The Government vs. Animal Lovers

W hen the Founders forged this nation, they could not have conceived of a state of affairs in which people who helped other people commune with the animals would be subjected to capricious and onerous laws.

Yet that was the sort of government heavy-handedness that struck in 2021, when a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration bureaucrat shut down two Hawaii-based businesses that offered humans the chance to swim with “therapy dolphins.”

Eliza Wille and Lisa Denning* were independent business owners who each established separate operations to enable people to interact with Hawaiian spinner dolphins. Wille is a psychotherapist who found that patients were willing to open up about addictions, mental illness, and other problems while interacting with the friendly dolphins.

And yet the federal bureaucracy stepped in to ban the practice, dictating that anyone who comes within 50 yards of a dolphin must immediately back away. The government acknowledges that the dolphins aren’t endangered, and their affection for humans is well documented. But getting too close to a dolphin can now earn a swimmer a $20,000 fine and/or a year in prison.

In late October, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Wille and Denning’s latest appeal. As a result, their livelihoods remain in danger, and their customers and patients have lost the enjoyment and comfort they found in playing with the “puppies of the sea.”

In another case of government overreach, New York State, with apparently no other problems for state law enforcement to fix, has gone to the mattresses to punish an entirely victimless crime.

Remember Peanut, the lovable squirrel? Last year, armed agents from the New York state departments of environmental conservation and health descended on the Elmira home of Mark Longo and Daniela Bittner, who were housing Peanut and a raccoon named Fred. The animals were soon euthanized — the squirrel by decapitation — as one of the agents claimed to have been bitten by Peanut through a thick leather glove during the seizure. The couple, in a rather unusual sort of enterprise, had drawn traffic to their OnlyFans account by featuring cute pictures of Peanut.

Peanut became a cause célèbre for politicians like then–vice presidential candidate JD Vance, who argued that the internationally famous ten-gallon-hat-wearing squirrel’s death was a prime example of government intrusion.

Now, Longo and Bittner have filed a $10 million lawsuit against the state for both the trauma they have suffered from the grisly death of Peanut and the loss of their income related to his fame. Technically, New York law forbids keeping a squirrel in one’s home. Regardless, Longo and Bittner deserve every cent they are looking for because of the government’s, er, wild overreach.

The victims of meaningless government regulation can often be the animals themselves. Earlier this year, a German shepherd, a K-9 immigration agent, was on patrol in California’s Otay Mountain wilderness when it was struck by a venomous rattlesnake. The dog, named Boo, was airlifted to a veterinary hospital and given anti-venom, which brought him back to life.

One California entrepreneur has developed a method to protect dogs from rattlesnake attacks. Jake Molieri founded SnakeOut, a business that trains dogs to avoid venomous snakes, thereby helping dogs to protect themselves. That includes hero canines that serve as agents in the desert and in rugged mountainous areas, where venomous snakes are most likely to attack.

Predictably, the California government stepped in and told Molieri he wasn’t allowed to charge customers for the service if he used native rattlesnakes to train the dogs. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife argued that charging a fee for the class is the “commercialization” of wildlife and thus illegal.

But shutting the class down will mean fewer dogs will be able to tell a venomous snake from a non-venomous one, and more dogs will be poisoned. Further, the dogs are trained to warn their human owners of the presence of a venomous snake. If those very snakes can’t be used to train the dogs, the K-9s won’t know what type of rattlers are on the “do not mess with” list.

These animal lovers aren’t Joe Exotic, running vigilante tiger refuges that emancipate employees from their limbs. They simply want to be left alone to enjoy their animals and let others enjoy them, too. Some just want to live with their animals without the judgment of prying neighbors; others provide services that help both humans and creatures enjoy each other’s company.

Our laws are meant to keep us safe from dangerous criminals and con artists. Banning swimming with sea creatures simply defeats the porpoise.

*Disclaimer: The author is employed by the Pacific Legal Foundation, which represents Wille, Denning, and Molieri in their lawsuits.