Avocado

The U.S. /Mexico Border vs. Human Life and Ecosystem

by Samyrha Saba

Introduction

Today the United States border with Mexico is a desert sea of opportunity to those invested in surveillance technologies, border construction, detention centers, border patrol, drug trafficking. This includes all those judicial pieces that participate in and profit from the criminalization of vulnerable migrant lives. Migrants seek the opportunity to escape war, persecution, and poverty whose cause is inseparable from the neocolonial apparatuses that oppress the global south. Also traversing these 2,000 miles of border you will find some of the most ecologically diverse ecosystems that support the livelihood of rare, endangered, and endemic species.

Borders represent a global issue with unique implications everywhere yet strong overlaps in rhetoric, technologies, agencies that sustain them. These intersections have drawn together movements to bring them down heard in today’s rallying chants such as, “From Palestine to Mexico, All the Walls Have Got to Go!” In this paper we will not look at these intersections but will focus solely on the U.S./Mexico border. In particular, we will look at this border region through a social and ecological lens. Socially we will consider the abuse, danger, and death experienced by migrants, the bisection of the Tohono O’odham nation, and the impacts of fear based xenophobic rhetoric. Ecologically we will identify the land designated for conservation within 100 miles of the border and the impacts to the land and to animals especially of endangered or threatened classification.

History

The demarcation of national borders is new in human history. A new form of claiming and expanding the reaches of power manifested through the nation state model. Many of these global boundaries that we recognize today, which bisect bodies of land and water are made by European colonialism, in North and South America, Australia, Africa, the Arab Nations, Asia, the Pacific Islands and more. Much of the world is geographically, systemically, and psychologically shaped by European colonialism.

The expansion and establishment of the United States is one driven by profit and whose beneficiaries still are determined within a white supremacist construct. U.S. imperialism is evident in its economic and military power globally. In addition to the huge mass of Turtle Island and Hawaii settled by the U.S. are the sixteen territories which include Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Mariana Island, U.S. Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.

The location of today’s U.S. southern border was first determined in 1848 and extended in 1853 via the Gadsden Purchase to include the mineral-rich areas in southern Arizona and New Mexico. Mexico had gained recognition of independence from Spain in 1821, but was left with little means to prevent Americans from settling in northern territories. Proslavery settlers continued to establish themselves in Texas to profit from the cotton industry built on the back of African slaves. Americans claimed these lands were part of the Louisiana Purchase, and Mexico could do little about it. Under proslavery President John Tyler in 1845 the U.S. annexed Texas from Mexico and identified its border reaching as far south as the Rio Grande. In 1846 James K. Polk sent troops to the Rio Grande and ensued a war with a highly outmatched Mexico. Two years of war culminating in the U.S. occupation of Mexico City and the signing in February 1848 of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Mexico looses 40% of it land including CA, AZ, NM, and TX. The U.S. threatened to incite war again if Mexico did not comply with what eventually was settled in the U.S. acquisition of the mineral-rich lands of southern New Mexico and Arizona via the Gadsden Purchase of 1853 (Nevins, 2008).

Since the arrival of the Europeans and the creation of the nation states of both Mexico and the United States this has had detrimental effects on native people on either side of the border. The history of Spanish colonization utilized a scheme of divide and conquer by giving land title to Spanish (ladinos) and mixed Spanish and native individuals (mestizos) (Vazquez, 2003). In the U.S. the “Indian Problem” was dealt with by relocation, reservations, boarding schools, and extermination. When the U.S. gobbled up this much land it also included communities of Mexican and indigenous peoples that conflicted with the construct of the white American. The marginalization of the Mexican populations in territories that became part of the U.S.

In southern Texas in 1915, Mexicans embarked on a series of raids on Anglo ranches, irrigation works, and railroads. This grew to a full uprising with Mexicans from both sides of the border that resulted in the use of force by Texas Rangers and thousands of U.S. soldiers. While dozens of Anglo ranchers died and many temporarily fled, anywhere from conservative estimates of 300 to a much higher 5,000 Mexicans lost their lives (Nevins, 2008). This event is exemplary of the animosity Mexicans and Latinos experience in the United States to this very day, while also revealing the violence the U.S. has always been willing to use in the name of imperialism to Mexico and the whole global south.

