Internal fur industry document on all suspicious activity reported by fur farmers in 1998.
Part nineteen in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign.
Sometime in the early 2000s, a document quietly began to circulate among activists who had done anti-fur work in the 1990s: a detailed timeline distributed to fur farmers by the Fur Commission listing every suspicious incident reported for the years 1998 and 1999. (I was never told how it was obtained, and I never asked.)
I’ve held onto this document for over ten years, and have decided to post it in full in two parts. The first is below.
What is the “Incidents Report”?
As part of it’s work to prevent Animal Liberation Front attacks, the Fur Commission encourages all its members to report any suspicious activity at their farms for inclusion in the “Incident Report.” The document is updated annually and distributed to both farmers and law enforcement.
The Incidents Report began in mid-1998 in response to an incredible 21 ALF fur farm raids the previous year. In an effort to build communication among farmers, detect patterns, and provide law enforcement with detailed data on possible fur farm raiders, the “Incidents Report” was born.
What is a “suspicious incident”?
Reading this document, it appears that when you’re a fur farmer, even the mailman is “suspicious.”
Most entries in this document fall into these categories:
Suspicious vehicles
The majority of reports describe vehicles seen near fur farms. The Fur Commission runs license plates, and lists the registered owners of the vehicles in most instances (I have redacted this information to protect people’s privacy.)
Of note is the number of “suspicious” vehicles that were found to have stolen plates. It is hard to know if this is just more fur farmer paranoia manipulating the data, or if there were people scouting farms with stolen license plates to conceal their identity.
Planes
You can’t make this up. Somehow, fur farmers adopted the belief that the ALF uses airplanes to surveil fur farms. This is absurd on a few levels, chief among them that there is nothing you could see from the air that couldn’t be determined more accurately from the ground. As though navigating a row of backyard sheds required such elaborate surveillance. More than anything, this belief in “surveillance by airplane” highlights how hopelessly out of touch fur farmers are, even at the senior level of the Fur Commission (Teresa Platt was a propagator of the “plane theory”).
Phone calls & emails
Even prank calls and emails are given clout as “security threats” in the Incident Report. Emails and instant messages are copied in full.
A couple of items from this category are mildly interesting, such as what appears to be a social engineering attempt to determine the address of a Central City, Nebraska mink farm by using a 911 dispatcher pretext.
Attempted raids
These include tripped alarms, and trespassers chased from farms. Most of the incidents listed were not reported outside this document, and include security guards chasing trespassers from farms. In one case, an armed guard actually fired shots into the air to scare off intruders. (One note: Guards are extremely rare, and are only encouraged by the Fur Commission during pelting season).
Actual raids
1998 saw 11 fur farm actions, all of which are reported in this document. While fur farmers appear to be vigilant enough to take down tail numbers off low flying planes, they seem to fail at actually detecting ALF raiders in their backyards.
The entries mentions some small details about ALF actions that I don’t believe were made public, such as one ferret that went uncaptured after a raid at United Vaccines in Wisconsin.
A rare glimpse into the fur farming world, uncensored
This document should be appreciated on a few levels, one being that this is a raw look at fur farmers “talking amongst themselves,” in a document they never thought would be seen outside their circle. The reports of planes, passing cars full of “straight edge types,” and more all paint a picture of very ignorant, disconnected people staring down their impending demise by way of a threat they can’t see or understand.
Next week, I will post the second installment: The “Incident Report” for 1999.
This is the nineteenth of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
In another leaked security bulletin, the Fur Commission warns fur farmers about suspicious cars seen near fur farms.
Part sixteen in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign.
Two suspicious vehicles are seen acting suspiciously near mink farms in Utah and Wisconsin, as described in one of dozens of security alerts obtained by Animal Liberation Frontline.
Note: I have redacted information that could be potentially compromising for the vehicle’s owners.
This memo was distributed to all 400 or so of the Fur Commission’s members after three Animal Liberation Front (and unclaimed) raids of fur farms had occurred in the previous 30 days.
The first farm mentioned, owned by Ryan Holt in South Jordan, Utah, had 3,000 mink released by the Animal Liberation Front in 1996.
Unclaimed action?
Interestingly, the security alert references four fur farm “attacks” in the month preceding the memo. However, only three are known. If there was a fourth raid, it was not claimed or reported by the media.
The memo could be referring to the arson at Rocky Mountain Firework Fur & Company in Caldwell, Idaho; however that business is not believed to be a wild pelt buyer and not a fur farm, as the memo states.
Hyper-paranoia and the fur farming industry
This memo, along with others I have posted and will be posting this month, highlights how neurotically vigilant some fur farmers have become. After over 90 raids of fur farms in the last 15 years, often any passing car is deemed suspect. Fur farmers are also fond of recruiting their neighbors, who can be more troublesome and overeager than the farmers themselves.
To further highlight this, I will soon be posting an incredible document: an entire log of all “suspicious activity” detected at fur farms over a two-year period (1998-1999), published by the Fur Commission. The first installment will go up later this week.
“Fur Commission USA SECURITY ALERT – UTAH, WISCONSIN October 23, 2011 Vehicles seen scouting farms in UT, WI
Late Friday night a blue [REDACTED], with Utah license plates [REDACTED], was seen outside the Holt mink farm in South Jordan UT. The vehicle fled when approached, and after being followed it was discovered to have an un-matched front license plate (began with [REDACTED])
That same evening a light colored [REDACTED] with [REDACTED] plates [REDACTED] was seen making numerous passes outside Langer Fur Farm near Kewaunee Wisconsin. Two men wearing camoflage baseball hats were in the vehicle. Initial reports indicate that the license plates are not registered to that make or model.
