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