Eco-Terrorism And Environmental Sabotage Prosecutions
⚖️ Definition and Legal Context
Eco-terrorism refers to criminal acts committed in support of environmental causes, often involving violence, sabotage, or destruction of property, especially targeting businesses or government agencies deemed harmful to the environment.
Key statutes used in prosecuting eco-terrorism include:
18 U.S.C. § 844(f) – Arson against government property
18 U.S.C. § 1366 – Destruction of energy facilities
18 U.S.C. § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), 18 U.S.C. § 43
18 U.S.C. § 2332b – Acts of terrorism transcending national boundaries
State arson and vandalism laws
🔍 Notable Case Studies
1. United States v. Joseph Dibee and "The Family" (1996–2018)
Facts:
A radical environmental and animal rights group called “The Family” (an offshoot of Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and Animal Liberation Front (ALF)) committed over 20 acts of arson and sabotage across the U.S.
Targets included meat processing plants, timber companies, a ski resort, and SUV dealerships.
Joseph Dibee, one of the fugitives, was indicted in multiple states and arrested in 2018 after fleeing the U.S.
Legal Issues:
Violations of the Terrorism Enhancement provisions in the Sentencing Guidelines
Arson, conspiracy, use of destructive devices
Outcome:
Several members pleaded guilty and received federal prison sentences (e.g., Chelsea Gerlach, Daniel McGowan, and Stanislas Meyerhoff).
Significance:
This became one of the largest eco-terrorism prosecutions in U.S. history and led to the FBI labeling ELF a domestic terror threat.
2. United States v. Daniel McGowan (2007)
Facts:
McGowan, a member of ELF, was involved in arsons at an Oregon tree farm and a lumber company.
He was charged after an undercover operation known as "Operation Backfire".
Charges:
Arson, use of destructive devices, conspiracy
Outcome:
Pleaded guilty, sentenced to 7 years in federal prison, and classified as a domestic terrorist under the federal sentencing guidelines.
Significance:
Raised public debate over whether non-lethal property destruction for ideological causes should be labeled “terrorism.”
3. United States v. Eric McDavid (2007)
Facts:
McDavid plotted with others to bomb U.S. Forest Service facilities, cell towers, and power stations in California.
He was arrested before carrying out any attack after being monitored by an FBI informant.
Charges:
Conspiracy to damage federal property
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to nearly 20 years in prison; released early in 2015 due to withheld FBI evidence.
Significance:
The case illustrated the government’s use of informants and raised concerns about entrapment in eco-terrorism investigations.
4. United States v. Justin Solondz (2011)
Facts:
Involved in an ELF firebombing at the University of Washington's Center for Urban Horticulture in 2001, which caused over $6 million in damages.
Charges:
Arson, destruction of property, conspiracy
Outcome:
Pleaded guilty in 2011, received 7 years in prison.
Significance:
This prosecution linked environmental ideology with significant property destruction and was used as a test case for applying enhanced terrorism penalties.
5. United States v. Rebecca Rubin (2013)
Facts:
Rubin participated in multiple arsons as part of the ELF/ALF campaign, including at a horse slaughterhouse, a ski resort in Colorado, and a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wild horse facility.
She voluntarily surrendered after years as a fugitive.
Charges:
Arson, use of destructive devices
Outcome:
Sentenced to 5 years in prison and ordered to pay $13 million in restitution.
Significance:
Showed the long-term reach of eco-terrorism investigations and the severity of penalties, even years after the crime.
6. United States v. Tre Arrow (2008)
Facts:
Arrow was linked to the ELF and convicted of firebombing logging and cement company trucks in Oregon.
He fled to Canada, was extradited to the U.S.
Charges:
Arson, conspiracy
Outcome:
Pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 6.5 years in prison.
Significance:
His case drew media attention due to his political activism and claims of persecution for ideology.
7. United States v. Walter Bond (2010)
Facts:
Bond, acting alone under the name “ALF Lone Wolf,” committed multiple arsons at businesses related to animal products in Utah and Colorado.
Charges:
Arson and Animal Enterprise Terrorism under AETA
Outcome:
Sentenced to 12 years in federal prison.
Significance:
Demonstrated use of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act in punishing ideologically motivated property destruction targeting animal industries.
📚 Legal Takeaways
Key Elements Prosecutors Must Prove:
Intent to damage or destroy property for ideological/environmental motives.
Use of fire, explosives, or other dangerous means.
Targeting of protected entities (government property, energy facilities, research centers, etc.).
Conspiracy or coordination with groups like ELF/ALF can enhance sentences.
Domestic terrorism classification can increase penalties under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 3A1.4.
🧾 Summary Table
| Case | Crime Committed | Charges | Sentence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dibee & The Family | 20+ arsons and sabotage actions | Arson, conspiracy, terrorism | 5–13 years |
| Daniel McGowan | Arson at tree farm/lumber company | Arson, terrorism enhancement | 7 years |
| Eric McDavid | Plot to bomb facilities | Conspiracy to damage federal property | 20 years (later released) |
| Justin Solondz | UW lab arson | Arson, property destruction | 7 years |
| Rebecca Rubin | Multiple arsons (ski resort, slaughterhouse) | Arson, terrorism charges | 5 years + $13M restitution |
| Tre Arrow | Firebombing cement/logging trucks | Arson, conspiracy | 6.5 years |
| Walter Bond | Arson of animal-related businesses | Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act | 12 years |
🔍 Broader Implications
Classification as “terrorism” (even for non-lethal actions) significantly affects sentencing.
Restitution orders often exceed millions of dollars due to destruction of property.
Informants and surveillance are central to federal investigations in these cases.
Controversies exist about labeling ideological, non-lethal acts as terrorism.
RELATED Blog
0 comments