With four farm attacks in the last 30-days, ranchers are urged to be especially alert to any suspicious activity around their property. Check your security, and alert your employees and neighbors to be aware of any suspicious persons or vehicles in the area. Report any unusual activity to law enforcement and Fur Commission USA
Distributed by, Michael Whelan Fur Commission USA 541-595-8568″
This is the sixteenth of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
In a private letter, a Utah fur farmer describes her effort to capture mink released from a fur farm.
Part fifteen in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign.
Among the more interesting documents I’ve been sent is the letter I’m posting below, which I originally posted in 2010. It was described to me by the sender (and I have no reason to doubt its authenticity) as an inspirational letter intended for other fur farmers on dealing with an ALF action.
The letter describes the “clean up” after a large A.L.F. mink release in Utah. It begins:
“It’s been almost 4 weeks since the mink release in Utah at Chuck Lodder’s Ranch… I still wake up still in the middle of the night and worry.”
What follows is Mary Wardell’s experiences trying to catch thousands of mink liberated by the Animal Liberation Front. The full text of the letter is posted below.
In September, 2008, the Animal Liberation Front carried out their largest raid of a fur farm in 5 years, releasing 7,000 mink from the Chuck Lodder fur farm in Kaysville, Utah. Fur farmers (and members of a nearby church) mobilized in the wake of the raid, converging on the farm to round up the thousands of animals released from their cages.
Candid perspectives on A.L.F. actions from animal abusers are extremely rare. Because it appears this letter was private and not intended to be viewed by the public, it is the kind of uncolored account the animal rights movement rarely gets to see.
“The destruction to the ranch was well planned”
Select quotes from the letter:
“The destruction to the ranch was well planned. Holes cut in the security fence every 5-6 feet which enabled the mink to run into the adjoining field.”
“Watching (mink farmer) Dennis Rees doing a tackle,,,yes a flying tackle no less, was something to behold.”
“Wess and I agree, we never want to see this happen again, but if it does, we will be there in a heartbeat. No one is going to take care of us, but us.”
“It’s been almost 4 weeks since the mink release in Utah at Chuck Lodder’s Ranch. Both Wess and I still wake up still in the middle of the night and worry.”
And one of the best fur farmer quotes of all time:
“When we got to the ranch I stood at the top of their big shed. If you can imagine an ocean of black mink, EVERYWHERE.”
“It’s been almost 4 weeks since the mink release in Utah at Chuck Lodder’s Ranch. Both Wess and I still wake up still in the middle of the night and worry. I thought I would share a little of that day for you.
When Bryan Boyce called us at 5:30 Sunday morning, there was no hesitation to get up and go. We checked our own ranches before leaving. We had a few minutes to sip a cup of coffee knowing it would be our only “nourishment” for most of the day.
Before we got to the Lodder’s ranch, we encountered Stan and Kendra Reese & boys rounding up mink at the sewer plant about 1/4 of a mile from the ranch. Between the bed of their truck and Bryan’s we probably had a good 50 to 75 mink. It was hard to count and hard to keep them in the truck.
When we got to the ranch I stood at the top of their big shed. If you can imagine an ocean of black mink, EVERYWHERE. It was a sight I’ll remember for a long time and one I hope I never see again. Lindsey McMullin and his son, whose mink were released 1 month before in South Jordan were already there, moving down the isle, catching right and left. What a nice man he is and it was a heck of a way to get to know someone. Before you knew it, familiar faces were popping up everywhere. Stan Stuart and his son, Smokey Dillree, his grandson and his wife. The Ball Brothers, Tony Jones, Keith Johnson & sons, Paul Westwood and his son, the Willis’, the Becksteads, Rusty Woolsey, and of course all the Lodder’s and their employees. Dennis Reese and his son Chase, Chad and Chaz Rowser, Reed and Dane Dixon, Chris Falco from the Fur Breeders came and handed out water, and many, many more who I wish I knew their names. And of course Ryan Holt. Ryan not only catching but taking care of the press, the FBI and keeping the communications going to the right people.
The destruction to the ranch was well planned. Holes cut in the security fence every 5-6 feet which enabled the mink to run into the adjoining field. Not only were the pen lids opened but they had removed the boxes also. Although the ALF communique said they destroyed pedigree cards, we didn’t see evidence of that. Maybe they lied???? They vandalized at least one truck that I’m aware of. The morning went by fast and we worked together in doing what needed to be done. The weeds on the other side of the fence were immensely tall, as a line of guys walked from one end of the length of the fence to the other, handing mink over to waiting catchers who in turn ran to the sheds and put them in pens. Because the weeds were so thick, the mink would hide under what had been tramped on, so the guys turned around and came back doing the same thing. Watching Dennis Rees doing a tackle,,,yes a flying tackle no less, was something to behold. The local church stopped their services and asked people to go to their neighborhood and catch what they could. They were filling up portable dog kennels and bringing them down the road. Thank goodness it wasn’t a “hot” Utah day, but warm enough to make us all sweat. We finally got some water, Gatorade, etc. so we could keep on going. I believe by the time we were done, we had 90% of the mink back in pens.
