Pennsylvania Targets Eco-Terror. Good Omen for AETA?

Pennsylvania has a new law on its books with strong penalties for defined acts of eco-terrorism. Backed by an unusually broad coalition of concerned parties, and an overwhelming majority of state legislators, its passage should bode well for the federal Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, still on the table in D.C.

"Destroying property, intimidating Pennsylvania residents or illegally confiscating animals as a way of political protest will not be tolerated in Pennsylvania," said Gov. Edward Rendell, Apr. 14, on signing HB 213 into law.

"This state is putting measures in place to protect all of our citizens, as well as our natural resources. HB 213 adds an additional safeguard so that we can ensure that our homes and our lands aren't mistreated or vandalized by senseless acts."

The bill defines eco-terrorism as the commission of specified offenses against property intending to intimidate a person who is lawfully participating in an activity involving animals, plants, or natural resource facilities, or preventing or obstructing an individual from lawfully participating in those activities. The specified offenses against property are already crimes in Pennsylvania. The purpose of this legislation, however, is to deter politically motivated property destruction with the intent of intimidation.

Explained Rendell, "Persons who seek to influence political discourse by committing crimes against property with the intent of intimidation are putting the lives of innocent law-abiding citizens at risk. In the last decade our nation has witnessed an increasing number of costly and dangerous acts of destruction of property - in the name of animal rights or environmental protection. Most of these protests are lodged against pharmaceutical and other companies that are in the business of developing new medicines to provide treatments and cures for deadly diseases. Those who oppose animal research certainly have the right to use the political process to express their views. But if they intentionally destroy property as part of their protest they should be charged accordingly for any property crimes they have committed. These persons should receive additional punishment because their conduct is intended to intimidate and stop lawful activities."

In practice, the act upgrades the classification of exisiting crimes, such as arson and burglary, if they are also deemed to be acts of eco-terror. Thus, for example, a crime already classified as a second-degree felony becomes a first-degree felony. A person convicted of eco-terrorism can also be sued for restitution of up to triple the value of the damages caused.

The legislation also ensures protection for people engaged in peaceful protest or non-violent civil disobedience, without which, the Governor said, he would have vetoed it.

And on to D.C.

The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), now being considered in D.C., differs from the Pennsylvania bill in that it is not as broad. It covers only animal enterprises holding animals and expands the current federal law to places of business that are selling animal-based products such as furriers, fishmongers, butcher shops, pet stores, etc.

The Pennsylvania law goes further and covers a host of resource-based industries based on the fact that ALF/ELF actions focus both on animals and habitat, and often target structures beyond those raising animals or selling animal products. Pennsylvania recognized the threat to the timber industry (engaged in active management of animal habitat), any construction (on animal habitat) and the recreation industry (which enables people to enjoy animal habitat).

Nonetheless, Congress should take notice, as should any group hoping to see the AETA pass into law.

Congress should take notice because an overwhelming majority of the Pennsylvania House, 188-6, were not shy about endorsing a bill that was an obvious target for criticism from all the usual sources. They were happy to call these crimes "terrorism". They were satisfied that terrorists should not be confused with people exercising free speech or the right to demonstrate. And in response to critics who said the new law was unnecessary because there were already laws against property damage, they were happy to say the eco-terrorist motive distinguishes certain crimes from others, and what's more, deserved stiffer penalties.

In short, they were not going to pussy foot around the issue, and we must hope Congress shows the same resolve in passing the AETA.

For the rest of us, meanwhile, Pennsylvania proved an object lesson in the importance of working together for the common good.

HB 213 was originally introduced by a representative seeking protection for constituents in the pharmaceutical and biotech sectors. But then the ball was picked up by the Pennsylvania Forestry Association, alarmed at attacks on loggers and road construction in the Allegheny National Forest. Then the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau came aboard, and soon the Governor's desk groaned beneath the weight of letters from fishermen, ranchers, pet owners, government resource managers, three universities, and, of course, FCUSA (see below).

In announcing his decision to sign HB 213 into law, Gov. Rendell made special mention of all these letters and how he had weighed them in making his decision. And that is as it should be.

So if you want to see more protection from eco-terrorism, urge your representatives to co-sponsor the AETA now! As of April, dozens of organizations from sportsmen to cattle ranchers, foresters to dog owners and researchers, have pledged their support. If we take one lesson from Pennsylvania it should be this: if enough people speak up, we may be heard!

See also:

FCUSA Press Kit special feature: Safe Farms Campaign.

For further information contact: Teresa Platt, Executive Director, Fur Commission USA, PMB 506, 826 Orange Avenue, Coronado, CA 92118-2698 USA, (619) 575-0139, (619) 272-2467/fax, furfarmers@aol.com, www.furcommission.com. See also Teresa's blog and Facebook.

To take a cyber-tour of a fur farm, visit FCUSA's Fur on Film.

Home

© 1998-2010 Fur Commission USA