Iowa
Iowa puppy mills again ranked among the biggest violators • Iowa Capital Dispatch
Eight Iowa dog breeders were cited for regulatory violations in the fourth quarter of 2023, with Iowa again ranked as one of the states with the highest number of violators.
Between Oct. 1, 2024, and Dec. 31, 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture cited eight Iowa breeders for violations of federal regulations, according to data compiled and analyzed by the Iowa animal-welfare organization Bailing Out Benji.
The number of violators resulted in Iowa placing third among the states — behind Ohio and Wisconsin — that had the highest number of violators in the fourth quarter.
According to the analysis by Bailing Out Benji, the No. 1 violation cited by USDA inspections, nationally, in the fourth quarter of 2024 pertained to veterinary care for dogs, which accounted for 48% of all violations cited.
Among the 50 states, Iowa has the fourth-highest number of USDA-licensed pet breeders and brokers, with 263 such businesses now operating in the state.
The Iowa breeders cited for violations in the fourth quarter of 2024 include:
John and Orla Nisley of Rolling Organic Acres in Edgewood: This business was cited for a violation related to an attempted inspection on Oct. 30, 2024. The inspector arrived at the kennel at 10:45 a.m. and “spoke to the licensee who stated they are not available for inspection today and no other facility representative is available. Failure to provide access to the facility, animals, and records for inspection is a serious violation of the Animal Welfare Act and regulations,” the inspector’s report states.
The inspector was able to gain entry on Nov. 12, 2024, after which Rolling Organic Acres was cited for four additional violations pertaining to records; cleaning, sanitizing, housekeeping and pest control, and veterinary care. At the time, the kennel’s paperwork indicated it had 42 adult dogs on hand, but a count of the animals showed there were only 13 adult dogs, creating some uncertainty as to the whereabouts of the other 29 dogs.
The inspector also noted that enclosures used to house 12 adult dogs had an excessive accumulation of hair and “brown, dusty organic debris” coating the top of the enclosures, and two of the enclosures had a heavy buildup of cobwebs. The inspector also reported the kennel’s attending veterinarian had not been to the kennel in the previous six months, as required, and was overdue for an on-site visit. In addition, six adult dogs did not have a complete physical examination by the attending veterinarian every 12 months as required. The dogs had last been examined in September 2023.
At the time, the kennel had 13 dogs on hand. Rolling Organic Acres recently canceled its USDA license and has, to date, not procured another license. This same kennel was cited for violations in the first quarter of 2023.
According to Bailing Out Benji, Rolling Organic Acres sells to a pet store in New Jersey.
Wuanita and Glen Swedlund of Farmington: This kennel was cited for three noncritical violations during a routine inspection on Dec. 19, 2024. The violations were related to the attending veterinarian and inadequate veterinary care; watering of animals; and cleaning, sanitization, housekeeping and pest control.
The inspector reported the kennel did not have the equipment on hand that was necessary to groom a recently acquired female bichon and stated that “the dog has heavily matted fur on all four legs and tail … This breed of dog requires regular grooming, and although recently acquired by the licensee, the dog appears to not have been groomed for several months.”
In one enclosure that was being used to house three adult dogs, there was an overturned water bowl and the dogs had no access to potable water. The inspector also reported that the sheltered portion of one animal enclosure was “heavily contaminated with fecal material” covering 80% of the floor.
At the time, the kennel had eight adult dogs on hand.
The Swedlunds have a history of violations dating back to her licensing in 2023, including violations in the first quarter of 2024 and the fourth quarter of 2023.
In December 2023, a USDA inspector visited a dog-breeding kennel located in the Van Buren County town of Cantril. The business was operating on property owned by Steve Kruse, one of Iowa’s larger dog breeders, but was doing business under a license held by Wuanita Swedlund.