What impressed me the most was the camaraderie that we shared and the immense respect everyone had for not only each other but for the Lodder family as well. We were not catching mink that were sold at Seattle or Toronto, we were catching mink that are the among the best in North America, raised humanly and supported a family. They didn’t destroy us but made us stronger. We were watching out for us. You also have to respect the one’s who stayed at home, like Lynn Boyce and my father in law Jay, who stayed at home and made sure our farms were safe and our mink taken care of. Lynn and I have canvassed our areas and have set up our own neighborhood watch. The Summit County and Morgan County Sheriff’s dept. have stepped up patrols and we have our own local Search and Rescue patrolling for us also.
Wess and I agree, we never want to see this happen again, but if it does, we will be there in a heartbeat. No one is going to take care of us, but us.
Stay Vigilant, Wess and Mary Wardell”
This is the fifteenth of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
In leaked security bulletin, fur farmers told commenting on “disturbing” Frontline article could incite violence, threaten lawsuit.
Part ten in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign.
Two months after anonymous liberators freed over 1,000 mink from his farm, fur farmer Palmer Erickson died of cancer. After decades of murdering hundreds of thousands of mink and fox, activists finally found Palmer Erickson in his final days and delivered a little bit of justice to 5% of the estimated 20,000 mink and fox imprisoned at the farm.
In one of several dozen “security alerts” obtained by Animal Liberation Frontline, the Fur Commission rails against a “disturbing article” on this site in which I cover Erickson’s death. The memo suggests they are looking into filing a lawsuit for criminal or civil offenses unspecified. (The lawsuit never materialized.)
Actual photo of caged fox on Palmer Erickson’s fur farm.
These bulletins are sent to the 400 or so members of the Fur Commission USA, and were not intended for a public audience.
The passing of a fur farmer is especially significant because many (if not most) of their children do not wish to carry on the family business. Over the years, many farms have shut down when the present owner dies. The operational status of the Palmer Erickson fur farm has not been verified since his death. (If you have any information, please send to the site.)
The memo reads, in full:
“Fur Commission USA January 16, 2012 Erickson Family Targeted in Hate Campaign
If you haven’t heard, longtime fur farmer Palmer Erickson recently passed away after a long illness, in Jewell IA. Last Fall, the Erickson family farm was raided and over 1,100 mink were released. The animal rights extremists are calling that raid, and his passing a victory for the ALF and the animal rights movement.
Appearing on convicted felon Peter Young’s website, is a disturbing article that describes Palmer and his family in horrible terms. Fur Commission USA has been monitoring the site, and in the last few days several people have posted defending the Erickson’s and condemning the hate speech that appears in the comments section.
We urge you not to engage these naive and intolerant individuals. The animal rights extremists that post there do not care about the truth, and will never deliberate logically or compassionately. Attempting to appeal to their humanity is a waste of your precious time. Challenging their world-view only enflames (sic-ed) them, and may motivate them to commit further acts of violence against the industry.
Be assured that Fur Commission USA is addressing the situation, and looking into legal avenues against the website and its contributors.
Our deepest condolences go to the Erickson family for their loss.
Michael Whelan Fur Commission USA 541-595-8568″
This is the tenth of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
Internal Fur Commission USA document details the anatomy of their “neighborhood watch program.”
Part two in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign
In a poll, fur farmers ranked the animal rights movement as the single largest threat to their business. This is reflected in the priorities of their trade group, the Fur Commission USA.
Last year, the Fur Commission restructured and changed its function. It dropped its public relations focus (a tacit admission that they will never win on the public opinion front), and shifted focus to “farm security.” The only way to read this is that fur farmers consider the Animal Liberation Front to be the biggest threat to their industry.
“The Neighborhood Watch” program
An internal flier obtained by Animal Liberation Frontline details one component of the Fur Commission’s new “farm security” focus. The flier breaks down their “neighborhood watch” program, aimed “at securing the US mink farming industry.”
According the flier, the program has these components:
NETWATCH email list
This list includes frequent “security bulletins”, many of which I have been provided and will be posted here over the next month.
“Netwatch is an email listserve which distributes articles, security alerts and key information on conflict campaigns and eco-terrorism incidents (4-6 items daily). The list of recipients includes law enforcement, intelligence analysts, trade associations, media, and policy makers in several countries.”
FAX/EMAIL: Fur Farm Security List
“FCUSA runs a fax/email list for distributing occasional security alerts to its farmers.”
DATABASE: Database and Annual Actions Report
Here, the Fur Commission admits to compiling dossiers on animal rights activists. The database purports to include “selected articles and documents going back several decades.” In addition the Fur Commission boasts that “profiles and reports can be generated on individuals, organizations.” And an “Actions Report” of several reports is distributed annually on disk.
SPECIAL REPORTS: Red Flag Reports
“Red Flag Reports analyze the finances of organizations which have expressed support for eco-terrorism, and/or have employees with records for being arrested. These reports are useful in understanding the structure supporting coordinated crime sprees. All information is compiled from public sources.”
WEB RESOURCES: Private Section
This is the the password protected section of the Fur Commission site, “designed for quick use by law enforcement, media, and policy makers.” It includes “eco-terrorism and anarchy libraries, particularly relating to the Animal and Earth Liberation Fronts”, “analytical reports on eco-terrorism”, an “extensive Unabomber section and writings by and about convicted eco-terrorists”, “eco-terrorism prisoners’ lists”, and tips on fur farm security.
