Last week, Rise for Animals and The Marty Project filed a formal complaint with the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) – the agency charged with regulating operations like Ridglan Farms, the state’s notorious dog breeding and animal research operation.

This complaint followed a jaw-dropping revelation: one of DATCP’s own Board members publicly admitted that she was unfamiliar with either Ridglan or the long-ongoing investigations her own agency is supposedly conducting into it.

Outrageous? Absolutely. 

But, it only gets worse.

Because, while some within DATCP claim ignorance, others have been caught doing something even more dangerous: trying to protect Ridglan from scrutiny.

Internal emails obtained by Rise and The Marty Project reveal that long-time DATCP employee Konnie Jerabek sent an unsolicited email to the agency’s Secretary in January. In it, she attacked animal advocates, undermined and derided her own colleagues, and mounted a defense of Ridglan Farms – all with a passion that only personal interest could explain.

And, indeed, it does.

Turns out, Jerabek isn’t just any DATCP employee. She’s the daughter of Jim Burns, Ridglan’s managing partner and co-owner.

Of course, Jerabek didn’t disclose that fact in her email. Instead, she vaguely referred to herself as “the proud daughter of a veterinarian” – failing to mention that said veterinarian is directly responsible for running the for-profit animal exploitation enterprise at the center of multiple state investigations.

Jerabek also omitted that either she or her sister currently works for Ridglan (see 45:13 in the audio file below), instead boasting about spending past summers working at Ridglan – handling the very dogs her father breeds, warehouses, mutilates, sells, and kills.  

No wonder her email reads like a personal fit rather than professional input. It reads just as what it is: musings of a defensive daughter trying to protect her family’s business.

Jerabek claimed, contrary to findings by DATCP’s other, almost-certainly-less-partial inspectors, that Ridglan complies with the law. 

She praised her father and his business partners for supposedly working to “ensure the highest level of compassionate care” – a ludicrous claim in light of the grotesque evidence, including sworn testimony, about what actually happens inside Ridglan:

Dogs losing their minds and spinning circles in tiny, barren cages.

Dogs having scissors shoved down their throats and their vocal cords cut out.

Dogs having glands hacked from their eyes, without anesthesia, and being left to bleed as others lick their wounds.

This is what Jerabek defends . . . before turning to obvious projection: accusing animal advocates of spinning “false narratives” while actively padding and pushing her own.

Not only does Jerabek brand grassroots, nonprofit groups like Dane4Dogs “extremist”, but she actually goes so far as to suggest that DATCP’s role in protecting “animal welfare” should include defending Ridglan from critics!

Twisted, certainly. But, ultimately, not surprising.

Jerabek has said before, “I educate first, so we don’t have to regulate”. Now she claims regulators should “advocate” for and “stand by” their regulated entities, cooperate with them, and help them “be successful in their operation”. 

Sound familiar?

It should — because it’s the same kind of delusional logic we heard from Craig Reinemeyer, the dog research enthusiast and devoted Ridglan customer who expressed more empathy for Ridglan’s owners than for the animals they torture. Like Reinemeyer, any empathy Jerabek may have seems to end where the money begins. 

When Secretary Romanski replied to Jerabek’s email by saying the matter had been referred to the compliance team, Jerabek fired back: “Why does DATCP believe the animal rights activists?”

Jerabek conveniently ignores that the court’s findings and DATCP’s investigations aren’t based *only* on animal advocates’ evidence. They rely on statements and sworn testimony from Ridglan insiders and from whistleblowers, including brave former employees.

But, Jerabek doesn’t really care about facts. She cares about protecting her father’s money-maker.

And that brings us to the real question:

Why is a state regulator with deep personal ties to Ridglan – who worked there, whose sister may work there, and whose father owns and runs it – inserting herself into an active investigation without disclosing her massive conflict of interest?

Of course, we already know the answer.

Because in this system, the people who are supposed to regulate industries too often serve them, instead.

Because the animal research industry doesn’t just depend on labs and cages – it depends on loyalists in power. On insiders who blur the line between watchdog and apologist. On people like Konnie Jerabek. 

This is the real infrastructure keeping animals locked away in labs. And this is what we need to expose. And, then, dismantle.

Share on Facebook, X, or Bluesky now.
Or copy and share this link anywhere: riseforanimals.org/news/ridglan-defender