The inspector reported that in November 2023, a French bulldog named Bethany gave birth to four puppies, three of which were found dead within days. Swedlund allegedly indicated to the inspector that “the puppies must have gotten too cold and passed away.” Three other puppies, born to a rottweiler, were also found dead at the kennel, with Swedlund allegedly telling inspectors “they must have gotten too cold and died.”
In addition, a puppy born to Megan, a sheepdog, had to be euthanized after a dog in a nearby enclosure chewed through the wall into the puppy’s enclosure and tore the flesh from one leg, leaving the bone exposed. A short time later, a sheepdog puppy from the same litter was determined to be missing. “The licensee states they did find a single bone and assumed Megan ate her puppy,” the inspector reported.
In February 2024, a state inspector from the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship visited the facility and found additional violations related to inadequate veterinary care. A state inspector wrote in her report: “Discussed the need to go down in dog numbers to adequately care for dogs on property.”
Waunita Swedlund and IDALS later reached an agreement whereby she agreed to downsize her Cantril operation to no more than 30 adult dogs.
Bailing Out Benji reports that it has records of the Swedlunds selling animals to pet stores in New York and Oregon.
Heath Meyers of Century Farm Puppies in Grundy Center: At the time of this Oct. 22, 2024, inspection, Meyers was cited for a direct violation related to dog enclosures and for one noncritical violation pertaining to the method of identification of animals. The inspector identified one adult female bichon, named Frisky Snowball, that had two toes on her right rear foot stuck in the flooring of her cage.
“The dog was panting with tail wagging, the tail wagging stopped when the facility representative was removing the stuck toes,” the inspector reported. “The dog was freed from the flooring by a facility representative approximately two minutes later. When the inspector examined the toes, the dog pulled back from the inspector’s touch, likely due to tenderness… The dog had a mild limp and was bearing some weight on that foot.” A worker at the kennel told the inspector incidents of that kind occurred “about two times a year,” with dogs’ toes becoming trapped in the flooring.
At the time of the inspection, Century Farm had 154 dogs and puppies on hand. Century Farm was also cited for violations in the first three quarters of 2024 and throughout 2023.
Eli Schrock of Hillview Kennels in Drakesville: This kennel was cited for two noncritical violations during a routine inspection that took place on Oct. 24, 2024. The violations were tied to incompatible groupings of dogs and cleaning, sanitizing, housekeeping and pest control. The inspector reported that the indoor portion of two separate dog enclosures was “heavily contaminated with fecal material.” In both enclosures, the fecal matter had been “flattened and smeared across the floor when the dogs walked through it,” and the material was covering roughly half the floor in one enclosure and 80% of the floor in the other.
At the time, Hillview Kennels had 40 dogs and puppies on hand. Hillview Kennels was last cited for violations in 2022.
Floyd and Lisa Klocke of Floyd Klocke Farm in Coon Rapids: This kennel was cited for one noncritical violation during a Dec. 3, 2024, inspection. The inspector reported that five 10-week-old yellow labs had no water available to them in their enclosure. The puppies were reportedly given water at 9:30 a.m. that day, and at 1:30 p.m., the water bowl was observed to be upside down. The puppies were immediately given water, the inspector reported, adding that “some did not drink while others drank normally.”
At the time, Floyd Klocke Farms had 14 dogs and puppies on hand.
Judy and Gale Dorothy of Stockport: This kennel was cited for one noncritical violation during a routine inspection on Nov. 21, 2024, pertaining to records that indicated a litter of kittens was sold in August 2024, despite there being no record of an adult cat on the premises at that time. There were 46 dogs and puppies on hand at the time of the inspection.
Julie Krause of Buttercream Ranch in Algona: On Oct. 23, 2024, this kennel was cited for five noncritical violations during an inspection. The violations were tied to minimum-age requirements for animals sold, veterinary care and animal enclosures. The inspector reported that Buttercream Ranch sold 17 puppies from five litters and sent them home with their new owners before the puppies were eight weeks old, placing them at risk of health problems.