This is the second of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
Read internal Fur Commission security bulletin sent hours after two arrests at an Iowa fur farm.
Part one in a thirty-article series this month on the ALF’s fur farm campaign.
Animal Liberation Frontline has obtained dozens of security bulletins from the Fur Commission USA, sent out to alert fur farmers to specific security threats. This is the first of many such bulletins I will posting over the next 30 days.
This alert was sent to farmers the day after the arrest of Kellie Marshall and Victor VanOrden at the Circle K fur farm in Sioux City, Iowa. From what I’ve been told (legally, I am not allowed to speak to either of them directly), Victor and Kellie never knew exactly how they were detected at the fur farm that night. This bulletin tells the story.
According to the bulletin, the pair unknowingly tripped alarms at the farm that night. Police were subsequently called and made the arrests.
Both served less than four months and have been released.
Having visited many fur farms, the few alarms I’ve seen take the form of (silent) photoelectric sensors which are tripped when they detect motion. They are noticeable as small boxes most often placed in the corner of (usually larger) fur farms. They can be easy to miss for anyone not looking for them, and this bulletin shows that is likely what led to Victor and Kellie’s arrest that night.
Another detail revealed in the bulletin is that after cutting holes in the fence, the pair (allegedly) made it as far as opening a single cage. Media reports on whether any animals had been released were conflicting.
5,000 mink and 100 foxes were released from this farm in 1997.
The bulletin reads, in full:
“Suspects Captured in Iowa
Last night around 1:30 AM, Steve Krege’s alarms were triggered on his mink farm in Sioux City IA. When he went out to inspect he discovered a silver Toyota truck backed up to his gate on the far side of the farm. He immediately secured the vehicle and called the police, who set up a perimeter and with the aide of K-9 units, captured two would-be farm attackers.
The truck contained masks, burglary tools, a police scanner, walkie-talkies and other items. There were approximately a dozen holes cut in the fence and one cage had been opened.
At this time the suspects are being held in Sioux City Jail and each has been charged with two felony burglary counts. An arraignment hearing is scheduled for this morning. I have been in touch with Sioux City PD, Iowa FBI and the Iowa Dept of Criminal Investigations, and I will send out new information as it becomes available.
After the Palmer farm attack on Thursday, and after receiving the Fur Commission Security Alert for the Upper Midwest, Steve had made sure his security systems were up-to-date and operative. His hard work and attention to detail may have prevented many more farm attacks from occurring. Congratulations go out to Steve Krege for his alert and decisive actions, and for his efforts in making our industry safer.
Distributed by
Michael Whelan
Fur Commission USA
541-585-8568″
This is the first of 30 articles I will be posting in December on the ALF’s fur farm campaign. Sign up for the email list to get every update sent to your inbox, or check back daily.
Animal Liberation Frontline obtains agenda for annual Fur Commission meeting.
Following up on last week’s posting of an ALF-prevention security manual for fur farmers, I am posting another internal document from the Fur Commission: the agenda for the FCUSA’s annual meeting, held every year in Park City, Utah. This is where most of the major decisions affecting fur farmers are made, and the industry’s heaviest hitters get together to strategize.
And much of that strategizing is about the animal rights movement. According to the agenda, at least 45 minutes went to “animal rights extremists”, which fur farmers have named in a poll as the #1 threat to the survival of their industry.
According to the 2011 agenda, part of this came in the form of a talk by Utah Division of Homeland Security’s “intelligence analyst”.
Fur Commission 2011 Meeting Agenda
What is the “Utah Division of Homeland Security”? It appears to be a state organization (not federal), but is housed in Utah’s “fusion center” – part of the Orwellian trend in which various state and federal law enforcement agencies – previously separate – join together in one building for the purpose of sharing “intelligence”.
According to their website, the UDHS’s focuses include:
Intelligence Analysis
Investigative Case Support
Risk and Threat Assessment
Organized Crime &Gang Analysis
Counter-Terrorism
Homeland Security Risk Mitigation
Fur industry turns to the law for protection
It would make sense the industry would seek “professional help” at the biggest fur farmer meeting in the country – since 1996, there have been over 90 raids of fur farms by the Animal Liberation Front and others. Last year, the Fur Commission shifted their entire focus from public relations to security, recognizing that the survival of their entire industry could depend on how effectively they could prevent ALF liberations and sabotage.
The rest of the agenda…
According to the agenda, the presentation from the Utah Division of Homeland Security was followed by the Fur Commission’s in-house expert on “security and risk analysis”. This, presumably, was a talk more specific to securing fur farms against an ALF action.
The rest of the agenda is comprised of general housekeeping (FCUSA “programs report”), and a public relations talk (on “Communicating with Consumers”), followed by dinner (Ghidotti’s Classic Italian Restaurant, 6030 N. Market Street Park City, UT). The agenda also names the hotel where the fur farmers stay, where the meeting is held, and more.
“Animal rights extremism has been the biggest threat to the well-being of the mink ranching community for the past 30 years.” – fur farm security manual
“If an individual or group is determined to enter your property, and willing to risk capture or injury, there is nothing that can absolutely prevent it.”
Animal Liberation Frontline has been provided with a 20-page document for fur farmers titled “Site Security: Strategies and Protocols” This manual is circulated to mink and fox farmers by the Fur Commission USA, and provides the most detailed look to date into security protocols fur farmers use to protect themselves against the Animal Liberation Front.
