Emergency map update · September 22, 2026

Emergency Map Update

CBP has changed the project map. Shumla’s September 22 review found that the revised route moves closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon. Shumla is asking officials to pause irreversible work, explain the change, and review the project’s need and impacts before work proceeds.

Take actionSign the petition
Protect the Lower Pecos

The route can change. Public review should keep pace.

Ask the officials responsible for Big Bend Project 5 to explain the changed route, demonstrate the need, consult affected communities, assess impacts, and evaluate lower-impact options before irreversible work proceeds.

Contact officials
The route update

What changed?

Shumla’s September 22, 2026 GIS review found that the current proposed route moved closer to the Rio Grande west of Eagle Nest Canyon and closer to Highway 90 elsewhere. It now runs much closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon. CBP provided no public notice of these route changes, according to Shumla.

Overview map of the proposed Big Bend Project 5 vehicle barrier route in Val Verde County. The yellow line shows the route dated September 20, 2026; the red line shows the route from approximately April through September 2026. The four detailed map panels below show the route from west to east.

The map legend dates the current proposed route to September 20, 2026. Shumla’s GIS review of route and site impacts is dated September 22, 2026. The two dates refer to different materials.

For CBP’s official project mapping, see the CBP Smart Wall Map. The comparison maps above are Shumla’s map materials.

Map 1 of 4, western Val Verde County. Yellow shows the proposed route dated September 20, 2026; red shows the route from approximately April through September 2026.
Map 1 of 4 · Western Val Verde County
Map 2 of 4, route segment east of Map 1. Yellow shows the proposed route dated September 20, 2026; red shows the route from approximately April through September 2026.
Map 2 of 4 · Central-west segment
Map 3 of 4, route segment east of Map 2. Yellow shows the proposed route dated September 20, 2026; red shows the route from approximately April through September 2026.
Map 3 of 4 · Central-east segment
Map 4 of 4, eastern route segment toward Lake Amistad. Yellow shows the proposed route dated September 20, 2026; red shows the route from approximately April through September 2026.
Map 4 of 4 · Eastern segment toward Lake Amistad

Route and impact figures reflect Shumla’s GIS review dated September 22, 2026. Update the figures and review date when Shumla completes a new GIS review.

≈64,908acres on the river side of the proposed barrier
+2,208acres compared with the previous route
410known archaeological sites on the river side, including 78 with rock art
108known sites within 500 yards of the route; 33 have rock art
Why this landscape matters

Deep history and living cultural meaning

Panther Cave

Located in Seminole Canyon State Park and Historic Site, Panther Cave contains a world-renowned mural extending more than 200 feet, with hundreds of painted images.

Rattlesnake Canyon

Rattlesnake Canyon houses five rock art sites spanning a quarter mile, including an extensive mural complex with more than 350 painted figures.

The Lower Pecos Canyonlands

People began creating murals in the Lower Pecos nearly 6,000 years ago. The tradition continued for more than 4,000 years across at least 175 generations. These places remain part of living Indigenous heritage.

The project area includes public lands, private ranches, and Seminole Canyon State Park and Historic Site. The project may affect archaeological sites, rock art, ranch access to water and grazing land, river frontage, family property, and public access.

What Shumla is asking

Pause, explain, consult, and review alternatives

Shumla supports effective border security designed for this region. Before irreversible work proceeds, DHS and CBP should:

  1. Pause construction, surveying, property access, and approvals that could cause irreversible effects while the changed route and impacts receive public review.
  2. Explain the route change and demonstrate the operational need for the proposed infrastructure in this terrain.
  3. Protect Seminole Canyon State Park and Historic Site, Panther Cave, State Antiquities Landmarks, and the Lower Pecos Canyonlands Archaeological District National Historic Landmark.
  4. Consult affected private landowners and Tribal communities before decisions become irreversible.
  5. Assess effects on archaeological sites, rock art, working ranches, public lands, park resources, and public access.
  6. Evaluate cumulative effects from barriers, roads, grading, blasting, lighting, staging, drainage changes, and long-term access restrictions.
  7. Consider detection technology and other site-specific security tools that meet the mission with fewer permanent impacts.

The cost deserves a clear public explanation

DHS awarded a $2.594 billion design-build contract for Big Bend Project 5, according to the project information summarized in Shumla’s update. Before committing public funds to infrastructure that could cause lasting effects, DHS and CBP should explain the operational need, show how the cost is justified, and compare lower-impact options.

