Rafters get citation in Mexico

[presidio]

Presidio,

Is it your opinion that LE Rangers should not enter Mexico under any circumstances?

That is correct, but it's not just my opinion, it's a matter of international law. You do not have any 'right' or reason to enter another country except in compliance with that country's immigration laws. Now, obviously, this was routinely ignored by tourists and both governments when you could cross to Boquillas, but in the context of a governmental agency, there is no 'free pass' to enter another country, absent some formal agreement detailing circumstances, conditions and limitations.

The sole exception that no one would contest would be situations involving life or death, which poop bags or fire pans most assuredly do not fall under. Attempting to enforce petty park rules in another country defies logic.

[presidio]

I suspect Presidio believes LE rangers should not enter any space he occupies

You assume too much. I have absolutely no problem with law enforcement at all. I have a problem with unprofessional, incompetent law enforcement and illegal actions taken under color of law. In the case of the NPS the surfeit of petty regulations affecting every aspect of being on a park and their obsession with same just adds to it. That said, I comply always with their niggling, overwrought view of how folks should use this form of public land. I don't have to be happy with what they do but I do expect they have some level of competence and intellect. Doesn't appear to be the case at the moment.

The river runners were wrong to willfully ignore the rules

Here's that rationalization aspect again. You cannot willfully ignore something that is inapplicable to where you stand. Just as the US Constitution does not protect you outside the country neither does US law control you.

Of course, one could probably make an argument that the river runners were also illegally in Mexico, which, absent enforcement, is not a problem I guess.

Absolutely, but the economics of the situation overrule practical law. As I have previously noted, killing the Boquillas traffic affected no one economically other than Boquillans who had come to depend on tourist traffic and who were the beneficiaries of benign neglect by the NPS, BP and Customs. Enforcing the same closure on river runners is fraught with political pitfalls, alleged 'takings' of property (income) from commercial outfitters, and a labor intensive presence to enforce it all. It really isn't about border security at all...it's money that controls this.

This incredibly incompetent ranger would have performed a legitimate service if he had instead gone to the Hot Springs to arrest the Mexican national for illegal commercial activity in the park (waiting until the person entered the park) and confiscate the sales wares.

Would this ever happen? Doubtful, it's too hard and time consuming to do real police work....so much easier to cross the river and harass someone in another country.

At Hot Springs the ranger would not be taking an action based on illegal immigration (since the park wants to pretend they can't have their staff operate under agreement with the Border Patrol or Customs) so upon detention for violation of park rules, the suspect could then be turned over to the BP because (guess what) in the course of the ensuing 'investigation' the ranger would 'learn' an immigration violation existed and refer it to the appropriate authorities. While I really don't care if a hiking stick can be bought at Hot Springs, the sales act clearly is a violation of both park regulations and immigration law.

The Mexican national also clearly understands this since he obviously carefully times his crossings to minimize the chance of being caught. The most incredible aspect is that the park doesn't even go down to the springs and collect the items and money jar...during which operation they could make enough noise to ensure the Mexican national would not be in the park and thus they could avoid having to arrest him. The presence of the items and money is in no way compliant with park rules. Maybe the NPS is watching and waiting for a hapless tourist to actually buy something so they can bust the tourist rather than addressing the root cause.

So here you have a blatant, almost daily, violation of a number of laws/regulations and the park does absolutely nothing about it. Thus my opinion they run an amateurish police force. We should expect better but after all, it's the NPS.

[Medic]

Presidio,

So, you want it BOTH ways: If you don't WANT a ranger, it should be illegal for them to enter Mexico. But if you NEED a ranger they should come running.

Interesting logic.

[presidio]

Presidio,

So, you want it BOTH ways: If you don't WANT a ranger, it should be illegal for them to enter Mexico. But if you NEED a ranger they should come running.

Interesting logic.

Oh, come on! I don't want it both ways nor do I want an NPS ranger for anything. You asked if a ranger should ever enter Mexico. I gave you the sole circumstance when it would be appropriate in the absence of some other formal international agreement. A situation that is covered under international search and rescue conventions.

Yeah, let's continue to parse this to somehow give the NPS a pass on stupidity and somehow assign responsibility to the user for not following rules that weren't applicable to the situation, but which tugs at the heartstrings of those who want to ignore legal protections because the users 'should' have complied. Bulls**t.

[Medic]

Oh, come on! I don't want it both ways nor do I want an NPS ranger for anything.

So, if you're on a river trip and you're sick or injured on the Mexican side, you're calling the Federales? Am I understanding you correctly?

[presidio]

So, if you're on a river trip and you're sick or injured on the Mexican side, you're calling the Federales? Am I understanding you correctly?

Yeah, you bet.

No, in a true emergency, I first would do what I could to self-rescue. Always been in that mode since where I spend the majority of my time outdoors there is no NPS attempting to hold my hand. They probably couldn't find me anyway since there's no approved trail guide to the places I typically hang out.

In a dire circumstance affecting me or any of my companions where resolution was beyond our resources I would whip out and activate my PLB which would initiate a SAR event. It matters not who comes...but unless it was on the rare occasion when I am in Big Bend it sure wouldn't be an NPS ranger showing up because I don't go to other NPS areas.

