Boarder Wall Threatens Sanctuary

UNESCO, responsible for World Heritage sites, says the boarder 'wall' between the US and Mexico threatens the ecological connectivity between two wildlife reserves, El Pinacate and Gran Desierto Alta Biosphere Reserve and Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Reserve. A section of barrier cuts across the reserves impacting wildlife that depend on springs in Arizona for water. A representative of the Center for Biological Diversity said the 30 foot wall does not block humans from crossing, but does stop the passage of animals, causing damage to the biodiversity of the Sonoran Desert [photo below]. 

credit: S. Müller

Without remediation, the reserves could appear on UNESCO's list of endangered World Heritage sites. According to the CBD, the barrier now runs 87 miles along the border of El Picante with only a 14 mile gap in mountainous terrain. Animals accustom to traveling to springs in the north are now without a water source. Quitobaquito Springs [video] is the most well known and is also sacred to the Thohono O'odham people who live on both sides of the border. In September UNESCO published a document calling on the US and Mexico to cooperatively develop a mitigation plan whose aim is to restore ecological connectivity. It also called for conservation measures to be implemented as part of Mexico's new solar power array near Puerto Peñasco. The Mexican government published a report in 2022 finding that the border structure would cause habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation as well as reduced water resources.

Dead animals including peccaries, deer, and desert bighorns have been found in the vicinity of the wall, presumably dying of thirst. Adding the adjoining reserves to the UNESCO danger list would allow the release of World Heritage funds to the threatened sanctuaries. Currently, the Mogool Foundation, which was founded to improve social and environmental health, is providing water in the south by filling concrete troughs with water transported from neighboring municipalities. While the effort may sustain wildlife cut off from natural sources, it is an expensive and inefficient means of mitigating the problem.