The Trump administration is reconsidering the scope of a planned border infrastructure project within Big Bend National Park in Texas amid growing opposition over environmental and community concerns. In court filings submitted late Tuesday, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) disclosed it is “actively considering adjustments” to reduce the project’s impact, following consultations with the National Park Service and other local stakeholders. A final decision is expected by the first week of October, with ground-disturbing activities delayed for several weeks thereafter.

The proposed undertaking is part of a broader $46 billion initiative aimed at fortifying the U.S.-Mexico border with steel bollard walls, vehicle barriers, roads, lighting, and advanced surveillance technology. While earlier plans to erect a 30-foot-tall bollard wall through Big Bend National Park were shelved due to widespread objections, the administration intends to continue other enhancements such as new roads and vehicle barriers. These plans have sparked opposition from environmentalists, local residents, business owners, and advocacy groups who warn the construction will irreparably damage the park’s remote landscapes.

In August, CBP paused all construction-related work in Big Bend after bulldozers were seen clearing land, a move extended to the adjacent stretch north of the park along the Rio Grande River. Officials emphasized that only design and planning efforts, rather than full-scale construction, were ongoing during the pause. The northern section—primarily private land—remains a contested site where the government intends to build a 30-foot steel bollard wall supported by surveillance technology. However, the agency faces resistance from landowners, some of whom have initiated legal challenges.

Critics urge the administration to prolong the moratorium and reconsider the project. Bob Krumenaker, leader of the advocacy group Keep Big Bend Wild and a former park superintendent, highlighted that existing surveillance methods coordinated between the Border Patrol, Park Service, and local law enforcement already provide effective monitoring without intrusive infrastructure. The Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks characterized the project as a “mutilation” of a unique and pristine environment.

CBP acknowledged difficulties in obtaining land access permits from private property owners for surveys and construction, indicating that some cases may be escalated to the Department of Justice for condemnation proceedings. The agency has also engaged with affected communities to share concerns over cartel-related violence that underpin the border security measures.

Despite the mounting opposition, the administration continues to pursue President Trump’s signature border wall agenda, touting a construction rate of 12 miles per week. Nevertheless, resistance persists not only from landowners and environmental groups but also from Native American tribes who claim the project threatens sacred sites and sensitive ecological areas. Critics contend that the extensive spending and environmental trade-offs are unjustified given the recent decline in illegal border crossings.