Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Do ‘Environmental Extremists’ Pose Criminal Threat to Gas Drilling?
As debate over natural gas drilling in the Marcellus shale reaches a fever pitch, state and federal authorities are warning Pennsylvania law enforcement that "environmental extremists" pose an increasing threat to security and to the energy sector.
A confidential intelligence bulletin sent from the Pennsylvania Department of Homeland Security to law enforcement professionals in late August says drilling opponents have been targeting the energy industry with increasing frequency and that the severity of crimes has increased.
It warns of "the use of tactics to try to intimidate companies into making policy decisions deemed appropriate by extremists," and states that the FBI -- the source of some of the language in the Pennsylvania bulletin -- has "medium confidence" in the assessment. A spokesman for the FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The advisory, a copy of which was obtained by ProPublica, doesn't cite the specific incidents causing concern. It is also unclear from accounts from state law enforcement officials whether the incidents in Pennsylvania posed a substantial threat, or what effect the advisory might have on public gathering and the debate over drilling in the state.
Pennsylvania State Police said there have been only a few isolated crimes involving drilling facilities.
"We haven't had any incidents of any significance to date where we have identified a problem, or any environmental extremists," said Joseph Elias, a captain with the Pennsylvania State Police Domestic Security Division, which was not involved in issuing the bulletin.
An aide to Gov. Ed Rendell -- speaking on behalf of the state's Homeland Security Office -- said the advisory was based on five recent vandalism incidents at drilling facilities, including two in which a shotgun was reportedly fired at a gas facility.
"All this security bulletin does is raise awareness of local officials. It doesn't accuse anyone of local activity," said the spokesman, Gary Tuma. "Where the professionals detect a pattern that may pose a threat to public safety, they have a responsibility to alert local law enforcement authorities and potential victims."
Anti-drilling activists in the state say that public hearings and other events have been peaceful and that they see no evidence of violent opposition. Given the lack of evidence about "extremist" crimes, they say, the bulletin casts drilling opponents as criminals and threatens to stifle open debate.
"It may very well be designed to chill peoples' very legitimate participation in public decision making," said Deborah Goldberg, an attorney with Earthjustice, a national group pressing for stronger environmental protections. "If people who have concerns fear that they are going to be treated as a security threat they may very well be afraid to go and express their views."
The advisory lists a series of public hearings on drilling permit issues across the state as potential flash points. It also mentions a Sept. 3 screening of the anti-drilling film "Gasland" in Philadelphia that went off without incident. Language describes "environmental activists and militants" on one side of the debate and "property owners, mining and drilling companies" on the other.
Finally, the bulletin groups the public hearings and film screening with protest rallies for anarchist clubs focused on "evading law enforcement," and with a Muslim advocacy group's rally for the release of suspects in an alleged terror plot at Fort Dix, N.J.
The advisory was sent to state law enforcement and local government groups, as well as businesses with a specific concern addressed in the bulletin. It was not intended to be distributed to the public.
In issuing such an advisory, the government has to walk a fine line between the need to respect the fundamental rights of freedom of speech and the need to keep the public safe, said Nathan Sales, an assistant law professor at George Mason University and a former policy development staffer at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
"The question is how to accomplish the one with minimal consequences to the other," he said.
A pro-drilling group, the Marcellus Shale Coalition, characterized the vandalism in Pennsylvania as "directed at preventing our industry from safely delivering these resources to Pennsylvanians."
The group's president, Kathryn Klaber, said she supported civil debate over drilling, "but to the extent they go in the other direction, and potentially devolve in a manner that undermines our ability to keep our folks safe, then we will have a problem," she said.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


12 Comments so far
Show Alldo gas drilling 'extremists' pose a criminal threat to the environment?
What have they done? steal stuff, anybody could have done that. I was in Oregon when the Earth First cretins were spiking trees with R/R spikes, real fun bunch, if anybody should have been hung.
Back to the post, if somebody wanted, gas facilities would be a pretty soft target. Instead of the usual overreacting lets see if anybody actually does anything, Americans are pretty soft these days and I havent seen anybody spending alot of effort to even protest things they don't want.
>^^<
Do gas drilling criminals pose a hazard to the health of extremist property owners?
No, not at all the folks who get hurt by any pranks are just regular six-pack joe blue collar types.
The fatcat owners usually don't get within a few miles of any work.
>^^<
"the use of tactics to try to intimidate companies into making policy decisions deemed appropriate by extremists"
So that is what the FBI calls nonviolent protests these days? Redress of grievances is called "intimidation"???
Has the FBI or the Dept of Homeland read the First Amendment???
We in Pittsburgh are planning protests at a big gas industry conference this November. This bulletin is probably in response to this event. I guess we should expect a mini-version of the measures and police tactics deployed at the G20.
Patriot Act, invalidates the the First Amendment, not to mention most of the bill of rights, for the duration. Ever read it?
>^^<
The Federal and State Dept's of Homeland Security should be disbanded.
They are a wasteful boondoggle and a threat to freedom of speech and assembly.
The white house, congress, and joke supreme court ARE the biggest threats on the planet to the environment ! They ARE the criminal extremists !
Fracking poses grave poisoning threat to households's water supplies that will last centuries. Another attempt to make the criminals into the victims.
There is a great environmentalist organization in PA called PennEnvironment fighting, at least unregulated, fracking for some time. They are not extremists.
New York City might take Hudson/Delaware River watershed fracking to court. We're talking about the water supply for at least 10 million people. Tell 10 million puking people to just suck it up, and they're just a bunch of extremists!
This is a two sided issue for at least two reasons: Some utilities are switching from coal to this gas with an instant 45-50% reduction in CO2 emissions. Nice! Property owners love the money, but want something done when methane comes out the tap, the animals get sick, and the fish in the creek all die.
Whoa, Pennsylvania, I think you have this backwards. Aren't the extremist CORPORATIONS the ones that, "...Pose an increasing threat to national security and to the energy sector?"
On the other hand, maybe not enough is happening for Homeland Security to justify its existence. This is very weird, Penn. has Philidelphia," the city of brotherly love."..and water is poisoning people?
If all the people in this state get sick, will health care be able to handle them all? Besides, if there are fewer live people, isn't worrying about enough energy just silly? Killing people for energy, what sense does this make?
The solution to this problem is to harvest alternative energy sources to produce cheap electricity that can "back out" the use of NG for electricity production, as well as to provide an alternative to the use of NG for home heating, which would be electricity based "heat pumps".
This can be accomplished by developing and deploying the Atmospheric Vortex Engine, which could make a significant impact within 5 years with a relatively minor expenditure in its development.
This technology uses energy which is abundant, and available at the time and place where it is most needed.
http://vortexengine.ca
Wake up, Pennsylvania--if you take the lead in developing this, you would not only solve the problem, but provide your state with a "revenue stream" based on the "know-how" you develop from this activity as its use spreads around the world.