Take action

Contact the officials responsible for the project

Start with offices that have direct authority over project decisions. Include your home city and ZIP code so elected offices can identify you as a constituent. Add a personal sentence about why the Lower Pecos matters to you.

Who to contact

OfficeWhoWhat to ask
U.S. Department of Homeland SecuritySecretary Markwayne MullinAsk DHS to pause irreversible work, disclose the route change, document need, and direct CBP to evaluate lower-impact options.
Texas GovernorGovernor Greg AbbottAsk the Governor to intervene for Seminole Canyon State Park, Texas landowners, and Texas cultural heritage.
U.S. SenateYour U.S. senatorsAsk for a written DHS response and oversight of the route change and consultation process; urge DHS and CBP to pause irreversible work pending review.
U.S. HouseYour U.S. representativeAsk for a written DHS response and oversight of the route change, project need, consultation, and alternatives.
Texas Parks and WildlifeCommission and Executive DirectorAsk TPWD to withhold access or approvals that threaten Seminole Canyon until impacts and alternatives receive full review.
Texas General Land OfficeLand CommissionerAsk the GLO to defend Texas public land and insist on lawful, transparent access.
Texas LegislatureYour state senator and representativeAsk them to review effects on Texas public lands, private property, cultural resources, and local communities, and raise concerns with relevant state agencies.

Find your U.S. representative · Find your Texas officials · U.S. Capitol switchboard: 202-224-3121

Short contact message

For a contact form or brief email.

Show and copy short message
Subject: Urgent request on Big Bend Project 5 and the changed CBP map Dear [TITLE AND LAST NAME], I am a resident of [CITY, STATE / ZIP]. CBP has changed its proposed route for Big Bend Project 5 without public notice. Shumla’s September 22 review found that the route moved closer to the Rio Grande west of Eagle Nest Canyon and closer to Highway 90 elsewhere. It now runs much closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon. The revised route places 64,908 acres on the river side of the barrier, an increase of 2,208 acres. Shumla identified 410 known archaeological sites on the river side, including 78 rock art sites. Additionally, 108 known archaeological sites lie within 500 yards of the route on either side, including 33 with rock art. Please [SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR THIS OFFICIAL]. Require DHS and CBP to explain the route change, demonstrate the operational need, consult affected landowners and Tribal communities, assess impacts, and evaluate lower-impact security options before irreversible work proceeds. [ADD TWO PERSONAL SENTENCES.] Sincerely, [NAME] [CITY, STATE / ZIP]

Phone script

A short call to an official’s office.

Show and copy phone script
Hello, my name is [NAME], and I live in [CITY / ZIP]. I’m calling about Big Bend Project 5. CBP changed the proposed route without notice, moving it closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon and placing 2,208 additional acres on the river side of the barrier. The government should explain why this project warrants such a large investment and show that the cost is justified. I’m asking [OFFICIAL] to seek an immediate pause on irreversible work, request a public explanation, and protect affected landowners, Tribal cultural interests, Seminole Canyon, and Lower Pecos rock art. Please record my request and send me the office’s response. My contact information is [EMAIL OR PHONE].

Full constituent letter

Personalize it and select the request that fits the office.

Show and copy full letter
Subject: Protect the Lower Pecos Canyonlands and respond to the changed project map Dear [TITLE AND LAST NAME], I live in [CITY, STATE], and I am asking you to act urgently on Big Bend Project 5. CBP changes the proposed route periodically without notifying the public. Shumla’s September 22, 2026 GIS review found that the current route moved closer to the Rio Grande west of Eagle Nest Canyon and closer to Highway 90 in other areas. The route now passes much closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon. The Lower Pecos Canyonlands preserve one of North America’s most significant archaeological records. People began creating murals there nearly 6,000 years ago and continued the tradition for more than 4,000 years. These places remain part of living Indigenous heritage and include public lands, private ranches, and Seminole Canyon State Park and Historic Site. Under the revised route, 64,908 acres lie on the river side of the proposed barrier, an increase of 2,208 acres. Shumla identified 410 known archaeological sites on the river side, including 78 rock art sites. Additionally, 108 known archaeological sites lie within 500 yards of the route on either side, including 33 with rock art. I support effective border security, but DHS and CBP must show why this infrastructure is necessary in this rugged terrain and whether less destructive security measures could accomplish the same goal. DHS awarded a $2.594 billion design-build contract for Big Bend Project 5. Before public funds are committed to infrastructure that may cause lasting effects, DHS and CBP should explain the operational need, show how the cost is justified, and evaluate lower-impact options. Please use every available authority of your office to secure an immediate pause on construction, surveying, property access, and government approvals for Big Bend Project 5 in Val Verde County. Before any irreversible work proceeds, DHS and CBP should be required to: 1. Publish the current route and explain changes made since the public comment period. 2. Demonstrate operational need using current, location-specific data. 3. Consult affected landowners and Tribal communities. 4. Assess effects on archaeological sites, rock art, working ranches, public lands, and public access. 5. Evaluate detection technology and other lower-impact security options. Please provide a written response describing the actions your office will take. Sincerely, [NAME] [STREET ADDRESS] [CITY, STATE, ZIP]