Also, the kennel’s attending veterinarian had not performed the required on-site visits, with the kennel having no record of any such visit since at least August 2023. In addition, 14 adult dogs had not had their required annual physical examination by the attending veterinarian, and Buttercream Ranch could not provide medical records for three dogs named Lottie, Otis and Dexter.
At the time, the kennel had 19 dogs and puppies on hand.
Ross and Valorie Craig of Dunroven Farms in Newell: On Oct. 2, 2024, this kennel was cited for four noncritical violations during a routine inspection. The violations were related to the attending veterinarian and inadequate veterinary care, dog enclosures, and cleaning, sanitization, housekeeping, and pest control. The inspector reported that a female cat named Poppyseed had a coat that was matted with fecal matter along her lower back, across her spine and around her tail.
The inspector also reported that the staff at Dunroven Farms was checking on some of the cats every other day rather than a minimum of once daily. A cat named Snowy exhibited signs of a “mild head tilt” — a potential sign of an underlying health issue that could result in the pain or distress — that had not been reported to the attending veterinarian. In addition, litter boxes were not being spot cleaned on a daily basis to remove excrement. At the time, the kennel had 36 cats and kittens on hand.
Dunroven Farms was also cited for violations in the second quarter of 2024.
Iowa
Iowa Great Lakes businessman Butch Parks dies at 81
SPIRIT LAKE, Iowa (KTIV) – The Iowa Great Lakes community is remembering Leo “Butch” Parks, a longtime lakes-area businessman and founder of Parks Marina.
He died Tuesday, Jan. 6, at the age of 81.
Parks established the marina on East Lake Okoboji in 1983, growing it from a small fishing boat operation into a business with marinas, sales, service, rentals, storage, and popular destinations like the Barefoot Bar.
Parks and his wife, Debbie, also owned Okoboji Boat Works for 23 years.
Funeral services are set for Friday, Jan. 16, at St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Spirit Lake. It will be followed by a celebration of life at Snapper’s restaurant in Okoboji that evening.
Want to get the latest news and weather from Siouxland’s News Source? Follow these links to download our KTIV News app and our First Alert Weather app.
Copyright 2026 KTIV. All rights reserved.
Iowa
Iowa woman accused of pandering for prostitution and harassment after incidents at Casey’s and a daycare
AURELIA, Iowa (KTIV) – A Northwest Iowa woman is facing charges of harassment and pandering for prostitution after two incidents took place in December 2025.
Forty-seven-year-old Kristal Miller of Odebolt was taken into custody on an arrest warrant and faces three charges: one count of pandering for prostitution and two counts of first-degree harassment, according to court documents.
The charges stem from two separate incidents that took place on Thursday, Dec. 18. 2025.
According to court documents, at 6:15 a.m., Miller reportedly went to the Casey’s General Store, located at 100 Pearl St. in Aurelia. Documents state Miller approached an employee and customers, requesting money from them.
Authorities state Miller claimed she was wanted by the FBI and told people, if anyone called the police, “she would kill them.”
During this encounter, she also allegedly asked an employee to remove the string from her hooded sweatshirt. Documents state when the employee refused this request, she threatened to strangle them.
That same day at 7 a.m., Miller reportedly approached a female employee outside an Aurelia daycare and asked them for money.
Court documents stated Miller suggested the unnamed employee leave her boyfriend. Miller reportedly told the employee, if she did, then she and Miller would both be paid.
Authorities say when she was told no by the employee, Miller became upset and started yelling at them.
Miller also allegedly threatened to “steal her car” and ”take her away to her guys to start a new life.”
She was booked into the Cherokee County Jail on a cash-only bond of $5,000. A preliminary hearing has been scheduled in Cherokee for Friday, Jan. 9, at 10 a.m.
Want to get the latest news and weather from Siouxland’s News Source? Follow these links to download our KTIV News app and our First Alert Weather app.
Copyright 2026 KTIV. All rights reserved.