This is a sensitive document that the fur industry never wanted public. It reveals every detail on how they prevent ALF raids – from motions senors to fence tampering sensors and more.
The guide is a manual for both preventing ALF raids, and doing damage control after they have happened. It is the culmination of everything the Fur Commission USA has learned in 17 years of ALF fur farm liberations.
Since 1995, there have been over 90 raids of fur farms in the US. This campaign has seen the liberation of over 100,000 animals and millions of dollars in damages inflicted on the fur industry. In a 2011 poll, fur farmers rated these raids by “animal rights extremists” as the single greatest threat to their businesses.
To protect themselves, the Fur Commission USA created this manual. The document includes detailed descriptions of alarm systems, protective fencing, how to use neighbors to report suspicious activity, and more tactics for preventing ALF raids.
Fur farmers shift focus to security
The FCUSA to has admitted to shifting it’s focus last year after the realization that the ALF – not mainstream efforts – represented the biggest threat to fur farmers:
“In June of 2011, FCUSA went through a reassessment of priorities, and concluded that our security strategies going forward will focus on preventing the farm attacks that have plagued our industry.”
This document is part of that shift. Once focused on public relations, fur farmers have tacitly admitted they cannot win the support of the public, and instead should shift their focus to “farm security”. That is, preventing raids by the Animal Liberation Front.
Highlights from the manual
Among the interesting items included:
*What fur farmers should (and should not) say to the media if their farm is raided.
*What fake cameras to use for the fur farmer who cannot afford real ones.
*How to entice neighbors to report suspicious activity near the farm (the Fur Commission recommends baking them a pie).
*How to trick mink into returning to the farm once released.
*The type of sign the Fur Commission describes as “vital to successful AETA (Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act) charges”.
Short note on fur farm security
Although the Fur Commission never expected this would be seen publicly, there is still a certain amount of posturing going on with this document, not evident to anyone who hasn’t been on a fur farm. After visiting over 100 fur farms close up, I can say that almost NO fur farms employ the security measures promoted by this manual.
The 20-page document is divided into ten sections. I will break down highlights from the most interesting portions here.
Chapter two: Communications
If you’ve followed media coverage of ALF mink releases, and noticed patterns that indicate fur farmers are reading from a script, you’re right. And this document proves it.
The manual gives a bullet-point list of talking points for fur farmers to use when speaking to the media. Prefacing this list, the authors give this stern instruction to fur farmers:
“Remember, that all comments should relate to THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE ANIMALS.”
What follows is a virtual script for fur farmers to follow when speaking to the media. These talking points will be familiar to anyone who follows ALF media coverage. The following is lifted directly from the manual:
Points to emphasize with media:
• The mink are domesticated animals and will not survive in the wild
• The animals are suffering and can die of dehydration within 24 hours
• They are attracted to the sound of traffic and many will be killed by vehicles.
• Praise the community for coming out to help rescue your animals in this time of
need.
• You are a law abiding, contributing member of your community.
I left out the last item because it deserves a spotlight. With a not-so-subtle wink, and the most tongue-in-cheek tone possible, fur farmers speaking to the media are instructed to:
It is everything animal rights activists have suspected fur farmers say behind the scenes, laid bare: Fake an interest in animal welfare, pretend to care about animals, then snicker about your deception later when no one is looking.
Post-raid media relations: cont’d
The subject of communicating with the media is given even more space. The focus is imploring targeted fur farmers to not speak with the media themselves, and to allow a Fur Commission USA spokesperson to do the talking.
Why does is it recommended that the targeted farmer not speak with the media? Quote:
“…the ranch owner should NOT ADDRESS THE MEDIA in this situation. The reason is, that an attack is a very emotional event and it is likely that the rancher will be angry and vengeful at the time.”
Any temporary media designee is instructed to lie, and tell the media the farmer “is just too busy ‘rescuing the animals’ to comment”.
Fur farmers are also encouraged to build relationships with neighbors (who the authors admit can be “difficult”), so that they will call-in any suspicious activity around the farm.
Chapter Three: Deter
To increase their chances of the ALF targeting another farm, the manual recommends one first step for deterring a raid:
“The primary goal of your security measures is to deter attackers from targeting your facility.”
The manual then outlines a security protocol to be used by fur farmers. I want to say again that after seeing many farms up close: almost no farms employ the security systems the Fur Commission recommends. Some of these recommendations are:
“..an integrated system of components that deters, denies and detects an intruder’s access to your facility. Closed Circuit Television (CCTV), Intrusion Detection, Access Control, Lighting, Physical Barriers (fencing), Guard Dogs, Patrols, Geography and Communication are all vital factors in determining your security preparedness.”
Farmers are again advised to use their neighbors to report suspicious activity:
“Attackers will do multiple drive-bys before attempting a raid. It is important for you (and your neighbors) to be able to identify and report unusual activity to law enforcement and Fur Commission USA.”
Counter-surveillance for fur farmers
The manual recommends the following “counter-surveillance measures”:
“No Trespassing” signs: According to the document: “‘No Trespassing’ signs are vital to successful prosecutions of Attempted Burglary, Criminal Trespassing, Breaking and Entering and AETA [Animal Enterprise Terrorism” charges.” As reported on Animal Liberation Frontline last year, the Fur Commission designed the following sign, which threatens terrorism charges against trespassers:
Fake security cameras: The document suggests farmers who are unable to afford real surveillance cameras (which almost no farms have) use “dummy cameras” to deter animal liberators.
