sacred

TECATE, Mexico — White sage burning, Norma Meza Calles gathers guests at a Mexican wellness resort into a semicircle facing Kuuchamaa Mountain and asks everyone to close their eyes and feel its presence.

“This is sacred to us like a church for you all. The mountain is our healer, our psychologist,” said Meza Calles, a Kumeyaay Nation tribal leader who explains that in its creation story a shaman transformed into the mountain. “Here is where we gather strength to live in this difficult world.”

Then she calls for a moment of reflection. But the silence is pierced by the crushing of rock. U.S. federal contractors have been blasting and bulldozing Kuuchamaa, which straddles the U.S.-Mexico frontier, to make way for new sections of border wall.

Indigenous leaders say that in the Trump administration’s rush to build border wall segments, contractors are desecrating Native American sacred places and cultural sites at an unprecedented pace, more than 170 years after the international boundary split the territories of dozens of tribes.

Blasts on sacred mountain

Wall construction has ramped up along the 1,954-mile border even as illegal crossings have plummeted to historic lows. Much of it began this year after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security waived cultural and environmental laws.

In California, explosions on Kuuchamaa, also known as Tecate Peak, send rocks hurtling down its Mexico side.

“We feel that in our DNA,” said Emily Burgueno, a California member of the Kumeyaay Nation, noting that “body” and “land” are the same word in the Kumeyaay language. Some tribal leaders met with Homeland Security officials to urge them to protect Kuuchamaa and are looking into legal action.

“No one ever consented or supported the use of dynamite on the mountain,” Burgueno said.

The nation consists of more than a dozen tribes in California and Mexico’s Baja California. The Kumeyaay have been working to block construction of the border wall since Trump’s first term.

In Arizona, Homeland Security contractors last month carved through a massive, 1,000-year-old fish-shaped geoglyph called Las Playas Intaglio. The rare drawing, etched into the desert floor much like Peru’s Nazca Lines, was created on a lava field in what is now the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge.

Construction crews work April 24 on a new border wall segment near the end of a previously built section on Kuuchamaa Mountain, seen from Tecate, Mexico.

(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)

The Tohono O’odham Nation said it had pointed out the site on its ancestral land for contractors to avoid.

“This was a devastating and entirely avoidable loss,” Tohono O’odham Chairman Verlon Jose said in an April 30 statement. “There is nothing more important than our history, which is what makes us who we are as O’odham. The site was also an irreplaceable piece of the United States’ history, one none of us can ever get back.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said in a statement that a contractor “inadvertently disturbed” the site west of Ajo, Ariz., on April 23, but it vowed to protect the remaining portion. CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott is talking to tribal leaders to determine next steps.

Members of the Inter-Tribal Assn. of Arizona, which represents 21 tribes, traveled to Washington last month to lobby against a 20-foot secondary wall being built along that section of the border, as well as a primary 30-foot bollard wall planned on Tohono O’odham tribal lands.

They met with Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, a Cherokee Nation member, who listened but made clear his intent is to build more border wall as fast as possible, the Tohono O’odham Nation said in a statement.

Hundreds of miles under contract

The Trump administration says the barriers are necessary to keep people and drugs from entering the U.S. illegally. It wants walls to cover at least 1,400 miles of the border.

Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year devoted more than $46 billion to the effort.

CBP has awarded contracts or begun construction on over 600 miles of new border wall, with companion surveillance technology. A double wall is planned or under construction along an additional 370 miles.

In Arizona, where the Patagonia Mountains descend to the border, heavy machinery crawls along freshly graded roads to extend a double wall that could block a wildlife corridor for endangered ocelots and jaguars. Jaguars have long coexisted with the Tohono O’odham, who consider the species “spiritual guardians,” Austin Nunez, a tribal leader, said in a 2025 lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged the Homeland Security waivers.

In Sunland Park, on New Mexico’s border with Mexico, crews this year set off blasts on Mt. Cristo Rey, a pilgrimage site topped with a limestone crucifix.

CBP is seeking to seize a strip of the mountain owned by the Roman Catholic Church for wall construction. The Diocese of Las Cruces asked a judge this month to deny the land transfer as an affront to religious liberties and the “faithful who seek to commune with God on Mount Cristo Rey.”

In western Texas, the federal government in February notified ranchers on the Rio Grande east of Big Bend National Park of its interest in their land that contains canyonland pictographs and petroglyphs, said Raymond Skiles, a retired Big Bend National Park ranger.

“There are pictographs, paintings of shaman figures and various things that we don’t know how to interpret,” said Skiles, describing the drawings on his family’s ranchlands.

After community backlash, CBP’s online planning map showed the 30-foot-wall plans were scrapped for surveillance technology, patrols and some vehicle barriers. A segment in the national park and neighboring Big Bend Ranch State Park would rely on technology alone.

CBP says it recognizes the importance of natural and cultural resources and is working to minimize the construction’s impact, including leaving drainage gates open in wildlife corridors for animal passage. Illegal border crossings have littered, polluted and trampled sensitive habitat, the agency says.

CBP also says 535 miles of remote, rugged border terrain will solely rely on detection technology.

Many tribes would prefer that to walls.

Norma Meza Calles, a Kumeyaay Nation leader, leads a guided tour of traditional Kumeyaay uses for local plants at a wellness center in Tecate, Mexico.

