A map of light pollution in the United States. A new U.S. Border Patrol facility could hinder the precious remaining dark skies in the Southwest. International Dark-Sky Association, Inc. image
Hi, Michael,
I wanted to give you a heads-up on a possible light pollution threat to southwestern New Mexico. The U.S. Border Patrol is in the process of building a new facility in Lordsburg. From the specifications we have seen, it is slated to keep at least a 24-acre area lit up all the time. The station will be about 40 miles from the LightBuckets facility in Rodeo, about 30 miles from Gene Turner’s Rancho Hidalgo Astronomy and Equestrian Village, and about 20 miles from Turner’s new development at Granite Gap.
We are not sure what the lighting fixtures will be. We know from other such facilities that the Border Patrol has not paid much attention to containing light. At this point, we’re still gathering facts. I just thought that given the Astronomy Magazine Observatory at Rancho Hidalgo and your interest in fighting light pollution, you would want to be aware of this.
Cheers,
Steve
Thanks, Steve. Astronomy magazine readers and visitors to this website know I am a vocal supporter of dark skies and have railed against light pollution for years. But because the Border Patrol hasn’t revealed its final plans, I’ll make this blog more a request than a rant. Oh, and just so there’s no misunderstanding, please know I am a staunch supporter of secure borders for the United States.
So, what’s my request? Kill the lights? Far from it. I’m not suggesting the Border Patrol turn off necessary lights — I simply want the fixtures properly shielded. I’m the last earthling to suggest a return to the Dark Ages. I love my computer, television, and (especially) refrigerator too much for that. Besides, without car headlights, I’d have to walk to my favorite dark-sky sites toting a telescope on my back. Yeah, like that’s going to happen.
Shielding lights accomplishes several things: First, it darkens the sky. OK, that’s good for astronomers. We thank you. But practical reasons also exist. For example, a well-designed fixture reduces glare, which allows people to see their surroundings better. And by directing light downward only (where it’s needed), manufacturers can reduce the total output of the fixture. The result? We — taxpayers — save money.
Proper design also has an impact on safety issues. Security for those out at night doesn’t depend on how much illumination you use, but how well you use it. A Border Patrol agent’s ability to see someone trying to cross illegally goes up as the glare from security lights goes down. Simply adding more lights won’t help, and it could make the situation worse.
A study of neighborhood lighting in the Journal of British Criminology stated that a 20 percent crime drop resulted from improved street lighting. Note the use of the term “improved” — that doesn’t necessarily mean “brighter.”
So, when all is said and done, we can solve two problems at once. Dark skies help astronomers. And designers can keep the sky dark without sacrificing security. To top it all off, we’ll save money by reducing our energy consumption. Seems like a win-win-win proposal to me.
If you have any thoughts or comments, please e-mail me at mbakich@astronomy.com or post them in the comments section below.