Social Impacts

            Economically the U.S. Mexico border and the establishment of new relations between these two nation states has meant more marginalization for Mexico’s poor working class and indigenous communities. In the period between 1800-1860 U.S. income rose 1,270.4% and Mexico’s declined 10.5%. Mexican towns drew further north towards the border, weakening ties with the central government in the south. The time of the Porfiriato (1880-1911) when Porfirio Diaz rose and fell and forced his way into the precedency, his government “gave many wealthy U.S. business interests control over large swaths of land, and domination over Mexico’s oil and mining sectors and much of the country’s agriculture” (Nevins, 2008).

            In regards to migration into the United States from the southern border there is a long history of discrimination and abuse. From laws in the 1800’s that banned convict, prostitutes, and lunatics, to the infamous 1882 law that banned Chinese nationals, though they still managed to get in. In fact, until 1882 the Bureau of Immigration functioned solely to encourage European immigration. Throughout the decades until today the U.S. has benefited from cheap migrant labor despite so many laws that have subjugated migrants and incremented border enforcement. Between 1929-1935 about 500,00 to 1 million Mexicans were forcefully removed including tens of thousands of U.S. citizens of Mexican decent. On Jun 9, 1954 Congress passed Operation Wetback were in just half a year an estimated 1 million migrants were apprehended and deported from major U.S. cities.

Since the 1990’s the U.S. border control efforts have been driven by “prevention through deterrence” strategies which adopt the notion that more border patrol and border infrastructure would deter migrants from attempting to cross. Because these strategies were first implemented in the areas of major cities, migrants were forced to cross deeper into the rural desert having various devastating effect. In 1994 the Clinton administration implemented Operation Gatekeeper that involved constructing fences and militarization of the border.

“The number of entries and apprehensions did not decrease, and the number of deaths due to dehydration and sunstroke in the summer or freezing in the winter surged dramatically. In 1994, fewer than 30 migrants died along the border; by 1998 the number had risen to 147; in 2001, 387 deaths were counted; and in 2012, 477 bodies were found. From 2007 to 2013, over 2,000 known migrant deaths occurred along the Mexico Arizona border” (Hing, 2015). This last number translates to just under one person dying every day, and that’s only within the Arizona desert. This information does not account for all the migrants that die before ever reaching the border from various communities of origin.

Figure 1 Between October 2017-September 2018 Pima County Forensic Science Center, the morgue for most of southern Arizona, received the remains of 122 people found in the desert. This only accounts for those found in Southern Arizona and reported. (No More Deaths, 2018)

The construction of physical barriers increased during the George W. Bush administration after Congress passed the Secure Fence Act in 2006 which originally mandated more than 800 miles of border wall construction. This happened in a post-9/11 framework that pushed policy with the drop of a singe word, “terrorism.” Under the administration of the 45th U.S. president in January of 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a travel ban of countries mostly of Muslim faith. On January 25, 2017 the 45th U.S. president also signed Executive Order 13767, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, which order for the construction of a wall along the 2,000-mile border.

The U.S. Mexico border represents a scar on the land for indigenous people who moved up and down and traded throughout the northern and southern continent prior to colonization and the establishment of today’s nation states. For the Tohono O’odham Nation the border splits their community in two. It’s important to recognize that originally this nation covered a much larger span of land which was reduced during the Gadsden Purchase and the lack of consideration to the nation. On the U.S. side the Tohono O’odham Reservation covers 2.8 million acres in southern Arizona. The tribe has 34,000 members 2,000 of whom are on the Mexican side (Montiel, 2017).

News of a border wall is of great importance to this native nation as it would be a physical barrier to reaching their relatives south and for the domestic and wild animals on their land. Today the reservation runs along 62 miles of international border. Although the tribal government spends 60% of their time on border relation issues, for nearly two decades has spent 3 million of its own funds on border, and has collaborated with the U.S. government and even used their own funds to help construct a vehicle fence, there is no question that they do not want a wall. “The Tohono O’odham Legislative Council issued a resolution on February 7th in opposition to the wall” (Montiel, 2017). While there seems to be consensus over the wall, there is much division over the collaboration with Border Patrol in the installation of Integrated Fixed Towers, which includes 15 surveillance and sensor towers. A more conservative older generation from the nation especially contrast with younger and activist perspectives on the reservation. A short film is on the nations tribal government website, “There’s No O’odham Word for Wall.”

