Countering Eco-Terrorism in the United States: The Case of ‘Operation Backfire’ Final Report to the Science & Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security September 2012 National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence Based at the University of Maryland 3300 Symons Hall • College Park, MD 20742 • 301.405.6600 • www.start.umd.edu National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence About This Report The authors of this report are Nick Deshpande (M.A. Candidate at American Military University) and Howard Ernst (United States Naval Academy). Questions about this report should be directed to Nick Deshpande at [email protected]. The authors would like to express their gratitude to, first and foremost: Chuck Tilby, a former captain with the Eugene (Oregon) Police Department, and Kirk Engdall, a former Assistant United States Attorney, for their time and service to their country as well as their assistance with crafting this paper; Andrew Laughlin, Geoff Haskell and Dr. Max Abrahms provided valuable insight and assistance along the way; Paxton Roberts, Research Project Manager at the Terrorism Research Center in Fulbright College, University of Arkansas and his crew facilitated access to the court documents, for which we are grateful; and much thanks is owed to the paper’s editors, Dr. Kathleen Smarick, Dr. Brooke Fisher Liu and William Braniff, of the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) at the University of Maryland. This report is part of a series sponsored by the Human Factors/Behavioral Sciences Division, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in support of the Prevent/Deter program. The goal of this program is to sponsor research that will aid the intelligence and law enforcement communities in identifying potential terrorist threats and support policymakers in developing prevention efforts. This research was supported through Grant Award Number 2009ST108LR0003 made to the START Consortium and the University of Maryland under principal investigator Gary LaFree. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security or START. About START The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) is supported in part by the Science and Technology Directorate of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through a Center of Excellence program based at the University of Maryland. START uses state‐of‐the‐art theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to improve understanding of the origins, dynamics and social and psychological impacts of terrorism. For more information, contact START at [email protected] or visit www.start.umd.edu. Citations To cite this report, please use this format: Deshpande, Nick, and Howard Ernst. “Countering Eco‐Terrorism in the United States: The Case of ‘Operation Backfire’.” Final Report to Human Factors/Behavioral Sciences Division, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. College Park, MD: START, 2012. Countering Eco-Terrorism in the United States: The Case of ‘Operation Backfire’ National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Methods and Terminology .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Measuring Counterterrorism Effects and Effectiveness ..................................................................................................... 6 Primer on Eco-Terrorism ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 The Rise of the Radical Environmentalist Movement ......................................................................................................... 8 The “Direct Action” Tactics of Radical Environmentalist Groups ....................................................................................... 9 Major Groups in the Radical Environmentalist Movement .............................................................................................. 11 Descriptive Analysis of REM Incidents and Eco-Terrorism ............................................................................................... 13 Eco-Terrorism in the United States ................................................................................................................................... 14 The Family ............................................................................................................................................................................. 15 Operation Backfire ................................................................................................................................................................ 21 Design and Implementation of Countermeasures against Eco-Terrorism ........................................................................... 23 Link Analysis Tools ............................................................................................................................................................ 24 Resource Management ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 Lasting Impact? ................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Conclusion and Future Research........................................................................................................................................... 29 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Appendix 1: Data from the Foundation for Biomedical Research (FBR)............................................................................... 35 Countering Eco-Terrorism in the United States: The Case of ‘Operation Backfire’ 1 National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence Executive Summary American counterterrorism officials consider those who commit violent acts in the name of the environment and animal rights a serious threat to homeland security. In congressional testimony more than six years ago, Senator James Inhofe noted that radical actors affiliated with the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front had caused more than $110 million in damage between approximately 1995 and 2005 (Inhofe 2005). Since that time, members of the radical environmentalist movement (REM) continue to carve out a prominent place in the domestic terrorism landscape. In this report, we examine a joint, inter‐agency investigation, known as Operation Backfire, into acts of eco‐terrorism that occurred in the country’s Northwest at the turn of the millennium. The target of Operation Backfire, a group known as the Family, caused more than $40 million in property damage and disrupted numerous lives and businesses from 1996‐2001 (Engdall et al. 2007; Likar 2011). The purpose of this work is to frame Operation Backfire as a terrorism countermeasure and assess what made it effective at dismantling the Family and altering the landscape for actors associated with the REM. Making extensive use of original data (i.e., the Institute for the Study of Violent Groups and the Global Terrorism Database), court documentation related to each of the 18 indictments, and interviews with two key investigators, we examine the concept of eco‐terrorism, how to measure counterterrorism effectiveness, resource allocation in inter‐agency settings, and deterrence. Our qualitative approach focuses on the characteristics and factors that made the investigation effective. The measurement of a countermeasure’s efficacy poses numerous challenges since there are various, but no universally accepted, metrics for effectiveness. In this case, successful arrests and convictions are certainly one indicator of Operation Backfire’s effectiveness. But assessments should also take into consideration the expenditure of resources, a comparison of desired results versus the outcomes (e.g., the dismantling of the Family), and the adherence to best practices and regulations. Further, organizational efficacy, which considers the structure of an organization and the performance of its members, should be accounted for. A measure’s ability to adapt to a changing situation is also an important metric that we examine in this study. Lastly, the