Nutmeg the squirrel
I don't know anyone who isn't touched by the compassion and trust between human and animal that bonds us together for life, while simultaneously becoming thoroughly disgusted with government regulatory abuse that interferes with the best part of human-animal interaction, after learning the story of Peanut the squirrel.
Seven years ago, Peanut the baby squirrel was rescued and restored to health by Mark Longo and Rachel Tindal, wildlife rehabilitators in New York. Longo and Tindal found Peanut orphaned on the side of the road after his mother had been run over by a car and killed. Longo and Tindal adopted Peanut as their own fully domesticated pet, providing a loving home as part of their family. Using social media, Mark and Rachel shared Peanut's uncommon intelligence, his mega-personality, and the pure joy and love Peanut returned unconditionally.
That is until a heartlessly cruel Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) employee(s) confiscated Peanut, along with a wounded pet raccoon that Longo and Tindal had successfully restored back to health. In October 2024, the New York agency claimed complaints had been lodged over safety concerns relative to rabies that justified heartlessly ignoring the deep attachments in both directions that has left a family bereaved to this day. For the record, the DEC euthanized Peanut and the raccoon before testing them for rabies, for which both critters tested negative postmortem.
There is plenty of information, including many videos, documenting Peanut's life story and government's overreach for no sustainable conservation reason other than to sabotage something just because it could, according to reports found in the links below.
The abusive, unnecessary, cruel, and abhorrent violative authority by which these callous murders happen to critters who cannot defend themselves, nor can their owners without severe consequences, is untenable, uncivilized and must be stopped. As a citizenry, if we can't, or won't, we are far lower life forms than all the Earth's critters we abandon to our inhumane system. Sources are below.
“Peanut the squirrel stole our hearts. Now he's a symbol against government overreach,” by Charles Trepany, December 3, 2024.
USAToday.com/story/life/pets/2024/12/03/peanuts-squirrel-lawsuit/76666240007/
“Is it legal to have a pet squirrel? Beloved Peanut the squirrel euthanized in New York,” by Jeanine Santucci, November 2, 2024
USAToday.com/story/news/nation/2024/11/02/peanut-squirrel-euthanized-legal/76009885007/
“Man who took in Peanut, the orphaned squirrel, says it's 'surreal' officials euthanized his pet,” by Associated Press, November 4, 2024
CNN.com/2024/11/04/us/peanut-the-squirrel-euthanized-intl-scli/index.html
Iowa's Squirrel Swatting Preceded New York's by More Than a Year
Doug and Tracy Johnson dedicate time to wildlife rehabilitation here in Scott County, Iowa, and in March 2023, took in an abandoned baby squirrel that a friend found in her attic. They named him Nutmeg, and for a week straight, were inseparable from Nutmeg, feeding him squirrel formula (yes, its a thing), protecting him, and loving him up completely. Nutmeg slept with Doug and Tracy, mostly on Doug's chest, feeling perfectly safe while Doug's body warmth soothed him. “He was the sweetest little thing,” according to Doug. Their devotion to Nutmeg's critical care established unconditional trust between them, contributing monumentally to Nutmeg's not just healing, but thriving as a beloved domesticated pet.
Then, just like in Peanut's story, a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) employee showed up, using the same complaint of safety concerns due to rabies, while further citing that having a wild animal in the house is against the law.
Naturally, the law referred to is completely obscure, unknown by most Americans. And unknowable if you rely on the DNR's Web site to educate you, as it must be buried deep deep deep in the bowels of Iowa's Code 481.38 on wildlife prohibitions. (Legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/481A.38.pdf)
According to the Johnsons, the DNR officer refused to leave their property, initiated a typical government intimidation process by threatening the Johnsons with warrants and arrests if they didn't hand over Nutmeg, which they initially refused to do without more information relative to this mean-spirited government taking. Both Doug and Tracy questioned this DNR bully's authority to just take Nutmeg from them forever, due to a potential death sentence if baby Nutmeg did not continue to receive ongoing critical care.