“Dummy-cams inside housings, with recognizable LEDs, can also be installed on poles along theperimeter or near the street, and can be very effective in creating the impression of a sophisticated security system. When using dummy-cams, be sure to conceal the camera make and model (can easily be looked up and identified as a dummy-cam)”
I can think of a couple reasons these are utterly futile as a deterrent. One, the ALF will nearly always wear masks during raids, so cameras are irrelevant. And two, with this document made public, the world now knows the many (if not most) cameras on fur farms are fake. Oh, and the world now knows exactly what the fake cameras look like.
Chapter four: Deny
“If an individual or group is determined to enter your property, and willing to risk capture or injury, there is nothing that can absolutely prevent it.”
The chapter begins by admitting upfront: nothing will prevent a determined liberator from breaking into a fur farm.
It goes on to downplay the threat:
“Fortunately, most of our opponents are not that dedicated to the cause, as to jeopardize their health and/or freedom in pursuit of it.”
This chapter focuses primarily on fencing. Numerous fencing options for fur farmers are discussed and rated for their resistance to being cut or felled. The fence most highly recommended is one that is sunk into the ground at least one foot to “prevent tunneling”.
Also noted: “Bolt-cutters are a standard tool of the opposition.”
(click to enlarge)
Chapter Five: Detect
“If an attack occurs, it is vital that the breach is detected as soon as possible. The ability to respond to a break-in immediately can spell the difference between capturing the assailants and preventing a release, and losing thousands of animals.”
The manual recommends several methods of detecting fur farm “breaches”:
neighbors
an alert staff working at the farm
cctv cameras
motion sensors
fence sensors
silent and audible alarms
proper lighting (motion activated)
“a K9” (family dog)
neighbors (The guide actually states neighbors should be called on to capture fleeing fur farm raiders by blocking the road.)
On the subject of cameras, the manual states upfront:
“The most important thing to remember is to make the cameras obvious. They need to have strong LED’s and be visible to anyone in the area, night and day.”
The “most critical” tool in detecting fur farm raiders
What do fur farmers perceive is the single most important tool in detecting fur farm raiders? Here it is:
“We believe the most critical detection device should be something integrated into your perimeter fencing (i.e. contact wire).”
“Contact wires” are described as follows:
“Long stretches of fencing can be monitored using a simple circuit. An insulated wire is woven through chain link or attached to the top or bottom of solid fencing. If the wire is cut or broken…This will activate any connected alarm system.”
Motion sensors are another recommended method of detection.
“Many farms also use detection mechanisms inside the sheds (primarily motion detectors or infrared beams). These can be adjusted so they are not triggered by mink or rodent activity, but only by atypical movement.”
Photobeam detectors are also effective tools. Most are weather and tamper proof and they can be installed along the inside of your fencing, as well as within the mink yards and sheds. Dual beam units are adjustable to prevent false alarms from falling leaves, birds or rodents, while effective ranges can vary up to 600+ feet per unit.
All alarm systems should trigger a silent response to your home, office and/or smartphone, as well as an audible signal in the mink yard. It is important that the assailants know that they have been detected, as they will likely flee upon the first sign of discovery. This will limit further damage.
Chapter Six: “What Fur Commission Can Do For You”
This chapter covers several security resources offered to fur farmers by the FCUSA.
Neighborhood Watch Report: Described as a massive dossier including, quote: “physical descriptions, vehicle descriptions and license numbers of suspected animal rights extremists seen in the vicinity of farms, as well as documented threats received by mail and email. The report goes back decades and is now over 200-pages long. It is regularly updated and distributed to law enforcement around the country.”
Email listserves: Two email lists are described as existing to help fur farmers prevent ALF attacks. The “Netwatch” email service is “primarily designed for law enforcement and covers general environmental extremism and potential flashpoints, on a national basis.” Second, the “Farm Security list… is focused more on a local and regional level, and primarily covers time sensitive, potential threats directed towards the U.S. mink rancher.”
Security Assessments: The Fur Commission offers to send its “director of security” to fur farms for an on-site security assessment. Quote: “This assessment will include fencing, camera, and alarm evaluations, as well as identifying likely tactics and targets of the
opposition.”
A “law enforcement liaison”: The Fur Commission USA employs an ex-police officer to focus full-time on fur farm security. Quote:
“Over the years, Fur Commission has created and nurtured many influential contacts within the law enforcement community. Our Director of Security, in addition to his time serving our country overseas, was a police officer for 18 years in both a large urban center and a small rural town. His ability to communicate on a professional level with law enforcement is vital in supporting our relationships In case of an attack, or the threat of an attack, we have the ability to engage officers from the DC headquarters of the FBI, down to your local sheriffs deputy.”
Lastly: security product guide for fur farmers
The manual concludes with a list of recommended security devices for fur farms, a sample letter to give to local law enforcement (allowing them access to a fur farm to arrest trespassers when the owner is not present), and a list of animal rights websites that are “of most interest” to fur farmers. Animal Liberation Frontline is flattered to have made the top of the list, followed by:
This document is an invaluable and rarely-seen look into how animal abuse industries strategize against the Animal Liberation Front when they think we aren’t looking. For the first time, we have an answer to the question of exactly what fur farmers are doing to prevent the ALF. And the answer is: not much.
