> The image tells an important story of habitat fragmentation, and how structures such as the border wall can prevent wildlife from migrating and moving into other areas. The wall dominates the image, with the roadrunner seemingly powerless and small in the frame.

So they're not really being coy about this being a statement. The Petapixel article also has longer quotes from the artist about how disruptive he feels the border wall is for wildlife. I don't think it's a statement about immigration politics, per se, as much as a statement about unintended consequences of the way our actions affect the environment.

For what it's worth, the competition site says [0]:

> Typically, an awarded photo will:

> Be properly in focus,

> show good use of exposure and lighting,

> display technical excellence in its execution,

> and capture a unique moment, behaviour, or story.

The last criteria seems like it could answer your question.

The announcement page also has this blurb [1]:

> The image tells an important story of habitat fragmentation, and how structures such as the border wall can prevent wildlife from migrating and moving into other areas. The wall dominates the image, with the roadrunner seemingly powerless and small in the frame.

[0]: https://www.birdpoty.com/news/judging-bird-poty-how-we-decid...

[1]: https://www.birdpoty.com/2021-winners

Unless we took it down. We got along without for a damn long time, and the reasons to put it up in the first place always turned out to be entirely made up and contrary to well-established fact. Is observation of stupidly, massively overpriced construction that has, objectively, no desirable result, but is massively disruptive for wildlife, political?

Only through an implicitly political lens.

"flying is limited to gliding from a nest or perch to the ground, or between perches"

"Male roadrunners perch atop fence posts and rocks"

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/Greater_Roadrunner/lifeh...

A lot of notable and iconic photographs are political.