turn to. >> All right. Senator Tammy
Baldwin, thanks very much. >> Thank you.
>> The Wisconsin Beagle Breeding and Research
Facility that was infiltrated by animal
activists has shined a spotlight on biomedical
research conducted on animals, as well as the
laws meant to protect animal welfare. Following
last week's announcement that 1500 beagles from
Ridglan Farms were purchased by Big Dog Ranch
Rescue. The undertaking of where they will go next
began in one group. Around 60 dogs arrived at the
Janesville airport, where the ones most in need of
medical attention were loaded onto a plane and
flown to a facility in new Jersey. The rest went by
ground to New York and Virginia. The fate of these
beagles is very different from the majority of
animals used for research. The current farm bill
includes a measure prioritizing animals no
longer needed for research to be given up for adoption
instead of euthanized. Euthanasia was one
consideration for the special prosecutor assigned
to investigate Ridglan Farms in 2025. La Crosse
County D.A. Tim Gruenke found enough evidence to
charge the facility with one felony over the
mistreatment of animals. In a report summarizing the
case, he states, quote, Ridglan Farms made clear
they would argue that because they conduct
research and all of the dogs being bred would also
be for research purposes. The Wisconsin statutes do
not apply to them. Okay. In the end, Ridglan Farms
agreed to end its breeding for sale operations by July
in exchange for the state not filing charges. La
Crosse County District Attorney Tim Gruenke joins
us now. And thanks very much for being here.
>> No problem. >> So why did you seek this
resolution with Ridglan Farms?
>> Well, the conclusion I came to was that I could
charge one of the types of things that I was referred
to by the judge in Dane County, and I was going to
charge that. But charging that would only have
started a process that probably would have taken
six months to a year to get to trial. There were some
issues that could have been appealed. So charging it
would have just been the start of a process of. When
the farm offered to close down in exchange of
charging. I thought that was a good outcome because
even if I had charged and convicted them, I still had
no authority to close them down and the fines that
they had been charged with as well, they could have
just paid and kept on running. So I thought them
ending the business is what most people wanted, and
it's more than I could do by charging, and it would
happen much quicker than me charging. So I thought that
was a good resolution to have them agree to end
their business in exchange for not charging a crime.
>> So the resolution effectively closes down the
operation, because I thought that under the deal,
they'd still be able to maintain their own research
on remaining animals. >> Correct. There's two
parts to the business. The part where they do their
own research. I was never part of. I had no authority
over them. The judge didn't involve that in the
appointment of my special prosecution. The only
control I had was on the breeding part, which is the
part they agreed to shut down. So they did anything
after that, they'd be doing it without a license and
could be prosecuted. The federal law and the state
law exempt research facilities and research on
animals from the animal cruelty law. So if they are
doing research on dogs under the federal grant of
authority under the USDA, the state statutes exempt
that from prosecution. So that's why I never had any
authority over them and wouldn't in the future if
they continued testing on animals.
>> You did find that you could support charging on
one procedure conducted on these beagles. Can you
describe what that was? >> It's called a Chiari I
procedure. It's basically an eye gland that is
swollen or prolapsed that has to be removed. If you
were doing it with a pet, it would be an expensive
procedure and you'd want to have a licensed
veterinarian doing it. They were doing it the way
they'd been doing it in decades past, which is kind
of outdated, which was removing the gland without
general anesthesia and without having a licensed
veterinarian do it. Honestly, if they had found
that it did not fall below the veterinary standards,
I'm not sure I would have had a legal authority to go
forward. But basically, they were performing a
surgery without proper veterinary methods required
by the state of Wisconsin. >> One thing that you
talked about in your charging decision was the
prospect of euthanasia of the beagles. Why did you
consider that? >> Being familiar with a
lot of farmers growing up and farmers in La Crosse
area that I talked to, you know, and they have animals
that are injured or need some help. They have the
right to euthanize them as long as it's done humanely.
And if you had a dairy farm or a pig farm where an
animal had some injuries, if it costs more than the
cost that animal is to you, most farmers would would
put it down. And so that was a factor in my charging
decision that it's not a place that was breeding
dogs for sale for pets. It's a farm like a turkey
farm or pig farm, or bringing them for food or
for, in this case, testing. So it's not looked at the
same under the veterinary standards or under the law.
And so that just reality of the economics of farms that
are doing business. >> Did it pull on your
heartstrings to pour over evidence in this case,
especially as we know that you are a beagle owner and
a fan of beagles, actually have a painting of one in
your office. >> It's heartbreaking to
see them in cages and heartbreaking to see them,
you know, not being socialized properly, not
being able to run free and do what dogs do. But the
law allows for this behavior on a farm. So as
long as you're following the USDA regulations and
the regulations, the fact that I don't like it or we
don't like it doesn't mean that we could charge a
crime. So I was relying mostly on the state
regulators, inspectors that are experts in this area
and going by their advice on what they normally see
on farms, dog breeders. And that's why one of the
reasons I came to the decision I came to about
this behavior. >> We leave it there. Xia