Wisconsin

Cargill Announces Closing of Milwaukee Ground Beef Facility

Thu, 12 Feb 2026 21:57:13 GMT

Cargill Meat Solutions Corporation announced it will permanently close its protein processing facility in Milwaukee, Wis. This closing is expected to result in the permanent elimination of approximately 221 positions.

A Cargill representative reports the company made the difficult decision to close its Milwaukee ground beef facility to better align its portfolio with current customer demand and prioritize investments where they are needed most for the future.

“We recognize the impact this decision has on our 221 employees, and our focus is on supporting them with respect, care and assistance as they navigate this transition. Moving forward, we will shift ground beef production volume to our other North American beef processing facilities, including the nearby Butler, Wis., plant, to continue reliably serving our customers.”

The Milwaukee plant specializes in producing ground beef patties, loaves and chubs. The plant came under Cargill’s ownership with the 2001 acquisition of Emmpak Foods Inc.

According to the WARN notice , Cargill expects to begin the process of winding down operations soon, with production stopping on or around April 17 and the plant fully closed on or around May 31. Separations will happen in phases, based on customer and operational needs. The first employee separations are expected to be April 11.

Impacted employees may apply for open jobs at other Cargill facilities. Employees who exit the Company through this plant closing will be eligible for a severance package.

Nightly Battles and Big Losses: Ranchers Demand Reform as Wolves Continue to Wreak Havoc

Wed, 03 Dec 2025 18:42:51 GMT

It’s hard to fathom: 92 confirmed or probable kills of cattle by three wolves during one season (April to October 2025) in the Sierra Valley. For ranchers, it’s more than economical loss — the emotional toll of dealing with wolves targeting their livestock and livelihoods is real.

Reintroduction and management of wolves in Sierra County, Calif., has led to significant challenges. The community, led by officials such as Paul Roen, has been actively pushing for updated management protocols, enhanced deterrence measures and better support from state and federal agencies to address the escalating wolf-livestock conflict.

Roen, a Sierra County supervisor (similar to a county commissioner) and rancher, explains it’s more than a livestock issue; it is a human safety issue.

“These wolves were not bothered by humans whatsoever. I mean, they were not acting like wild animals at all,” he says in reference to the wolves killing cattle earlier this year.

Rick Roberti, California Cattlemen’s Association president and a cattle rancher in Sierra Valley, adds: “For every confirmed kill you find, there’s probably four to six others. The wolves had gotten so used to eating cattle they didn’t hardly even look at a deer if they could find one.”

Roen and Roberti both stress the wolves have no fear of humans, with frequent sightings near homes and barns.

The severity of the attacks led Roen and other local officials to declare a state of emergency, drawing statewide and media attention. Despite the efforts of ranchers and local authorities — including constant night patrols, protective measures and deployment of technology like drones — wolf predation persisted. The community also engaged with state and federal resources, including a Strike Force sent by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to document the losses and explore possible intervention .

The program, designed to prevent livestock attacks on ranching properties in the heavily impacted Sierra Valley, deployed more than 18,000 staff hours across 114 days, engaging in 95 hazing events that helped to prevent an even greater loss in cattle deaths.

Eighteen Sierra Valley ranches enrolled in the program. CDFW staff also assisted ranches in evaluating the use of wolf-deterring fladry and ensuring livestock carcasses are correctly disposed to avoid attracting scavenging wolves. Additionally, the program helped facilitate depredation investigations, enabling ranchers to access compensation through CDFW’s Wolf-Livestock Compensation Program .

Following the unprecedented level of livestock attacks across the Sierra Valley, CDFW, in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), took the step of lethally removing four gray wolves from the Beyem Seyo pack.

“This action follows months of intensive non-lethal management efforts to reduce livestock loss and is grounded in the best available science and understanding of wolf biology,” according to the press release.

Roen says progress dealing with the wolf issue came with federal involvement and local law enforcement support. He says when the sheriff got involved , people woke up in Sacramento.

Read more about how sheriff departments from seven California counties united to oppose environmental polices they believe threaten ranchers and farmers.

Not Just California

The gray wolf is on the federal endangered species list except in the Northern Rocky Mountain region of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, the eastern one-third of Oregon, Washington and north-central Utah. In Minnesota, the gray wolf is considered threatened. Because of these protections, killing a wolf in the states where it’s protected is illegal, even if it’s seen killing livestock.

Luke Morgan, Lightning Bolt Cattle Company general manager, has been dealing with wolves since 2011 when they first came to Oregon. Morgan manages 2,500 mother cows on multiple locations in Oregon and Washington using both public and private lands.

A pack of wolves that live on one of the Lightning Bolt ranches in western Oregon have been causing havoc the past couple years. According to Morgan, the wolves killed more than 25 head of livestock from mid-October to mid-November.

He says the wolves prey the weak-minded: “Whatever can’t take the pressure … the ones that will break and run.”

(CDFW)

Cattle producer Amy Anderson Fitzpatrick says her family has also been dealing with wolves since 2011. They raise cattle in southern Oregon during the grazing season (May to December), then move the herd to winter in Northern California. The base ranch, called Rancheria Ranch, is in the mountains of Oregon and is a mix of owned land and permitted grazing. The operation includes commercial cow herd plus some yearlings.

Since 2019, Fitzpatrick says at least 24 cattle deaths have been attributed to wolves, though actual losses are likely higher due to unconfirmed cases in the rugged terrain.

“I have learned far more about wolves and their behavior than I could ever imagine. Wolves kill for food, yes, but they also kill to hone their skills, teach their young and for fun. We have witnessed wolves literally bumping livestock bedded down to get them up and running to chase them,” Fitzpatrick says. “We’ve been dealing with it for about 14 years. … The earlier pack, the Rogue Pack, would hit Fort Klamath hard in the summer months when there was an abundance of yearling cattle, then in the fall they’d come over the hill to Rancheria and hit us. Now we deal with what is known as this Grouse Ridge Pack, which seems to just like to hang out at the ranch and hit our permit country in the summertime.”

Fitzpatrick says they previously anticipated up to five losses per year from cattle turned out on the range as a cost of doing business. With the increase in wolf population, the ranch tallied between 35 and 40 mostly weaned calves during the 2024 season.

The Rogue Pack would kill livestock as sport and not consume the animals. However, the current, larger pack tends to consume more carcasses, further complicating verification.

In Wisconsin over the past 12 months, wolf attacks on livestock have increased. According to the state’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR), there have been 62 livestock depredation incidents in 2025 — 45 killed and 17 confirmed harassments — all of which are either livestock or pets. That’s nearly double the number of incidents reported just three years ago.

According to the Wisconsin Farm Bureau : “Wisconsin’s wolf population has rebounded from extinction to an undeniable conservation success. But lately, it feels more like a horror story than a success story.”

Read more about how ranchers say they are willing to deal with wolves if they will return to their natural habitat:
Wolves Are Not Going Away: Ranchers Push for Practical Management Tools

(Paul Roen)

Financial Loss is Real

Herd-level effects beyond death loss include lower conception rates, 50 lb. to 75 lb. weaning weight declines and cow herd fear. Wolves have changed cattle behavior significantly.

Fitzpatrick says the presence of wolves has caused observable stress and aggression in the cattle, leading to behavioral changes, abortions and decreased weaning weights.

“Wolves actively harass resting cattle, preventing them from relaxing or thriving,” she says.

Morgan says herd experience more vulnerability during calving season. He points out calves and protective dams are high-risk with wolf attacks leading to increasing accidental calf deaths and stress-related herd disruptions.

Research by Tina Saitone, a University of California-Davis professor and cooperative Extension specialist in livestock and rangeland economics, found one wolf can cause up to $162,000 in annual financial loss .

Compensation is Available But Falls Short

Compensation frameworks exist but often lack speed and scope and require confirmations that are often unfeasible. Morgan says there’s not even close to enough funds in the pool to cover all the losses.

“There is money appropriated in California, but we’re just having a hard time getting it,” Roberti adds. “Most have been waiting since April.”

All four producers say depredations are significantly undercounted compared with real losses due to terrain, investigation lags and evidence requirements. A shared frustration is the fact if an animal is nearly completely consumed, the investigators can’t find the evidence it was a wolf attack and thus, it does not count as a wolf depredation.

Emotional Toll is Substantial

For cattle producers impacted by wolves, it’s more than the financial toll; it’s the human factor, the stress incurred.

“Financial-wise, it’s huge. It’s astronomical, if you really dig into it, but the mental capacity it takes from us and the people who work for us is huge,” Morgan says. “The emotional toll we have to go through just watching and observing cattle, and we spend every day we possibly can trying to keep these animals alive.

“There’s nothing pretty about the way [wolves] kill animals,” he continues. “For us to go out and find them or have to deal with that, it’s huge emotionally.”

Fitzpatrick explains the losses due to wolves have deeply affected her dad.

“My dad is 81 years old, and I have never seen him so depressed,” she explains. “He’s not the same; he’s lost the fight. It’s like we’ve lost. How do you put a price tag on that?”

Dealing with wolves it is a safety issue as well, Roberti adds. As producers stay up all night checking on and protecting their cattle. Fitzpatrick agrees, summarizing the stressful steps she takes to check cattle, noting she now avoids certain tasks due to the increased risks to herself and her dogs.

Documenting the events in Sierra County, Roen says he hopes their experiences can be used as a road map for others. He plans to share plans, forms and training materials with ranchers facing similar threats.

“We created different plans and trainings we will allow everybody to plagiarize,” he says.

Your Next Read:
Wolves Are Not Going Away: Ranchers Push for Practical Management Tools

The Cost of Coexistence With Wolves

Wisconsin Ag Regulators Propose Massive Livestock Fee Increases

Thu, 11 Sep 2025 19:08:28 GMT

The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) is proposing changes to rules, ATCP 10 and 12 , regulating animal disease and movement and animal markets, dealers and truckers.