It was at this point that Tracy turned to go back in the house when the DNR officer grabbed her arm, triggering Doug to come to her aid, ordering him to remove his hands from his wife. The officer seized the moment and pounced on Doug, took him to the ground and charged him with “Interfering with Official Acts” under Iowa Code 719.1 and pursuant to relevant duties as applied in Iowa Code 147a section 602.1303 subsection 3. (Law.justia.com/codes/iowa/2021/title-xvi/chapter-719/section-719-1/ ; Legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2008/719.1.pdf)
Arguably “Interfering with Official Acts” is a catchall charge for all manner of violative and unconstitutional prosecutorial abuse, judicial misconduct, and government overreach. It is largely the fault of derelict legislation written by lazy legislators that provides lawfare-ish holes. Made far worse is that glaring prosecutorial abuse is too often upheld by mediocre judges and administrative law magistrates, who appear to defy their oaths and, at the very least, the spirit of the Constitution thereby degrading justice.
Nutmeg was confiscated and given into the custody of JoJo's Nut House Wildlife Rehabilitation Center, a licensed wildlife rehabber, against the express wishes of the Johnsons, who feared for Nutmeg's well being. Their worst fears were realized when they learned that Nutmeg had died, presumably while under the care of JoJo's Nut House. However, this unfortunate calamity occurring at JoJo's is not yet confirmed.
Amidst the unmitigated heartbreak and confusion as to how this injustice could even be happening in a civil world, the Johnson's constitutionally protected rights for due process were arguably violated by the DNR and the court. Doug and Tracy recounted their request for a public defender claiming the courts failed to fulfill their lawful request. They were all but forced to waive this representation at the 11th hour to move things along, especially after several continuations of their case “in the interest of justice” dragged things out.
According to the Johnsons, they were also denied access to the DNR officer's body cam video of the entire incident until minutes before their hearing, derailing any meaningful exploration of its value as exculpatory. Meanwhile, during the hearing, Doug explained how the DNR officer presented video footage to only show a truncated segment that favored the officer's version of events, prejudicing Doug and Tracy's version. The judge accepted this potentially unfair representation of events without dispute.
Doug and Tracy further claimed that the judge, who was actually an administrative law magistrate, never explained the proceedings, the charges, the authorities for the charges, any available options, et al. The Johnsons had no attorney representation and operated in a hopeless vacuum of predetermined outcomes.
In the end, Doug was not adjudicated for illegally housing Nutmeg, somehow construed to be a wild baby squirrel prohibited from cuddling up in Tracy's arms precisely as Nutmeg was doing when she opened her front door to the government official. Instead, Doug was exclusively charged for the kerfuffle with the DNR officer via “Interfering with Official Acts.”
One more time: What official acts were being interfered with, exactly? The confiscating and killing of a domesticated baby squirrel, a beloved family pet. And where is the authority for this particular absurdity? What is the precise language that authorizes any federal or state DNR or DEC employee(s) to walk onto private property and enforce such a diabolical policy? And pray tell, what possible rationale could there be for such barbaric policies? Because it clearly is not safety.
Meanwhile, the DNR officer's intimidating presence, evidenced by his initially putting physical hands on Tracy that triggered a defensive response from Doug, goes unaccountable. Doug was restrained, arrested by Davenport City Police Officers who were called to the scene, incarcerated, released on bail, found guilty and fined. The Johnsons emphasized the Davenport police officers were perfectly professional, reasonable, and genuinely decent. Whether there were consequences for the DNR employee's aggressive conduct is unknown. We do know that the consequences to Nutmeg were deadly.
All this unnecessary chaos and profound heartache for providing care and love to a baby squirrel, who loved Doug and Tracy right back. As Tracy so keenly pointed out, it's perfectly legal for you to shoot a squirrel, eat a squirrel, kill a squirrel, but it's illegal for you to befriend a squirrel, save a squirrel's life, or just love a squirrel!
The following commentary “Peanut and Puppycide” by Robert Blumen (Brownstone Institute, November 20, 2024) is vitally important insight into the rise in pet killings. These killings are not what most think – for the safety of law-enforcement personnel. Instead, this pet killing is psychological manipulation, done deliberately to create a state of public fear to compel compliance verses inspire cooperation, an outcome that is all about ironclad top down control versus bottom up community-centric law enforcement or peace keeping. (Brownstone.org/articles/peanut-and-puppycide/)
And here's another important, educational, and eye-opening study: “Puppycide by gavel: How the judiciary uses the police killing of dogs to reinforce justifications for police violence,” by Jeremy J. Smith, University of Tennessee Qualitative Criminology, May 22, 2024. QualitativeCriminology.com/pub/axvb531i/release/1)