Iowa
Iowa law on police appeals ‘constitutionally vacuous,’ prosecutor says
The Iowa Supreme Court’s 2025-2026 docket is filled with key cases
Iowa’s top court has a busy schedule as it launches into a new term this fall, delving into cases involving subjects including bullying and TikTok.
A feud between two Jefferson County officials has landed before the Iowa Supreme Court, which must decide if a 2024 addition to Iowa’s Rights of Peace Officers law is unconstitutional.
Jefferson County Attorney Chauncey Moulding is asking the state’s high court to overturn what he calls the “constitutionally vacuous” law, which allows officers to petition the courts to be removed from their county’s Brady-Giglio list.
Named for two U.S. Supreme Court decisions, the lists compiled by prosecutors identify law enforcement officers and others whose credibility is in question, and it can provide grounds for questioning their testimony in court.
After a dispute over a case involving a sheriff’s deputy’s use of force, Moulding in 2024 notified Jefferson County Sheriff Bart Richmond he was placing him on the Brady-Giglio list. Richmond petitioned a court to reverse Moulding’s decision, and a district judge did, finding Richmond’s actions in connection with the case, while unprofessional, did not bring his honesty or credibility into question.
In his appeal, Moulding argues that’s not up to the court to decide, and that the law lets judges improperly intrude on prosecutors’ professional judgment and, ultimately, defendants’ rights.
“The practical real application of (the 2024 law) is to create a Kafkaesque scenario where a criminal defendant could face the prospect of criminal charges involving a State witness who is so lacking in credibility that the State’s attorney has qualms about even calling him to testify, but is prevented from disclosure,” Moulding wrote. “Such a situation is unconscionable, and underlines the constitutional vacuousness of the statute itself.”
The court has not yet scheduled arguments for the case, which could have impacts far beyond Jefferson County. Attorney Charles Gribble, representing Richmond, said this is just one of three Iowa Brady-Giglio appeals he personally is involved in.
What is a Brady-Giglio list?
Under the Fifth Amendment, criminal defendants are entitled to due process of law. In Brady v. Maryland in 1963 and in subsequent cases the U.S. Supreme Court held that due process requires a prosecutor to disclose any known exculpatory evidence to the defense. That includes anything giving rise to doubts about the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses, including law enforcement officers.
In 2022, Iowa formalized that process by mandating prosecuting agencies maintain a Brady-Giglio list of officers whose credibility can be questioned due to past dishonesty or other misconduct. The law requires agencies to notify officers when they are being put on a list and allows them to seek reconsideration.
Being placed on a list can damage or destroy an officer’s career, as prosecutors generally will decline to call them as witnesses or to bring charges that would depend on their testimony.
2024 law gives courts a role in Brady-Giglio lists
Iowa’s 2024 law went beyond requiring officers be notified of their placement on a Brady-Giglio list by giving them the right to appeal to a district court if their prosecuting agency refuses to take them off a list. The law requires judges to confidentially review evidence and allows them to affirm, modify or reverse an officer’s Brady-Giglio listing “as justice may require.”
In less than two years, courts have reversed local prosecutors on several Brady-Giglio placements, including a messy Henry County dispute in which prosecutors accused a sheriff’s deputy of making misleading statements on a search warrant application.
What happened in Jefferson County?
The lawsuit before the Iowa Supreme Court involves an April 2024 traffic stop by a Jefferson County deputy. As laid out in a subsequent memo by Moulding, video recordings show the deputy handling the driver roughly and, when the man complains, telling him “I can do whatever I want” and, “You’re not going to tell me what I can and can’t do. … You’re going to learn what respect is, young man.”
After learning about the incident, Moulding wrote, he repeatedly emailed Richmond, asking if the deputy’s actions had violated any county policies. Richmond did not respond. Concerned about possible litigation against the county, Moulding then asked another county to conduct an investigation. While the details are disputed, Moulding accuses Richmond of stonewalling both his office and the outside investigators and instructing his subordinates also not to cooperate.
