No one in the United States knows the perils of an insecure Mexican border better than our members and neighbors. We live with the ill-effects every day and some of us have even been forced to sell or abandon living on our properties.

We, of all people, desire a quick and definitive fix for our broken border. However, as it is apparently envisioned, “The Wall” would be nothing but counter-productive in making the border region more secure. Here are 10 specific reasons not to build “The Wall”:

Susan Kibbe

1. The terrain is not conducive. The Rio Grande River watershed in Texas is 50,000 square miles, roughly the size of Alabama. Building a wall around two of the largest lakes in Texas, Falcon Lake and Lake Amistad, and through the massive mountains and canyons of the Big Bend region would require an unfathomable engineering and construction feat that would require constant maintenance.

2. Even if constructed, it wouldn’t work. While physical barriers are useful for slowing and redirecting human movement, they never stop it. The Great Wall of China certainly didn’t stop Ghengis Khan, as evidenced by the millions of people throughout China with his DNA.

3. It would surrender the Rio Grande River, not to mention the land between the river and the wall, as a natural barrier. Both the state and the feds have had success deploying boats along the river. More boats would bring more success.

4. It could take forever. Besides design and construction time, private landowners along the river would rightfully advocate adequate compensation in the court system for land that is taken from them. That process would take years.

5. It would consume resources that are needed for Customs and Border Patrol enforcement and support personnel, technology, equipment, and the Coast Guard, which is already seeing increased activity.

6. It would consume resources that are needed for detention facilities and the justice system.

7. It would diminish trade with Mexico, our third largest trading partner, and consume resources that could be used to improve and better secure our ports of entry.

8. It would consume resources that could be used for interior domestic drug enforcement and treatment.

9. It would consume resources that could be used to address the need for an enhanced legal workforce in many sectors of our economy.

10. It would consume resources that could be used to address the root causes of people fleeing their living conditions in Central America.

In short, spending precious taxpayer dollars on building a monolithic physical barrier along the Rio Grande River in Texas would be a gross misappropriation of funds. Such expenditures would fail to address root issues and would ultimately lead to a less secure border, both now and in the future.