Figure 2 The Green Dotted line marks original O'odham land. Yellow dots are O'odham communities in Mexico. The light colored area is O'odham Reservation land.
Ecological Impacts

While there are some studies on the ecological impacts of existing physical barriers and the potential impacts of a 2,000-mile wall, there isn’t as much research as you would suspect with a project of such great magnitude. This is largely thanks to the fact that Congress gives the Secretary of Department of Homeland Security the power to waive more than 35 laws that would otherwise kick in during the planning, implementation, and management of development projects like the installation of physical barriers and surveillance technologies at the border. Therefore, dozens of laws such as NEPA, CEQA, or ESA can all be waived by the stroke of a pen in the name of national security. The wording for this power ascribed to the Secretary of the DHS is found in Section 102 of the 2005 Real ID Act (Sierra Club, 2018).

Along the 2,000 miles you’ll find three mountain ranges “Today there are 25 million acres of protected US public lands within 100 miles of the line. That includes six wildlife refuges, six national parks, tribal lands, wilderness areas, and conservation areas — all of them managed by various federal agencies and tribal governments” (Barclay, 2018). In the far west of the border is the Tijuana Estuary, considered one of the most ecologically diverse areas in the state of California (Sierra Club, 2018). The border in the far east is home to the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge, home to 19 federally threatened and endangered species and 57 state protected species including the ocelot, bobcat, and armadillos (Barclay, 2017). In southern Arizona alone and into Mexico are the protected areas of Barry M. Goldwater Range, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, and El Pinacate y Gran Desierto de Altar.

Figure 3 From the Vox report on the ecological impacts of the wall. Photo credit Sarah Frostenson

According to a 2011 study co-authored by Jesse Lasky of Penn State’s biology department there are an estimated 134 mammals, 178 reptiles, and 57 amphibian species within 30 miles of the line, 50 species, and 3 subspecies that are globally or federally threatened in Mexico or the United States. A higher estimate by the Center for Biological Diversity that includes species who are low in numbers but not yet listed, these are known as candidate species. The CBD suggests that a total 93 threatened, endangered, and candidate species would potentially be impacted by the wall, this includes plant species (CBD, 2017). The full list is in their May 2017 report. For these species a border wall translates to habitat loss and isolation, which in turn reduces genetic diversity and the chances of reestablishing self sustaining populations. In an ever changing climate, a wall further exasperates unpredictable and often scares resources with further reduction in the ability to move freely in search of water. For other insects such as butterflies the lights on sections of the wall have been know to attract and zap the insects (Barclay, 2017).

The hydrological cycles along the border could also be impacted by the wall in ways similar to a dam. Flooding, erosion, and scouring are all possibilities with walls or levee walls and it has already happened. Within the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument there is an average of nine inches per year and has two wet seasons. When the rain comes the dry cracked desert floor moves water quickly causing natural flash floods. These floods tend to carry debris and more so after fires. In 2008 2 inches fell in less than two hours, as the water picked up debris, the pedestrian fence acted as a dam and the water ran laterally flooding Lukeville. The Army Corp of Engineers responded by installing lift-able gates in the fence, when the Nation Park Service published a report in 2008 regarding the impacts of the pedestrian fence. These gates failed to open in 2011 and the same problem happened during another flash flood (Reinig, 2012)

With the continued enactment of xenophobic policies that make crossing more difficult and dangerous, this land and the plants and animal species that reside here are more threatened. Today there is about 650 miles of fencing, about 300 miles are vehicle barriers and 353 miles are pedestrian barriers. While the vehicle barriers are passable by animals, the existing pedestrian barriers are not. Research shows these movement barriers are already impacting animals who previously roamed freely through this area. Besides fencing impact is also highly attributed to trails for patrolling and development of the border. “Department of Homeland Security has built hundreds of miles of roads to allow the Border Patrol to access remote regions” (Barclay, 2018).
The Mexican Gray Wolf (Canis lupus baileyi)
Endangered

Figure 4 Mexican Gray Wolf (Bartletti, Don)

Smallest gray wolf in North America. Once found throughout southwestern Texas, southern Arizona New Mexico, and down into central Mexico, but they were hunted to near extinction by the U.S. government. Eliminated in the U.S. by 1930, the U.S. government maintained a hunter to shoot any wolves coming in from Mexico. The Endangered Species Act in 1976 protected these wolves, and the surviving population was taken into a captive breeding program in 1981. The wolves were reintroduced in 1998. As of 2017 there 113 wolves in the wild, particularly eastern Arizona and western New Mexico. In Mexico they were reintroduced in in 2011 and have resulted 35 wolves in northern Mexico. A border wall would separate the northern and southern populations and prevent genetic exchange critical for an endangered population.
Sonoran Pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis)
Endangered