Read a private letter from a Utah fur farmer: “…imagine an ocean of black mink, EVERYWHERE.“
Animal Liberation Front-line has obtained a letter written by a fur farmer, describing the “clean up” after a large A.L.F. mink release in Utah. The letter begins: “It’s been almost 4 weeks since the mink release in Utah at Chuck Lodder’s Ranch… I still wake up still in the middle of the night and worry.”
The letter, which appears to be written to other mink farmers, covers Mary Wardell’s experiences trying to catch thousands of mink liberated by the Animal Liberation Front. The full text of the letter is posted below, and it is the first time it has been seen publicly.
In September, 2008, the Animal Liberation Front carried out their largest raid of a fur farm in 5 years, releasing 7,000 mink from the Chuck Lodder fur farm in Kaysville, Utah. Fur farmers (and members of a nearby church) mobilized in the wake of the raid, converging on the farm to round up the thousands of animals released from their cages.
Candid perspectives on A.L.F. actions from animal abusers are extremely rare. Because it appears this letter was private and not intended to be viewed by the public, it is the kind of uncolored account the animal rights movement rarely gets to see.
Another copy of the secretive Extremist Watch newsletter leaked
For the second time, Animal Liberation Front-line has been provided a copy of the little-seen publication Extremist Watch, published for law enforcement and animal researchers. Never meant to be seen by the eyes of the public, this week another issue was submitted to Animal Liberation Front-line anonymously. Extremist Watch covers both above-ground animal rights activism and the Animal Liberation Front.
Last month, I posted two previous copies of Extremist Watch. These issues printed intelligence on the animal rights movement such as activists home addresses, which activists were dating, details about the personal lives of activists, and more. It was the first time the newsletter had been seen publicly.
The latest issue I have been provided focuses on two subjects:
1) Recent photos of mutilated primates inside Primate Products, leaked by the Animal Liberation Investigation Unit.
2) How to increase security at animal research labs.
Part one: leaked Primate Products photos
In August, the Animal Liberation Investigation Unit publicized gruesome photos leaked from inside Primate Products, a notorious breeder of primates for animal research labs. The photos showed badly mutilated animals inside their Florida facility.
The Primate Products / Animal Liberation Investigation Unit analysis in Extremist Watch focuses on the implications of the leaked photos, and offers advice for animal abusers to prevent future public relations crisis’.
INA’s “analysts” (who seem to source all their “intel” from the internet) carry on the same fear mongering we saw in the two previously issues, even getting an entire paragraph of mileage out of a video for a song called “Firebomb” posted in the Facebook page of a Florida activist.
Extremist Watch also describes concerns that animal rights activists will obtain employment inside Primate Products, admitting the impact the leaked photos had –
“…a leak of proprietary information could be just as damaging to a company as undercover videotape footage if released to the public, as evidenced in the release of the photographs allegedly ‘leaked’ from a source inside PPI.”
Extremist Watch’s “analysts” urge screening of all applicants for positions in animal research labs who have direct contact with animals.
Part two: Increasing security at animal research labs
In the second section,various Animal Liberation Front (A.L.F.) preventatives are outlined.
The section starts bymentioning recent reports of “suspicious behavior” at animal research labs.
“In one case, an unidentified individual approached a staff member and questioned the type of work being conducted within the facility and sought information on the building’s layout before being asked to leave the premises.”
And another example:
“In other cases, unidentified individuals avoided company personnel and fled when confronted by the staff.”
“In nearly every case” (of suspicious activity), Extremist Watch states individuals were observed taking photographs of the animal research labs.
To prevent against Animal Liberation Front raids, the article recommends decreasing blind-spots at animal facilities, increasing physical barriers along the lab perimeters, adequate lighting, creating single entry points / exits, installing fence motion sensors, and more.
Implementing certain security features, according to Extremist Watch, can
“…give the illusion of more security than actually exists and deter criminal acts.”
The article also recommends animal research labs prevent the public from seeing or hearing animals:
“It is often not advisable for outsiders to be able to view or hear laboratory animals.”
Use of security decoys are also encouraged, including –
“…false, lighted windows to create the appearance of insiders monitoring the outside of the facility.”
In a comic moment (and there are many among the three issues I have been provided), the “experts” at Extremist Watch clearly underestimate the motivation of the Animal Liberation Front , claiming –
“…activists, are unlikely to attempt crossing a section of desert, uneven ground, rocks or other physical features during the dark of night.”
So despite the A.L.F.’s history of cutting through windows, sawing through doors, and dropping through skylights, Extremist Watch assures its clients that activists working at night are unlikely to cross “uneven ground”.
Animal rights Wikileaks
Animal Liberation Front-Line is happy to post any future copies of Extremist Watch, or other damning documents from animal abusers. If you have copies of Extremist Watch, the Fur Farm Letter, other insider animal abuser publications, or incriminating documents, please send to Animal Liberation Front-Line.
Read copies of secretive newsletter: “Extremist Watch”, published for animal researchers and law enforcement
Animal Liberation Front-line has been leaked copies of a little-known newsletter for animal researchers called Extremist Watch. The publication prints intelligence on the animal rights movement, including activists home addresses, who is dating who, details about the personal lives of activists, and much more.
Little-seen outside of private animal researcher and law enforcement circles, I am making two issues of Extremist Watch available publicly for the first time.
