Many animal lawyers react to critiques of carceral animal law by contending that punishment is no longer a priority, and that there are only but a handful of anecdotes about over-charging. One might listen to animal lawyers who support criminal interventions and conclude that incarceration is no longer a priority. But a critique of incarceration alone was never the point, and such a framing would actually let the movement off too easy. Prosecutions that do not result in sentences of imprisonment, under this logic, are examples of the merciful progression of animal law. This chapter focuses attention on the other-than-incarceration efforts that might be incorrectly conflated with leniency and just outcomes by animal advocates. Recognizing that for many of our readers, it will sound ridiculous to suggest that police interventions that do not lead to incarceration can be an over-reaction to animal crimes. Thus, a substantial portion of the chapter is comprised of short vignettes that describe the role of police in animal protection efforts that do not involve incarceration. These examples are not exhaustive, but they provide a foundation for thinking about how policing and prosecution that does not result in incarceration or even a conviction can be affirmatively bad for animals.