Texas leadership letter

Focus on Texas land, park access, and cultural resources.

Show and copy Texas letter
Subject: Protect Seminole Canyon and Texas land from irreversible harm Dear [TITLE AND LAST NAME], CBP has changed the proposed route for Big Bend Project 5 without public notice. I am asking you to intervene now to protect Seminole Canyon State Park and Historic Site, Texas landowners, and the cultural heritage entrusted to the State of Texas. DHS awarded a $2.594 billion design-build contract for Big Bend Project 5. Before public funds are committed to infrastructure that could cause lasting damage, DHS and CBP should explain why it is necessary, show how the cost is justified, and evaluate lower-impact options. Please require a public explanation of the route change and updated impact analysis before Texas grants access, easements, permits, or other approvals. Ask DHS and CBP to demonstrate the operational need and evaluate detection technology or other site-specific alternatives with fewer permanent effects. Texas should protect public land and irreplaceable cultural resources through full review of the facts, meaningful consultation, and alternatives. Please provide a written response describing what action your office will take. Sincerely, [NAME] [CITY, STATE / ZIP]
Background and supporting documents

Read more about Shumla’s response

The action tools above help visitors contact officials. These documents provide more context for people who want to read Shumla’s statement, the Board’s position, or Dr. Carolyn Boyd’s letters.

Board resolution

The Board’s resolution on stewardship, science, consultation, and cultural resources.

Read the Board resolution
Questions and answers

Frequently asked questions

Does Shumla oppose border security?

No. Shumla supports effective border security designed for this region. DHS and CBP should demonstrate the need for this project and evaluate less damaging options.

What does “river side of the barrier” mean?

It refers to land between the proposed barrier and the Rio Grande. This is clearer than “south of the barrier” because the river and route do not follow a straight east-west line.

Are these numbers current?

These figures reflect Shumla’s GIS review from September 22, 2026. CBP may change the route, so Shumla dates each update. Check this page for the latest review.

Why should I personalize my message?

Your city and ZIP code help an elected office identify you as a constituent. A short personal note about why these cultural places matter to you makes your message your own.

What is Shumla asking elected officials to do?

Shumla is asking officials to use their authority to seek a pause on irreversible work, request a public explanation, review project need and impacts, consult affected communities, and consider lower-impact options.

What could the project affect?

Potential effects include archaeological sites, rock art, working ranches, public lands, park resources, land and water access, and public access. A full review should assess direct and cumulative effects.

Share this update

Help your community stay informed

Forwardable email to friends and partners
Subject: Urgent action needed after CBP route change CBP changed its proposed route for Big Bend Project 5 without public notice. The revised line moved closer to the Rio Grande west of Eagle Nest Canyon, toward Highway 90 elsewhere, and much closer to Panther Cave and Rattlesnake Canyon. Shumla is asking officials to pause irreversible work until the public receives a clear explanation and updated review. DHS awarded a $2.594 billion design-build contract for this project. Before public funds are committed to infrastructure that could cause lasting effects, DHS and CBP should explain the operational need, show how the cost is justified, and compare lower-impact options. Please take five minutes today: 1. Read Shumla’s updated route analysis on Shumla.org. 2. Use Shumla’s toolkit to contact the officials responsible for the project. 3. Sign and share the petition: https://c.org/2qRf6DCZBL