TO MY READERS: HOW TO USE THE BLOG
Click Here

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape


PORVENIR BRIDGE NEXT ON BORDER PATROL LIST TO BE REMOVED 


According to the latest reports, the little footbridge shown above at the Porvenir/Pilares crossing of the Rio Grande is next on the Border Patrol removal list. The Border Patrol is requesting landowners on the Texas side tear the bridge down. Below is landowner Fred Nelan's response to the Border Patrol.
Gj

From: Fred Nelan
Sent: 05/30/2008 10:01 AM
To: 'REYNOLDS, LORAINE L'
Cc: 'perelpowell@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Porvenir Footbridge


To: Loraine L. Richards
Patrol Agent in Charge
Marfa Border Patrol Station
(432) 729-4250 Office


Hi Lorraine:

After our conversation this morning I would like to reduce to writing in this email the facts that I conveyed to you. First of all I don't believe that the bridge in question in Section 65 belongs to us. I therefore will not be destroying it this weekend as we discussed late yesterday.

It seems that congress authorized in 1972 the funding for channeling of the Rio Grande as well as preservation of wildlife on the river. This was in accordance with some Treaty with Mexico and they were to do a similar project on the other side of the river. It appears that many surveys were then conducted as well as environmental impact studies were done. In the early 1980's the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) began executing the project and acquiring right of way and lands for wetland set aside from landowners with river frontage. We were owners of the subject land at the time and a 200 foot right of way was acquired from land owners between a place called Haciendita on the South and North to Fort Quitman. We received compensation for some 47 acres in this right of way for our river frontage and assume most other land owners did also. The frontage on our Section 65 as well as a small piece of Section 66 was identified also as wetlands. We were compensated for 23 acres and the IBWC took title to this land.

It appears to me that since our land in Section 65 does not touch the Rio Grande at any point ,and what does touch is owned by IBWC, then the bridge is not our responsibility.

As I told you I have extensive files on this matter with maps and plans supporting the whole project including the environmental assessment. These files should be available to you from sources other than from us. I will deliver these files to our Attorney and partner and you can communicate with him regarding these files. He is Robert Perel and he has sent you a letter recently that on the letterhead will appear his contact information.

On a personal note I would hope that somewhere in this great government of ours someone can help alleviate the hardships you are about to impose on a few law abiding US Citizens living in San Antonio de Bravo. Removal of the Candelaria bridge to stop terrorists and Drug smugglers as well a few illegal aliens from crossing is ludicrous . They don't cross there anyway. Those illegal aliens that do cross are not the ones that are headed into our heartland and are so controversial but they are part of family and culture of our great Rio Grande Valley. We need to allow their children to catch that school bus in Candelaria each morning.

I write this as I see the new wall under construction over the sand hills west of El Paso. It is going down the Border on its way to California. I was raised here in El Paso and it breaks my heart to see such things happening.

Fred



[ view entry ] ( 2242 views )   |  permalink  |  $star_image$star_image$star_image$star_image$star_image ( 3 / 3111 )

<<First <Back | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | Next> Last>>