[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 18]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 24965]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      INTRODUCTION OF THE ANIMAL ENTERPRISE TERRORISM ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. THOMAS E. PETRI

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, November 4, 2005

  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the Animal Enterprise 
Terrorism Act of 2005. This legislation would provide federal 
authorities with the necessary tools to help prevent and better 
investigate and prosecute eco-terror cases.
  Between January of 1990 and June of 2004, extremist movements such as 
the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), 
and the Stop Huntington Animal Cruelty (SHAC) committed more than 1,100 
acts of terrorism causing more than $120 million in damages. The FBI 
considers these extremists groups among its most serious domestic 
threats.
  Animal rights extremists advance their cause through ``direct 
action'' which includes death threats, vandalism, animal releases, and 
bombings. Their actions are calculated to aggressively intimidate and 
harass those identified as targets. Traditional targets include 
research and biomedical laboratories, fur farms, and restaurants. These 
extremists have also turned to targeting companies that do business or 
have a financial interest in an animal enterprise.
  In my own state of Wisconsin, mink farmers and researchers at the 
Wisconsin National Primate Research Center have experienced their own 
fair share of intimidation, harassment, and vandalism at the hands of 
animal rights extremists.
  Current federal law is inadequate to address the threats posed by 
violent acts committed by these animal rights extremists. They have 
recognized the limits and ambiguities in our current statutes, such as 
the Animal Enterprise Protection Act, and have tailored their campaign 
to exploit them.
  Mr. Speaker, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act of 2005 would 
address gaps in the law that keep authorities from using it in the most 
effective manner possible. The bill provides for penalties for 
intentional economic disruption or damage and for intentionally causing 
bodily harm or placing a person in reasonable fear of death or bodily 
harm.
  It also specifically addresses the ``tertiary targeting'' tactic 
employed by these extremists by prohibiting intentional damage of 
property belonging to a person or organization with ties to an animal 
enterprise.
  Enactment of this legislation will enhance the ability of law 
enforcement and the Justice Department to protect law-abiding American 
citizens from violence and the threat of violence posed by animal 
rights extremists.

                          ____________________