents Have Either Not Requested Additional Access or Have Had Such Requests Denied by Senior Border Patrol Officials

Of the 26 patrol agents-in-charge we interviewed, 4 reported that delays  and restrictions in gaining access to federal lands have negatively affected  their ability to achieve or maintain operational control: 2 of these 4 agents  reported not having used Border Patrol’s operational assessments to  request resources to facilitate increased or timelier access, and the other  2 reported having had such requests denied by either Border Patrol sector  or headquarters officials. Some Federal Land Managers Have Collected and Used Selected Data on the Environmental Effects of Cross-Border Illegal Activity to Manage Federal Borderlands

While federal land managers along the southwestern border receive data  collected by Border Patrol on the extent of cross-border illegal activities on  their lands, the extent of land managers’ data collection efforts on the  effects of these illegal activities has varied among land units, with some  land managers regularly monitoring areas to determine resource impacts,  others documenting environmental damage on an ad hoc basis, and still  others collecting no such data. Nevertheless, many patrol agents-in-charge reported wanting more  frequent, land unit-specific, in-person training for their agents. Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report for review and comment to the  Departments of Homeland Security, the Interior, and Agriculture. GAO staff who made major contributions to this  report are listed in appendix V.

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Our objectives were to (1) describe the key land management laws Border  Patrol operates under and how Border Patrol and land management  agencies coordinate their responsibilities under these laws, (2) examine  how Border Patrol operations are affected by these laws, and (3) identify  the extent to which land management agencies collect data related to  cross-border illegal activities and associated environmental impacts and  how these data are used.
Why GAO Did This Study

Over the last 5 years, Border Patrol has nearly doubled the number of its agents on patrol, constructed hundreds of miles of border fence, and installed surveillance equipment on and near lands managed by the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture along the southwestern border. In so doing, the agency has had to comply with federal land management laws, and some have expressed concern that these laws may limit agents' abilities to detect and apprehend undocumented aliens. GAO was asked to examine (1) key land management laws Border Patrol operates under and how it and land management agencies coordinate their responsibilities under these laws; (2) how Border Patrol operations are affected by these laws; and (3) the extent to which land management agencies collect and use data related to the environmental effects of illegal activities, such as human trafficking and drug smuggling. GAO reviewed key land management laws, interviewed agents-in-charge at 26 Border Patrol stations responsible for patrolling federal southwest borderlands, and interviewed managers of these lands.

What GAO Found

When operating on federal lands, Border Patrol has responsibilities under several federal land management laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Wilderness Act, and Endangered Species Act. Border Patrol must obtain permission or a permit from federal land management agencies before its agents can maintain roads and install surveillance equipment on these lands. Because land management agencies are also responsible for ensuring compliance with land management laws, Border Patrol generally coordinates its responsibilities under these laws with land management agencies through national and local interagency agreements. The most comprehensive agreement is a 2006 memorandum of understanding intended to guide Border Patrol activities on federal lands. Border Patrol's access to portions of some federal lands along the southwestern border has been limited because of certain land management laws, according to patrol agents-in-charge for 17 of the 26 stations, resulting in delays and restrictions in agents' patrolling and monitoring these lands. Specifically, patrol agents-in-charge for 14 of the 17 stations reported that they have been unable to obtain a permit or permission to access certain areas in a timely manner because of how long it takes for land managers to conduct required environmental and historic property assessments. The 2006 memorandum of understanding directs the agencies to cooperate with one another to complete, in an expedited manner, all compliance required by applicable federal laws, but such cooperation has not always occurred. For example, Border Patrol requested permission to move surveillance equipment to an area, but by the time the land manager conducted a historic property assessment and granted permission--more than 4 months after the initial request--illegal traffic had shifted to other areas. Despite the access delays and restrictions, 22 of the 26 agents-in-charge reported that the overall security status of their jurisdiction is not affected by land management laws. Instead, factors such as the remoteness and ruggedness of the terrain have the greatest effect on their ability to achieve operational control. Although 4 agents-in-charge reported that delays and restrictions have affected their ability to achieve or maintain operational control, they either have not requested resources for increased or timelier access or have had their requests denied by senior Border Patrol officials, who said that other needs were more important. While federal land managers in the borderlands region rely on Border Patrol to collect data on the extent of cross-border illegal activities on their lands, the extent of the land managers' data collection efforts on the effects of these illegal activities has varied. Some land managers monitor areas on a routine basis, some document environmental damage on an ad hoc basis, and still others collect no such data. Where collected, land managers have used these data for several purposes, including restoring lands and providing Border Patrol agents with environmental awareness training. With regard to training, most agents-in-charge wanted more-frequent, area-specific training to be provided by land managers.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends, among other things, that the Secretaries of Homeland Security, the Interior, and Agriculture take steps to help Border Patrol expedite access to portions of federal lands by more quickly initiating required assessments. In commenting on a draft of this report, the agencies generally agreed with GAO's findings and recommendations.