Figure 5 The Sonoran Pronghorn. (CBD)

The fastest land mammal in North America reaching speeds of 60 mph. The Sonoran pronghorn is an endangered subspecies of pronghorn that is endemic to the Sonoran Desert. There are a small 100 pounds and 3 feet tall. Hunting and habitat degradation has led to their decline in numbers and there are a total of about 1,000 living in the wild in Mexico and the U.S. combined. The wall would again separate populations impacting genetic diversity essential in survival and making access to food and water more difficult.
Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owls (Glaucidium brasilianum cactorum)
Endangered

Figure 6 Nesting in large cacti.
Photo Credit Blue Planet Biomes

These little owls average 7 inches in heights any only 2.5 ounces but they are ferocious predators who prey on mammals, birds, and reptiles. One of three subspecies of the ferruginous pygmy-owl. Though they were once common in the bi-national Sonoran Desert they are in serious risk of extinction. Since 1993, no more than 41 have been found in a single year. While more abundant in Mexican Sonoran Desert, there too they have declined 26% since 2000.

A petition by the Center for Biological Diversity granted this pronghorn listing in the ESA and in turn 732,000 acres of critical habitat in 1999. Developers with the support of the Bush administration filed a lawsuit resulting in the bird’s overturned listing in 2006. In 2007 the CBD filed a new petition for the pygmy’s listing, after which the 9th District Court of Appeals upheld the delisting again. The CBD filed a lawsuit 2012. The latest is a 2017 court order for the USFWS to make a decision. For this bird the wall would represent a gap in vegetation, significant due to their nesting in cacti. They are also low flying birds. Interesting research has found that any wall 18 to 30 feet in height would exceed their flight range and divide their population (Center for Biological Diversity)

Jaguar (Panthera onca)
Endangered

The largest cat native to North America once ranged north to Monterey Bay California and east into the southeastern United States, before being hunted to near extinction. They are now listed as endangered in the U.S. and Mexico and the USFWS has identified providing natural jaguar dispersal between the two countries for the jaguar’s recovery. At least seven have been spotted in the last few decades in the U.S., like the jaguar in the photo above. The population is several time larger in the Mexican Sonoran Desert, and a wall would completely destroy any opportunities for this cat to establish reproducing populations in the north.

Conclusion

            The creation of the U.S. Mexico border and its impacts are massive. This report only begins to scratch the surface of ecological impacts and the many ramification of social impacts caused by this border. The border has transformed North America drastically giving the United States a drastic increase in capital that has influenced its impacts to the world at large. The history of abuse and stigmatization of migrants is only particularly looked at here. There is little to no mention of the abuse within detention centers, dispossession of migrant property, physical and sexual abuse to name some of the many issues fueled by this border complex. For native communities the creation of the borderlands and their continued enforcement has transformed the way in which native people live and engage with the land. Here we looked in part at the experience of the Tohono O’odham but the impact is experienced by native people beyond the border region and to other nations such as the Yaqui or Kumeyaay.

In regards to the environment the creation of a wall much like any development, but unique in its whole obstruction of movement is a terrible possibility for wildlife. Though this report does not detail impacts to vegetation, there is no guarantee that with the passage of the Real ID Act that the Department of Homeland Security will hold high standards for the mitigation of damaged vegetation or prevention of invasive plant species colonization during construction.

All of the many side effects of the border wall mentioned and unmentioned here will continue to occur and worsen with the construction of a border wall. So long as the root problems that lead communities to migrate are left unresolved, there will be migrants by any means necessary. While we began this report looking at the beginning of U.S. imperialism, we also must look to the end of U.S. imperialism in order to find a solution to this issue that impacts the world at large. The normalization of the wall is one that should not be a given but rather is worthy of the highest most experienced, impacted, and educated examination. The border could have the effect of further normalizing the whiteness, xenophobia, privilege, racism, animosity, desensitization, imperialism, and hate that it stands for. In the name of dignity for all life, may this wall and those that stand for this fall with the power of the people whose backs these walls have stood on.

Works Cited

Barclay, E., Frostenson, S. The Ecological Disaster that is Trump’s Border Wall: A Visual Guide. Vox (October 29, 2017).

