By: Katrina Erwin
The U.S. government’s plan to build a border wall inside Big Bend National Park has sparked concerns about the impact of such projects on environmentally and culturally significant areas. In recent years, border wall construction within Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument has disrupted Native American burial sites, wildlife, and the surrounding environment, raising broader questions about how the U.S. cares for its public lands. While both national monuments and parks are federally protected, federal law allows the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to waive certain U.S. statutes, including environmental and land protection rules, if they are deemed to impede barrier construction along the U.S. border. These events stand in stark contrast to how Costa Rica, one of the world’s most ecologically progressive countries, handles the balance between wildlife and national security.
Both the U.S. and Costa Rica destroyed valuable forests and then sought to revert the destruction, but they took very different paths in doing so. While the U.S. has made progress through multiple-use, sustainable yield practices and replanting, Costa Rica’s strategy placed environmental conservation at the forefront. In the U.S., most public lands are managed for multiple uses, balancing conservation with economic activities. This approach has contributed to the nation boasting a roughly 33% forest cover nationwide. In contrast, Costa Rica prioritizes biodiversity, ecosystem preservation, and sustainable land use over extractive activities. Costa Rica is widely recognized as an environmental model, having enacted progressive policies such as outlawing deforestation and compensating private landowners for conserving or restoring forests. As a result, nearly 60% of Costa Rica is now forested. This distinction highlights the differences in what each country prioritizes when drafting its legal frameworks on conservation and land use.
Although Costa Rica is smaller than West Virginia, approximately 25% of its land is legally protected for conservation. By comparison, the U.S. protects about 13% of its total land area for strict conservation, with another 17% managed for multiple uses. U.S. protective designations can be overridden for national security reasons, while Costa Rica’s laws safeguard archaeological sites and make it difficult to bypass land protections. The right to a healthy environment is enshrined in Costa Rica’s Constitution, and conservation is further supported through robust environmental education in schools and a national economy centered on ecotourism. In contrast, the U.S. places less emphasis on environmental education and continues to face pressure to extract and develop resources on public lands. These differences illustrate how each country’s legal and cultural frameworks shape their approaches to land stewardship.
The U.S. and Costa Rica have fundamentally different philosophies for public land stewardship. The U.S. has achieved important conservation milestones, but these often compete with other interests. In contrast, Costa Rica has made conservation a foundational pillar of national identity. As debates continue in the U.S. over projects like border wall construction on public lands, Costa Rica’s approach offers a compelling model for prioritizing the long-term protection of natural and cultural heritage. The contrast challenges the U.S. to reconsider its own values and commitments to public land preservation.