“A county sheriff ordering deputies not to cooperate with an inquiry into a deputy’s use of force represents a fundamental lapse in judgment and raised serious concerns regarding the Sheriff’s honesty, candor and ethics as a law enforcement official,” Moulding wrote.
He scheduled a meeting that Richmond did not attend and then placed him on the county’s Brady-Giglio list. In an emailed statement, Moulding called the entire matter “unfortunate.”
“Frankly, I am shocked that instead of attempting to address this matter with my office cooperatively, the Sheriff instead decided to stonewall an investigation, stonewall the Brady-Giglio investigation, and then take this matter to court instead of sitting down and addressing the matter like an adult and an elected official,” he said.
In a letter, Moulding warned Richmond that he would no longer be called as a law enforcement witness and advised him to limit his involvement with criminal investigations, as “your engagement in such activities could likely negatively impact the outcomes in court.”
Judge disagrees with sheriff’s placement on list
After Moulding denied Richmond’s request for reconsideration, Richmond filed suit. In February 2025, Judge Jeffrey Farrell ruled Richmond should be removed from the list.
Farrell’s order criticized both parties, finding that Moulding had failed to comply with some procedural elements of the law but that Richmond could have avoided the whole situation with “basic and professional” responses to Moulding’s emails. Nonetheless, he found Richmond’s actions did not demonstrate dishonesty or deceit that would justify placement on a Brady list.
“This is not a case in which an officer lied to a court, was convicted of a crime, manufactured or destroyed evidence, or committed some other act that would serve as the basis for impeachment in any criminal case,” Farrell wrote. “Game-playing the county attorney is not the standard of professionalism that Iowans expect of our elected county sheriffs,” he added, but does not constitute grounds for a Brady-Giglio listing.
Prosecutor appeals, argues law is unconstitutional
In his appeal, Moulding does not address Farrell’s factual findings, instead asking the court only to decide whether the law is constitutional.
“The most glaring constitutional defect in (the 2024 law) is that it impedes a criminal Defendant’s substantive and procedural due processes of law, and right to a fair trial,” the appeal says. “These fundamental rights constitute the bedrock raisons d’être for the entire body of Brady-Giglio jurisprudence in the first place.”
Iowa appears to be the only state with a law allowing officers to sue to be removed from a Brad-Giglio list, but Moulding cites a recent federal lawsuit where a judge rejected a South Dakota officer’s attempt to get removed from a list, finding the request “in essence, asks this Court to require a State’s Attorney to violate the constitution.” He further argues that the law violates the constitutional separation of powers and is “so poorly drafted as to be unenforceable and void for vagueness.”
Sheriff’s attorney says single lapse of judgment is not grounds for listing
Gribble, Richmond’s attorney, argued in his Supreme Court brief that the law is constitutional and that the sheriff’s actions fall well short of Brady-Giglio standards.
“Under (the 2024 law), placement on the Brady-Giglio list results not from a single lapse of judgment but rather from repeated, sustained, intentional and egregious acts over a period of time,” he wrote. “Thus, while a singular act of bad judgement may undermine a police officer’s credibility in a particular case, placement on the Brady-Giglio list places a permanent and unreviewable scarlet letter on the officer that he/she is unlikely to be able to ever overcome.”
He also suggests that a court order removing an officer from a list “does not in any way alter the prosecuting attorney’s duty to provide exculpatory evidence in all cases.” In an interview, he argued there should be a legal distinction between prosecutors disclosing concerns about an officer’s conduct in the case in which it occurred, and doing so in every future case involving them.
“To me, that’s what Brady-Giglio is for, not for occasional or first-time wrongs, even if established of a police officer, but those that have a history of that sort of thing,” he said.
The Supreme Court has not yet set a date for arguments in the case.
William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com or 715-573-8166.
-
Detroit, MI6 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Iowa3 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska3 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios