Earth Liberation Front: Eco-Terrorism, Arsons, and the FBI

Introduction to the Earth Liberation Front

There are many people and groups who claim responsibility for the Earth Liberation Front's (ELF) development. The group is comprised of loosely affiliated or autonomous cells that are only bound by the idea that they can move beyond civil disobedience and accept more contentious tactics in defense of their environmental causes. This group was one of the organizations that helped coin the label "eco-terrorist," which later became a mainstream designation for such offenders. The ELF was considered one of the first eco-terrorist groups and was at one time labeled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the most dangerous domestic terror group in the United States.

This analysis provides a background on eco-terrorism followed by more specific information about the ELF and the actions the group has claimed responsibility for, including a string of arsons. It has been estimated that collectively groups such as the ELF and the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) have caused in excess of one hundred million dollars in damages through acts of vandalism and harassment. A number of terrorist convictions have also arisen from ELF members being prosecuted in federal courts.

Most of the convictions that have occurred stem from one of the groups that formed in the Northwestern United States as an offshoot of Earth First. A documentary was produced that follows the stories, trials, and convictions of some of these members, which will be discussed later in this analysis. There is some controversy regarding whether this group should be classified as a terrorist organization, due to the fact that, despite hundreds of actions, there has been no injury or loss of life. The group has limited its destructive actions to property damage.

Eco-Terrorism: Definition and Context

Terrorism can mean different things to different people. As one law enforcement official observed in the documentary If a Tree Falls, "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Some terrorists are motivated by religion, nationalism, ideology, or social cause, among other motivations. It is therefore important to develop a working definition of what terrorism means for the purpose of analysis. The documentary discussed later in this paper illustrates some of the controversy found in labeling eco-terrorists in the same manner that other types of terrorists are labeled under the law. This controversy also has implications for the detention and housing of criminals following their convictions. The film follows an eco-terrorist who would have benefited in his prison arrangement had he been prosecuted as an arsonist rather than receiving a terrorist conviction.

Terrorism is defined in many different ways by different groups and carries a subjective component. The FBI's definition of domestic terrorism in the U.S. Code holds that "domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics (Federal Bureau of Investigation, N.d.):

1. Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
2. Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
3. Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

The FBI defines eco-terrorism as the use or threatened use of violence of a criminal nature against innocent victims or property by an environmentally-oriented, subnational group for environmental-political reasons, or aimed at an audience beyond the target, often of a symbolic nature (Jarboe, 2002). Different types of terrorism are labeled according to what the terrorists are trying to defend. The "eco" designation in the eco-terrorism label is intended to indicate that this type of terrorist is motivated by the defense of the environment. Related subgroups include agri-terrorists (focused on agriculture) and other specific categories.

Examples of Eco-Terrorism Groups

Over the last three decades, radical environmental and animal rights groups have increased their membership as many individuals became disillusioned with political and social avenues for change. These groups have claimed responsibility for hundreds of crimes and acts of terrorism — including arson, bombings, vandalism, and harassment — causing untold millions of dollars in damage. Many of those responsible have been held accountable under the legal system, while others have evaded law enforcement.

The organizational structure of these terrorist groups makes them difficult to identify in many cases. There is no official leadership, and anyone sharing roughly the same ideology can operate their own cell. Given the advantages of the internet in disseminating information, ideas, tactics, and operational knowledge can spread quickly and without detection, even in the absence of formal leadership. The leaderless cell model has developed over time and represents an effective strategy for avoiding detection by law enforcement.

Beginning as early as the 1960s, groups like Earth First, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), and Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) can trace their roots. Most of these groups descended from non-criminal organizations from which a fringe element broke away. These fringe groups adopted tactics contrary to those of their parent organizations, which had engaged in peaceful and lawful protests. The tactics of the fringe groups also evolved over time. Initial tactics were primarily limited to what was called "monkey wrenching" — illegal acts that were relatively harmless but slowed the operations of targeted organizations.

Early acts of resistance by these fringe groups included putting sugar in the gas tanks of logging equipment and tree spiking — the act of placing metal pins in trees so that loggers cannot cut them down without risk of injury. However, these acts quickly escalated in their severity. Some groups have been responsible for using fuel-cell incendiary devices to burn SUVs at car dealerships, as well as targeting logging operations, ski resorts, and university research facilities, all justified under causes of "ecology" and "animal rights."

One of the first formal eco-terrorist groups, composed of disaffected environmentalists, formed in 1980. Called "Earth First!," it engaged in a series of protests and civil disobedience events (Jarboe, 2002). By 1984, however, the group began to advocate tree spiking — the insertion of metal or ceramic spikes into trees to damage saws — as a tactic to thwart logging. The FBI further reports that in 1992 the ELF was founded in Brighton, England, by Earth First! members who refused to abandon criminal acts when the mainstream Earth First! sought to remain a peaceful organization engaged only in civil disobedience. The ELF and the ALF have worked closely together, and this unity continues today with a crossover of leadership and membership.

The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) is the United States' most active extreme animal rights movement, and has been endorsed by more mainstream organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The ALF is believed to have origins in a group of English activists known in the late 1960s as the Hunt Saboteurs Association. One of this organization's original targets was fox hunting in England, which members deemed immoral and unethical. One of the first recorded domestic attacks occurred in 1979 when an activist group broke into New York University Medical School and released five animals. Animal rights extremists increased their dedication to sabotage in 1987 when the ALF carried out an arson attack at the University of California–Davis veterinary laboratory, causing millions of dollars in damage (Southern Poverty Law Center, 2002).

Another group, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC), was originally formed in 1998 following a BBC broadcast of a graphic documentary alleging the mistreatment of animals by Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS), a British-based research firm. With that graphic portrayal of animal cruelty, SHAC quickly spread to multiple countries and worked to radicalize many animal rights activists. Huntingdon Life Sciences has laboratories in New Jersey and England, and five undercover investigations have reportedly shown workers punching beagle puppies in the face, dissecting live monkeys, and falsifying scientific data (Potter, N.d.). SHAC activists set out to close the lab using tactics similar to the anti-apartheid movement — pressuring businesses associated with the lab to sever ties — in what the government has called "tertiary targeting."

Conclusion

There are many people and groups who claim responsibility for the Earth Liberation Front's development. The group is comprised of loosely affiliated or autonomous cells that are only bound by the idea that they can move beyond civil disobedience and accept more contentious tactics in defense of their environmental causes. Many members of this group have been prosecuted as terrorists and are currently housed in special detention facilities. The group and its actions undoubtedly fit the broad definition of terrorism provided by the FBI. The two most relevant elements of that definition — performing dangerous acts with the intent to intimidate others — are clearly satisfied. Although no one has been physically harmed in an ELF action, it cannot be denied that many of the arsons carried significant danger.

Yet when compared to other terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, the ELF does not evoke the same level of fear. Because of this, many individuals and groups — particularly others from the environmental movement — have developed a sense of empathy toward radical environmentalists. However, regardless of any such feelings, ELF members are undeniably breaking the law by causing major property damage. If left unchecked, the group's trajectory would likely escalate and its actions would become more aggressive. Therefore, no matter one's personal feelings about the group, law enforcement, the FBI, and the criminal justice system must take these threats seriously.

Works Cited

Earth Liberation Front. (N.d.). Earth Liberation Front. Retrieved from http://earth-liberation-front.com/

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (N.d.). Definitions of terrorism in the U.S. Code. Retrieved from

Jarboe, J. (2002, February 12). Testimony before the House Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health. Retrieved from

Libcom.org. (2012, January 12). If a tree falls: A story of the Earth Liberation Front (documentary). Retrieved from http://libcom.org/blog/if-tree-falls-story-earth-liberation-front-documentary-12012012

McGowan, D. (2013, April 1). Court documents prove I was sent to Communication Management Units (CMU) for my political speech. Huffington Post. Retrieved from

Potter, W. (N.d.). SHAC 7. Retrieved from Green is the New Red:

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2002, Fall). Eco-violence: The record. Intelligence Report. Retrieved from