March 27, 2025 – Town of Polk, WI – The Washington County Humane Society has issued a statement regarding the situation involving 22 Golden Retrievers.
March 27, 2025 – Town of Polk, Wi – Charges have been filed against the 70-year-old woman from the Town of Polk who surrendered 22 Golden Retrievers earlier this month.
There are 22 counts against the breeder for “Intentionally provide improper animal shelter sanitation standards. Which is summed up “as the person owning an animal, a dog, did intentionally fail to provide the animal with the minimum standards of sanitation, to wit: failed to keep shelter clean of feces, contrary to sec. 951.14(4), 939.51(3)(a) Wis. Stats., a Class A Misdemeanor, and upon conviction may be fined not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000), or imprisoned not more than nine (9) months, or both.”
The criminal complaint outlines how the woman was found Saturday, March 1, 2025, on the side of the road sitting on top of a trash can hoping someone would stop to see if she’s ok. The woman was taken to the hospital and found to be malnourished. According to the complaint, the woman had not eaten for two weeks because she felt ill.
A portion of the criminal complaint is below. The woman’s name has been redacted out of courtesy because of medical concerns outlined in the complaint.
You can choose to CLICK HERE to read the full criminal complaint.
Please note, some of the details may be unsettling.
Since the first article about this story was published, more information has come to light. Efforts have been made to reach out to the defendant, however, there has been no response.
Kay Amland, executive director of the Washington County Humane Society, did respond to a series of questions below.
Question: In the criminal complaint, it said “the defendant granted consent to go into the house with Humane Society staff to take the dogs to the Humane Society for safekeeping while the defendant was in the hospital.”
Kay Amland: “That is accurate. The intent was to return the dogs on Monday. Normally, we don’t board animals, obviously we have no jurisdiction to go into a person’s home, but because law enforcement told us to do it, we did it. We thought we were going to be done with the dogs on Monday. The owner was into the hospital because she was sick. That’s what we knew.”
Question: Did the owner, I’m assuming, give consent on that Saturday to take the animals?
Kay Amland: “No, she didn’t know. The consent came from law enforcement. Our only line of communication was through law enforcement.”
Question: If Monday was the day, you were expecting her to take them back, what was the date you approached her about the surrender?
Kay Amland: “We didn’t approach her about surrender. She approached us. She gave us verbal consent to take all the dogs. She told us over the phone, and her doctor was present, and he said she was of sound mind when she did that. However, we didn’t move on that because I was out of town at a training in Madison. I like things in writing, and because she was in the hospital, we didn’t know how she was doing. Then she came in on Friday, March 7, and that’s when she signed all the documents. She had been released from the hospital; she came with her sister and her brother. We didn’t pursue her to surrender the animals, she pursued us.”
Question: Some people in the dog community have reached out saying they co-owned the dogs or had a certificate saying they co-owned a dog.
Kay Amland: “There was one person that thought we might have a dog, and we checked the microchip number, and that was a dog we did not have. Then the person came in and checked all the microchips of all the animals we had, just as a double check, and we did not have that particular dog.”
Question: Some people said they paid for the puppies and had contracts. Were you aware of any of that?
Kay Amland: “The owner said she wanted certain puppies to go to certain people. But that never went anywhere. That would have been between the owner and the people that allegedly say they have the contracts. But she said she owned all the dogs, and then she surrendered all the dogs to us.”
Question: Did the owner know once she surrendered the animals that they would be spayed/neutered? Because you sent me the paperwork and it does not say spay or neuter, so how was she informed that was going to be part of this surrender process?
Kay Amland: “That was verbally explained to her by Kelly Bykowski the Shelter Programs Manager; she did the intake.”
Question: Was anything given to the owner in writing about the surrender process and then the spaying and neutering.
Kay Amland: “WCHS provides copies of the surrender form if requested by the surrendering party.”
Question: Some people said they were trying to help the owner and the dogs, and they said they were threatened with arrest, is that true?
Kay Amland: “I know we had in a group of upset people at the shelter. I believe it was Monday, March 3, and they were requesting information which we could not provide, because at that point no charges were filed, and we have to keep everything confidential. We did get Lieutenant Tim Kemps on the phone, and he said the people needed to leave the building and it was law enforcement’s issue and not the Humane Society, and they were asked to leave the building and not come back. So, they left peacefully, and didn’t return.”
Question: When were the dogs posted for adoption?
Kay Amland: “It was a Tuesday evening, March 11 they were on the adoption floor and on Wednesday they were adopted.”
Question: Were they adopted by one person?
Kay Amland: “You mean one person adopting all the dogs? Oh no, no. There were multiple adopters.”
Question: Somebody said they were sold.
Kay Amland: “There’s an adoption fee. So, if that’s considered selling. We do have an adoption fee or a sale, but yes, I can see where someone might say they were sold.”
Question: People said they did not see they were posted for adoption.
Kay Amland: “Once the dogs were adopted and leaving the building, we take them off our website.”
Question: But they were added to your website.
Kay Amland: “Yes, all of them.”
Question: Were you aware of the owner’s status in the dog community?
Kay Amland: “No.”
Question: Is anybody filing a lawsuit against the Humane Society?
Kay Amland: “We’ve been told a plethora of litigation is forthcoming, so I’m assuming there will be something. I haven’t received anything yet.”
The initial appearance for the defendant/previous owner of the dogs is set for May 5, 2025, in Judge Ryan Hetzel’s court at 9:45 a.m.
Below is a story that initially ran March 24, 2025.
Washington Co., WI – There’s an emotional issue for animal lovers regarding a recent assist by the Washington County Humane Society to help with 22 Golden Retrievers in Richfield. The request was made by the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.
Click HERE for surrender details at the Washington Co. Humane Society