Here’s a teaser: If your name isn’t in these newsletters, the name of someone you know probably is.
I have made many redactions from the two issues I have obtained, to protect personal information and security of people mentioned. View both issues here:
This is a long article, so here is a sampling of what will be covered:
*INA spying with fake Facebook profiles
*”Extremist Watch” publishing activist’s home addresses
*Activists speak out on inaccuracies in “Extremist Watch”
…and more.
Extremist Watch: An introduction
Extremist Watch is a secretive publication published by private intelligence firm Information Network Associates. INA is the company responsible for a recent conference on “animal rights extremists”, as exposed last month on Animal Liberation Front-Line. The publication’s primary goal appears to be (more…)
The Fur Farm Intelligence Unit exposes the unpublished addresses of three mink farms, a feed supplier, and a new fur researcher.
In their third communique, the Fur Farm Intelligence Unit this week released more secretive fur industry data. Included were addresses for:
*Three unknown mink farms
*A feed supplier
*A new fur industry researcher
All were previously unknown outside the fur industry.
Having done heavy research into the fur industry myself, I can testify to how closely the fur industry guards these addresses. The new addresses do not appear to be internet-sourced, and in fact the communique (read in full below) states:
The Fur Farm Intelligence Unit is being leaked information from the highest levels of the U.S. fur industry.
This is the third communique from the Fur Farm Intelligence Unit, which apparently functions to distribute unpublished, sensitive information on the fur industry. In its first communique, the FFIU released a list of attendees for the 2010 Canadian Mink Breeder’s show in Madison, Wisconsin – including the exact dates some farmers would not be at home to guard their farms. In its second communique, the F.F.I.U. exposed a previously unknown mink farm in Turner, Oregon.
With an industry as small as the fur industry, every possible target within it has major significance. Two addresses exposed in the latest communique in in particular have potentially immense significance to the survival of the fur industry.
New feed supplier: The FF.I.U. exposed the address of Shoreline Farms, a previously unknown Utah mink feed supplier. Feed represents 50% to 60% of the cost of raising a mink, and is a mink farmer’s largest expense. Without suppliers delivering inexpensive, specially blended feed (which guarantees quality pelts), the U.S. fur industry would not be able to survive. Not since www.finalnail.com exposed the Astoria, Oregon location of Northwest Farm Foods has a new feed supplier been discovered in the U.S. All mink feed suppliers have tremendous significance, and this is a major discovery. (Read the full list of known fur feed suppliers in The Blueprint)
New researcher: The F.F.I.U. also exposed the new (possibly soon-to-be) fur industry researcher Branson W. Ritchie. He is said to be working on the “Mink Genome Project” to eliminate Aleutian Disease. AD is perhaps the greatest fear of any fur farmer (possibly eclipsing the A.L.F.), and can wipe out an entire farm in less than two months. The elimination of Aleutian Disease would eradicate one of the biggest threats the fur industry faces. This research would be a crucial lynchpin in the survival of the fur industry, and is a significant discovery. (Read the full list of known fur industry researchers in The Blueprint).
In addition, the Fur Farm Intelligence Unit released addresses of three farms owned by the Carson family of Highland, Utah.
This is the full Fur Farm Intelligence Unit communique, as received by Bite Back:
“Fur Farm Intelligence Unit Communique #3
The Fur Farm Intelligence Unit is making public these never-before published fur industry addresses:
New mink farms
The addresses of these three farms have never been published. All three are owned by the Carson family of Highland, Utah. There are two new Utah farms owned by Larry Carson, and a third Idaho farm owned by his son Nathan Carson. The Carsons also own mink feed supplier Shoreline Farms.
LS CARSON MINK RANCH, LLC
Location #1
1553 No 950 East
Richfield, Utah 84701
Notes: Mink farm
LS CARSON MINK RANCH, LLC
Location #2
6199 South 2800 West
Spanish Fork, Utah 84660
Notes: Mink farm
New mink feed supplier
Shoreline Farms
6245 So 2800 West
Lakeshore, Utah 84660
801-756-0106
Notes: Owned by Larry Carson. Feed suppliers are essential for the survival of the U.S. fur industry. There are only 10 other confirmed mink feed suppliers.
New fur industry researcher
Branson W. Ritchie
Department of Small Animal Medicine
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Gerogia
Athens, GA
Notes: Richie has volunteered his research skills to the mink industry as part of the proposed Mink Genome Project. This project aims to alleviate the industry of one of its biggest threats: aleutian disease. He has offered cell mediated research to isolate mink genes that are resistant to AD. This research will be done in partnership with Dr. John Easley of Plymouth, Wisconsin, who is also a leading expert in mink disease. Ritchie is awaiting funding from the Fur Commission USA’s research committee before the Mink Genome Project is launched.
The Fur Farm Intelligence Unit does not inflate the impact or significance of leaking secretive information as a tactic. The intelligence organ of this movement will never be more than an auxiliary service to the movement’s teeth: Those who take these addresses and use them to achieve true animal liberation.
Despite efforts at secrecy over the location of their farms, feed manufacturers, equipment suppliers, and research facilities, we are approaching the day when every address in the fur industry is revealed and available for use by individuals who will bring its collapse.
The few murderers of animals for fur whose business addresses remain unexposed will soon be driven from hiding. The Fur Farm Intelligence Unit is being leaked information from the highest levels of the U.S. fur industry. This will become apparent in future communiques. More to come.