Bradley, Curt et al. A Wall in the Wild: The Disastrous Impacts of Trump’s Border Wall on Wildlife. Center for Biological Diversity. (May 2017).

Center for Biological Diversity. Saving the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy Owl. https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/birds/cactus_ferruginous_pygmy_owl/index.html. (Access December 12, 2018)

Hing, Billy Ong. The Racism and Immorality of the Operation Gatekeeper Death Trap. University of Oxford Faculty of Law. (April 13, 2015)

Nevins, Joseph. Dying to Live: A Story of U.S Immigration in an Age of Global Apartheid. City Lights Books. San Francisco. (2008).

Montiel, Anya. The Tohono O’odham Nation and the Border Wall. American Indian. Vol. 18 No. 2. (Summer, 2017).

Quijano, Elaine. How a Border Wall May Affect the Tohono O’odham Nation. CBSN Originals. (January 29, 2018).

Reinig, Corey. Flooding in the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. National Border, National Park: A History of Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. (2012).

Vasquez, Rafael Gallegos. Los conceptos “Indio” Y “Ladino”: construcciones histórico sociales definidas por sus relaciones. Universidad Rafael Landivar. (September, 2003)

12/11/2017

Avocado

0 Comments

Read Now

The Dark Side of the Aguacate
By Mariah Lomeli
          Markets are constantly influenced by what society thinks of consumer products. As corporations and other business interests play a role in deciding what commercials, ads and programs to run, society soaks them in and manifests them into what could be destructive behaviors. These commercials, ads and programs eventually run their course around the world through globalized efforts, ultimately affecting people in every country. As more people around the world gain access to Internet connections, they are constantly exposed to these consumer pressures. Social media is key in influencing today’s generation and products that make a major debut on such platforms become widely accepted and desired. One such product includes the beloved avocado. Health conscious social media accounts promote healthy diets with this super-food that’s packed with healthy fats and vitamins.This however is not the only type of influence. NAFTA created a large market for the U.S that has steadily increased since. As wonderful as it is to get ahold of such a tasty, nutritious fruit at any supermarket, we cannot disregard the fact that this increase in this market creates many negative consequences. This should not be the norm. People should not have to suffer at the hands of capitalistic gain. However, this is almost always the case and in regards to the avocado the destruction is no different. The food that becomes part of a person’s diet does more then give them nutrients. It tells a story of cultural values, globalized trade, social injustice, environmental degradation and our political economy.
When did the avocado become a precarious object of concern? The increased consumption and demand of avocados began in 1994 as NAFTA lifted the ban on avocado imports from Mexico. This meant that most tariffs were eliminated or reduced considerably, allowing it to infiltrate the North American market completely. In less than a decade, consumption doubled in America (Huacuja, F. E. 2008). However, issues surrounding this demand have mounted to a national concern. The avocado is native to Central Mexico and has ties to much of the ancient history of the land. It can be traced back some 12,000 years ago has spread all over the Americas since. The main geographic location for avocado production is in Michoacan, a central state in Mexico, and grows 50% of all the avocados being exported from Mexico. With approximately 106,000 hectares, Michoacan yields 4- 8 metric tons of this silky fruit per hectare (Haofeng Chen, et al. 2009). During 2001 to 2011 avocado production steadily increased as Mexico supplied 45% of the international avocado market. The United States had always been dependent on the avocados produced by California, however the California drought had strained production enormously.Usually this meant that Mexico would continue supplying the avocado demands of it’s northern neighbor, however a battle against unethical treatment of farm workers was steadily picking up steam in Mexico. This resulted in massive strikes from Mexican farm workers as they occupied offices of the Association of Producers and Exporters of Avocados from Mexico. As negotiations failed to be reached, a total shutdown of the Mexican avocado supply to the US Market was inevitable. This caused an increase of avocado prices all around the world, with some establishments increasing prices 100% (Jeansonne, Brent. 2011). Increased avocado prices have not curbed our appetite for the fruit, and interestingly enough, effective marketing has created an Internet frenzy around the avocado. Today we can’t scroll through our social media feed without seeing an avocado. Consumer demand in the U.S has increased overtime as a result of increased consumer income, population growth and industry advertising and promotion. This created a need to match this demand from Mexico, especially in places like Michoacan.
The avocado can be seen as an object of concern for many reasons. Such reasons include, its high water demands in water strained areas, the politics surrounding it’s production, its influence in communities and the impact it has on the environment. Although these impacts may not reach everyone directly, it is ignorant not to realize the dangerous situations that the avocado has brought upon the people in Mexico. It has become so popular that America is now importing 80% of the avocados produced by Mexico, thus creating a lucrative market for capitalistic interests (Lamb, R. 2006). Most of these avocados come from the state of Michoacan, a place many associate with cartels such as La Familia Michoacana and more recently the Caballeros Templarios, or Knights Templar. Cartels feed on successful and lucrative businesses in many part of Mexico, most often those associated with agricultural production, by charging a tax. They tax almost every business in Michoacan, for example butchers would be taxed $70-$100 USD a day. Cartels have realized that extortion was more profitable than selling drugs and charge avocado growers $60 and packaging facilities about $2,200 a month. Resistance is always met with threats, kidnappings and murder. The Mexican government has done little if nothing at all to intervene on behalf of the communities