Examining the Extent and Impact of Surveillance on Animal Rights Activists

In the post-9/11 era, the USA PATRIOT Act provided law enforcement agencies broad powers to investigate citizens believed to be potential or perceived domestic terrorist threats. Preceded by the Animal Enterprise Protection Act (AEPA) of 1992, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) of 2006 delivered to these same agencies laws under which animal rights (AR) activists could be charged as domestic terrorists. Considered to be potential domestic terrorist threats under the Green Scare era, AR activists became prioritized as state-sponsored surveillance subjects. This thesis seeks to determine the extent of surveillance on AR activists as well as its impact in regard to the progression of this social movement through the use of qualitative methods. It also questions whether the Green Scare still has relevance today. The researcher conducted face-to-face and phone interviews with 11 activists in the states of Nevada, Oregon, and Colorado. The researcher found that the majority of the sample in the study had experienced different indicators of surveillance. Many activists expressed the view that surveillance was an inevitable part of being an activist. Despite their exposure to surveillance, it does not appear that state-sponsored surveillance has stifled the willingness of activists to participate in the AR movement