Don't misunderstand, I am aware of their considerable competence with search and rescue....a skill set required and developed over years of coddling people who can't function on their own outdoors. The NPS is a premier technical rescue organization and I will admire them for that. I do not agree at all with how they 'manage' the public lands they control with their excessive rules and fees.

But, even though you seem to want to play word games with this, it has nothing to do at all regarding attempting to enforce laws without jurisdiction.

[RichardM]

...the places I typically hang out.

You mean "allegedly hang out," as we're still waiting for trip reports with pictures, right Homero?

[presidio]

...the places I typically hang out.

You mean "allegedly hang out," as we're still waiting for trip reports with pictures, right Homero?

 

That was good.

[EdB]

One other thing a lawyer would have fun with all day is this...

'All solid human waste must be carried out, with the following exception: kayak-only or single-canoe trips. Carryout is encouraged, but not required, between the Santa Elena Takeout and Talley, and between Solis and the Boquillas Canyon entrance.'

What does it mean where carryout is not required? Does that still apply only to kayak-only or single-canoe trips or does it also now cover large private party and commercial trips. It's certainly not clear and because of the punctuation, it cannot be inferred that the second sentence now does not encompass commercial trips. I suspect the NPS intends that large private party and commercial trips carry out regardless of where they may be but it is in no way clear that's the case, and it is more convincing that no one is required to do so in the places exempted.

Just another example of ambiguous, very poorly written 'regulations'.

I presume you are getting those regs from the informational pages on the park website. However, the superintendent's compendium is not so ambiguous, and that is what should be consulted for the definitive wording. From Section 2.14:
"Boaters in the park must carry out all solid human waste, with the following exceptions:
 -  Private river users between the Santa Elena Take-out and Talley, and between Solis and the entrance to Boquillas Canyon.
 -  Single canoe or kayak-only trips."

I've never seen a river permit so I don't know exactly how the regs are printed, but at least for backcountry permits your signature says you will abide by the regs printed on the permit. I would hope those regs are taken word for word from the compendium so there's no dispute over wording. I would not take the wording on the informational pages of the website to be official, but rather laymen's language which is susceptible to confusion the more it's picked apart.

That doesn't address the issue of someone who decides to dig catholes on the Mexican side for an entire trip. I suppose a zealous ranger could take such an admission and turn it into an illegal border crossing/re-entry issue if he/she do desired, unless the river runner stays on the Mexican side for the entire trip and re-enters at a legal port of entry upon completion of the trip.

[presidio]

I presume you are getting those regs from the informational pages on the park website. However, the superintendent's compendium is not so ambiguous, and that is what should be consulted for the definitive wording. From Section 2.14:
"Boaters in the park must carry out all solid human waste, with the following exceptions:
 -  Private river users between the Santa Elena Take-out and Talley, and between Solis and the entrance to Boquillas Canyon.
 -  Single canoe or kayak-only trips."

Yep, you're right about the source. Good catch on the compendium. I meant to check it for the post and then forgot to do so.

Also contained above is a critical component of the regulation...'Boaters in the park'.

Beyond the international boundary you no longer are 'in the park'.

That doesn't address the issue of someone who decides to dig catholes on the Mexican side for an entire trip. I suppose a zealous ranger could take such an admission and turn it into an illegal border crossing/re-entry issue if he/she do desired, unless the river runner stays on the Mexican side for the entire trip and re-enters at a legal port of entry upon completion of the trip.

Nope, the NPS maintains it has no immigration/customs authority so they can't make an issue out of it...and all the agencies accept that the border is crossed while floating. It is a non-issue, except for the inequity of its application to other border crossings.

[Undertaker]

Boaters in the park would depend on which side of the river you are boating. North US, South, Mexico, International boundary is middle of Rio. Entering Mexico armed is a violation of Mexican law and a armed ranger would be subject to arrest. I also agree with Presidio, in that if you are going to be backpacking, walking or anything else you do you should be self reliant, plan on caring for yourself, or you could always expect the government to protect and take care of you, just like the folks in Rita and the Jews in Nazi Germany. Yep that always works. This may be tough love, but the government is NOT going to take care of you, our government is WE and I don't know about Presidio, but I am tired of taking care of people who think I owe them a living, or am responsible for their stupidity in not evacuating a major storm. If you are given advice and fail to heed said advice or research and plan, life, camping, driving etc, then YOU deserve what YOU get

[presidio]

I don't know about Presidio, but I am tired of taking care of people who think I owe them a living, or am responsible for their stupidity in not evacuating a major storm. If you are given advice and fail to heed said advice or research and plan, life, camping, driving etc, then YOU deserve what YOU get

I am in complete agreement.

[Burn Ban]

presidio,

i wonder if you would be willing to put your two cents into this discussion.?

[presidio]

presidio,

i wonder if you would be willing to put your two cents into this discussion.?

Sure, let me work on it for a bit.

 

[slsutton]

I wonder what these issues would be like if they indeed created a international park between mexico and u.s. that included BB and the Maderas El Carmen range area as has been talked about before as noted near the bottom of http://www.bigbendchat.com/portal/forum/whats-happening/room-to-roam-t2374.0.html;msg23624     international park rangers?