in Mexico and as a result, the same communities are forming armed vigilante groups to protect their livelihood and families. One Cheran local explains it in a story covered by FusionTV, “We’ve armed ourselves to defend our rights. Officials no longer carry out justice here.” An avocado production manager from Michoacan stated, "Many of them give money, others don't. If you don't give it, well, you are putting yourself in danger". In another instance, a preacher and avocado grower from the city of Tancitaro, had his daughter kidnapped, raped and brutally killed. This all happened right before her father prepared to transfer title of his grove to the cartel after failing to raise a $600,000 ransom. Although vigilante groups have successfully fought off the Templars in Tancitaro, they remain with a heavy presence in Urapan, Michoacan, the states largest avocado growing region after Tancitaro and where most avocado packing facilities are certified for U.S exports (Paley, D. 2014). Many growers, packers, families and individuals fear retaliation by the Caballeros Templarios, including those linked to the Association of Avocado Producers and Export Packers of Mexico. The last president of the APEAM, Alejandro Alvarez, was shot in his car by unknown men in 2012 and ended up leaving Mexico with his family (Rucker, P. 2010). Working to produce agricultural commodities increases the chance of cartels interfering in the lives of many farmers living in rural parts of Mexico. Avocados are known as “green gold” in Mexico, because of the fortune to be made from such crops. Generations of Mexicans have provided for their families and brought food into our kitchens by directly and quite literally spilling blood, sweat and tears. As we sit down for breakfast and spread avocado on our toast, we can’t hide from the fact that their are real people feeling the heavy impacts of the avocado production near their communities.
Acts of physical violence aren’t the only detrimental consequences felt by the communities associated with avocado production and handling. As more and more people seek to profit off of global demand, avocado production continues to expand.Thus, all of the effects imposed by avocado groves become multiplied at an increasing rate. This includes, increased pesticide use, increased water usage, increased greenhouse gas emissions and increased exposure to violence. Pesticide use has always been controversial in regards to the negative ways they affect humans and other living organisms. Since the release of “Silent Spring” the harmful side effects of pesticide use have been brought to light. Illnesses and deformities are all too common in those that have suffered exposure. Chemicals used in orchards to treat fungus, pest and other plant diseases are no different. An article written for PBS by a lecturer at Harvard, Vikram Mansharamani, explained the health concerns for those related to avocado production. The people in Jujucato, the heart of avocado land, have come down with more and more breathing and stomach problems from the wind that blows the chemicals into many family homes (Vikram Mansharamani, 2016). Pest problems in public health, agriculture, and commerce are unsteady because pests develop resistance to widely used pesticides and are introduced to new locations without effective natural controls (Alavanja, M. C. R., Ross, M. K. and Bonner, M. R. 2013). Field workers in Mexico are subject to more lenient laws against pesticides and other chemicals. Such form of leniency includes little or no protective gear against the harsh chemicals. These are the people that are the most vulnerable to illnesses. On top of illegal deforestation through the use of fires to clear areas for more avocado groves, chemical residue is left behind in the wake of the fires. SinEmbargo, a liberal media outlet in Mexico that is backed by NGO’s and environmentalist, has challenged this notion of illegal deforestation. Social media and news outlets are often times the only way to voice the concerns and opinions of the people in rural town within Mexico. An environmentalist wrote on the Michoacan Food Sovereignty Defense Front facebook page saying, “Flames devoured the hills in plain view of all the citizens of Uruapan, just like the fields of avocados have decimated entire forests, leaving in their wake highly toxic green wastelands and aquifers contaminated by pesticides, as well as sickness and death for the laborers and their families.” The Secretary of Commission for the Environment, Natural Resources and Climate Change of The State of Michoacan, Ricardo Luna Garcia, claimed that the forest fire in the town of Uruapan was started by the “ambitions of avocado businesses”.
The controversy surrounding avocado groves mirrors similar environmental concerns as those around the palm oil plantations in Indonesia. Avocado trees thrive in the same environment as fir forests in the mountains of Michoacan. This has led farmers and corrupt cartel members to take drastic measures in order to avoid authorities. Activities such as thinning out of forests, planting young avocado trees under the forest canopy, and then cutting back the forest as the trees grow to let in more sunlight on the forest floors have increased since the avocado boom. Occurrences of avocado trees growing in various areas outside of the designated land is all too common. Farmers have even taken to cutting down protected areas to establish avocado groves. This protected area contains much of the wintering grounds of the monarch butterfly. These groves are created with little input from local communities and have only increased conflict between communities and government actors. Locals feel that the cartel and greedy capitalistic entities are trying to drive the people out in order take up the fertile land ( Barsimantov, J. 2009).
When a seemingly innocent product is the culprit to environmental issues and community destruction, it is almost inevitable not to feel compelled to act in a way that would reverse the negative consequences. It is easy to say “well I just won’t buy avocados from Mexico” but this isn’t the correct response at all. The livelihoods of many innocent people are dependent on agriculture production to live another day. There are laws and regulations that force big agriculture corporations to treat produce at an ethical standard in regards to pesticide and chemical use, yet the ethical treatment of migrant workers trails far behind and is only exacerbated through the greed caused by explosive avocado market.