(Gregory Bull / Associated Press)

Desecrating Native American sites is a felony

Tribes along the border “are all experiencing the same tragic desecration of our cultural and sacred sites,” said Burgueno, chair of the Kumeyaay Diegueño Land Conservancy, a nonprofit organization in California that works to protect Kumeyaay lands. “This is a great example of the federal government not following federal laws.”

Desecrating a sacred Native American site on U.S. federal or tribal land is a felony, punishable by imprisonment and fines. In 1992, the National Park Service listed Kuuchamaa Mountain in the National Register of Historic Places, giving it limited protection. It noted that “discarding or disturbing the mountain’s natural state would be sacrilegious.”

Rising 3,885 feet above sea level, Kuuchamaa has also captivated non-Native people.

Sarah Livia Brightwood Szekely said her father, Edmond Szekely, felt the mountain’s healing energy when he arrived in Tecate, Mexico, as a Hungarian Jewish refugee during World War II, and started the renowned wellness resort, Rancho La Puerta, which she now runs.

“There are all of these people that have a deep relationship with the mountain,” she said.

Meza Calles leads walks at Rancho La Puerta to teach guests about Kuuchamaa.

Traditionally, young men would spend 40 days at its base in a coming-of-age ceremony before becoming warriors or shamans, she said. Today’s rituals are shorter. People suffering from a death, debt, divorce or other difficulty seek Kuuchamaa’s healing, she said.

“It’s sad they are ruining the mountain,” she said. “We’ll see how far they go. Destiny is destiny. But the fight is not over.”

Watson and Lee write for the Associated Press and reported from Tecate and Santa Fe, N.M., respectively.

RYANAIR boss Michael O’Leary has made the headlines today, calling for an early-morning ban on airports serving alcohol to passengers.

He’s calling for the big change following a rise in badly behaved passengers that have caused flights forced to divert.

He told The Times: “It’s becoming a real challenge for all airlines

“I fail to understand why anybody in airports bars is serving people at five or six o’clock in the morning. Who needs to be drinking beer at that time?

“There should be no alcohol served at airports outside [those] licensing hours,” he said. “We have been calling for many years for a limit of two drinks per person per airport, why don’t you limit people by boarding pass?”

So should we be banning morning beers at UK airports? Our travel experts go head to head…

LAST SHOT

Ryanair boss calls for BAN on beloved airport breakfast pint

AIR OFF

Ryanair boss demands EU axes new travel rules causing misery for Brit holidaymakers

‘Please don’t deny hard-working Brits this small holiday pleasure’ says Caroline McGuire, Head of Travel (Digital)

AIRPORT breakfast beers are one of those quirky British traditions, much like the Wetherspoons table number game and the dirty birthday pint.

It is pretty much guaranteed that you will see a number of sleepy-eyed Brits sinking a lager at the airport pub, no matter what time of day you arrive.

While I personally can’t stomach a drink before midday, I’m also not a fan of telling hard-working Brits how they can spend their precious seven days of holiday that they’ve been saving for all year.

Michael O’Leary has long called for there to be a two-drink limit on people drinking at airports and that is something that feels like a reasonable compromise to me.

But to ban airport bars from serving any booze outside of normal UK licensing hours – typically from around 10 or 11am – seems pretty unfair when passengers can still buy a drink on the actual Ryanair flight.

Pubs are under a huge amount of financial stress these days, thanks to a raft of anti-hospitality measures introduced by our current chancellor, Rachel Reeves.

Around two pubs are closing in the UK each day – more than 2,000 since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, should we really be penalising them any further?

Add to this the fact that pubs pay an extremely high rent for their airport locations, do we want to see boozers also disappearing from here too?

I’m not sure that cutting out morning drinking will see the solution to the problem that airlines are clearly having such a huge issue with, because it won’t have any effect on the thousands of flights that fly out of the UK post-midday.

I’ve been on more late-evening Ryanair flights to Ibiza than I care to remember, when I have deep sympathy for the cabin crew serving very rowdy passengers.

Mr O’Leary has been in the industry for a long time, in fact he’s one of the most experienced airline bosses in the business, and we should be listening when he says it’s a huge problem that needs sorting.

The measures he has taken in recent years to hold disruptive passengers to account with huge court fines is clearly a huge step in the right direction, although I appreciate this is a time-consuming and costly process.

But banning the small joy of a breakfast beer in these stressful modern times, with everything that’s going on in the world? Please no.

‘More drastic measures are needed’ says Kara Godfrey, Deputy Travel Editor

LOOK, I get it – you finally got that time off work, and you’re ready for a week of sunshine and relaxing.

But it has forever baffled me as to how that translates to a pint of beer or glass of champagne at 6am when normally you wouldn’t even be awake.

I can’t think of anything worse than sinking a Guinness when I’m waiting for my flight, and certainly don’t want that sloshing around in my stomach before a long journey.

If people could restrain themselves then a ban wouldn’t be needed but sadly, without airports willing to put a cap in place, it seems more drastic measures are needed.

Haven’t we all been on that awful flight where rowdy passengers just make it worse for everyone?

With Ryanair saying that as many as a flight a day are being diverted, those costs are likely to be passed onto the passenger too.

So those drunken idiots are essentially going to make your flight more expensive.

Maybe a full ban is too far, but I would say that a drink limit is definitely needed. 

I’d back airports being required to scan boarding passes, with a cap on 1-2 boozy beverages before you get on a plane.

Lets save it for the all-inclusive pool bar, guys.