References

Alavanja, M. C. R., Ross, M. K. and Bonner, M. R. (2013), Increased cancer burden
among pesticide applicators and others due to pesticide exposure. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 63: 120–142. doi:10.3322/caac.21170

Atucha, A., Merwin, I. A., Brown, M. G., Gardiazabal, F., Mena, F., Adriazola, C., &
Lehmann, J. (2013). Soil erosion, runoff and nutrient losses in an avocado
(persea americana mill) hillside orchard under different groundcover management systems. Plant and Soil, 368(1-2), 393-406. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1520-0

Barsimantov, J. (2009). What makes community forestry work? A comparative case
study in michoacan and oaxaca, mexico (Order No. 3367705). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection. (304853132). Retrieved http://ezproxy.humboldt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/304853132?accountid=11532

Chan, N. (2016, Aug 24). Why we should assess avocado ardency. University
Wire Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.humboldt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/1813809453?accountid=11532

Haofeng Chen, Peter L. Morrell, Vanessa E. T. M. Ashworth, Marlene de la Cruz,
Michael T. Clegg; Tracing the Geographic Origins of Major Avocado Cultivars, Journal of Heredity, Volume 100, Issue 1, 1 January 2009, Pages 56–65, https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esn068

Huacuja, F. E. (2008). Abriendo fronteras: El auge exportador del aguacate mexicano a
estados Unidos1/Opening markets: The mexican avocado export boom to USA. Anales De Geografía De La Universidad Complutense, 28(1), 9-28. Retrieved fromhttp://ezproxy.humboldt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/204249300?accountid=11532

Jeansonne, Brent (June 1, 2011). "Commercial Horticulture: What do we know about
Mexico's avocado production (PDF). University of Florida. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-12.

Lamb, R. (2006). RENT SEEKING IN U.S.-MEXICAN AVOCADO TRADE. Cato Journal,
26(1), 159-177.

Paley, D., & Ebooks Corporation. (2014). Drug war capitalism. Oakland, CA.: AK Press.

Rucker, P. (2010, Feb 07). Mexican drug cartels find 'green gold' in super bowl
avocados. Edmonton Journal Retrieved from http://ezproxy.humboldt.edu/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/251448806?accountid=11532

Velazquez, A., Duran, E., Ramirez, I., Mas, J., Bocco, G., Ramirez, G., & Palacio, J.
(2003). Land use-cover change processes in highly biodiverse areas: The case   of oaxaca, mexico. Global Environmental Change, Part A: Human and Policy Dimensions, 13(3), 175-184. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(03)00035-9

0 Comments

The U.S. /Mexico Border vs. Human Life and Ecosystem

Avocado

Leave a Reply.

Authors

Archives

Categories