According to the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation (WFBF) , these changes include massive fee increases that will be a substantial financial burden to markets, dealers and truckers that will unavoidably be passed down to farmers.

The license fee for what the DATCP calls “Animal Market Class A” would change from $420 to $7,430. A late fee for those markets would also increase by nearly 1,700% by shifting from the current price of $84 to $1,486. The registration fee paid by about 1,000 truckers transporting livestock in the state would increase 517%, from the current price of $60 to $370.

(Wisconsin Farm Bureau)

WFBF Government Relations Director Jason Mugnaini says it is important to clarify that Wisconsin’s program had historically received state funding support through DATCP, but this proposal shifts that onto industry fees.

The WFBF also reports the inspections and public health activity costs of these programs have previously been partially funded by state funding in Wisconsin, as they are in neighboring states. DATCP’s proposal shifts the full cost of these programs onto industry fees.

DATCP Secretary Randy Romanski explains the fees have not been adjusted since 2009 and the increases are needed to maintain critical animal health and transportation services.

“This program is currently in deficit because these have not been adjusted for so long,” Romanski explains. “Costs have increased during that time.”

He is transparent about the financial realities driving these increases. While the percentage increase might seem large, it reflects 17 years of accumulated cost pressures. He summarizes the goal is not to burden the industry, but to ensure the continued provision of critical animal health and movement services.

According to Sam GO, DATCP communications director, the DATCP Division of Animal Health receives federal funding through cooperative agreements for specific goals and objectives, such as animal disease surveillance and animal traceability. The cooperative agreements are separate from the programs in the proposed fee rules and do not fund the programs in the proposed fee rules.

She explains as federal funding for the cooperative agreements has decreased, those activities that are partially federally funded (such as animal disease surveillance and animal traceability) need to have a larger portion of their costs covered by the state animal health general program revenue. That means there is less state GPR remaining to cover the deficit in program revenue for the ATCP 10 and ATCP 12 programs.

The ATCP 10 fees support the following animal health programs: Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (CVI) Forms, Intermediate Handling Facilities, Disease Certifications (Brucellosis, Tuberculosis, Pseudorabies), Equine Infectious Anemia Retests, Equine Quarantine Stations, Feed Lots, Medical Separation, National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP), Farm-Raised Deer, and Fish Farms.

The Process

Romanski explains the administrative rule process is collaborative and takes about two and a half years. He says the process is designed to be collaborative with multiple opportunities for public input and engagement. He encourages stakeholders to not just critique the increases, but to offer constructive feedback and potential alternative solutions.

The current stage is specifically about public comment and engagement. He says the department wants to hear from industry members, producers and other stakeholders. They are actively seeking input that can help shape the final rule package.

The public can participate and provide feedback that can be considered by the department’s staff through several channels:

Attending public hearings
Submitting written comments by Oct. 15

The remaining hearings will be hosted virtually and at the Prairie Oaks State Office Building, Room 106, 2811 Agriculture Dr., Madison, WI 53708. For more information, dial-in instructions and to register for online access click on the ATCP 10 or 12.

ATCP 10:
• Monday, Sept. 15 – 1 p.m.
• Wednesday, Sept. 17 – 9 a.m.

ATCP 12 :
• Tuesday, Sept. 16 – 1 p.m.
• Wednesday, Sept. 17 – 1 p.m.

Individuals can submit written comments by Oct. 15 to: Angela.fisher1@wisconsin.gov or Angela Fisher, DATCP, P.O. Box 8911, Madison, WI 53708

Romanski explains after the public comment period, DATCP staff will review all submissions, consider suggested changes, and then present any revisions to their policy-making board. This ensures multiple layers of review and public involvement.

Neighboring State Comparisons

According to the proposal document , programs in adjacent states (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois) are similar to Wisconsin, as all are based on federal standards. Neighboring states primarily fund these types of programs through general program revenue; therefore, they have lower fees than Wisconsin’s current fees. While Wisconsin’s program fees are collected from a small number of licensees, these critical programs have impacts and benefits across animal health, animal industries and public health.

In Iowa, a livestock market permit is $50 per year. The livestock dealer and livestock market agent permits are $10 per year. A bull breeder license is $20 every two years. A livestock dealer or order buyer permit is $50 per year. A feeder pig dealer agent permit is $6 every two years. A pig dealer’s agent permit is $3 per year.

In Michigan, an action Class I is $400 per year. A buying station (Class II) is $250 per year. The remaining fees are waived for veterans: A dealer (Class III) is $50 per year. An agent broker (Class III) is $50 per year. A collection point (Class III) is $50 per year. A trucker (Class IV) is $25 per year.

In Minnesota, a livestock market agency and public stockyard is $300 per year. A livestock dealer is $100 per year. A livestock dealer agent is $50 per year.

In Illinois, a livestock auction market license is $200 per year. The livestock dealer license is $25 for a new license, $10 for the annual renewal, as well as $10 for each location in addition to the first location, and $5 for each employee. A feeder swine dealer license is $25, the renewal is $10, and there is a fee of $5 for each employee. There is no fee for a slaughter livestock buyer’s license, just a requirement to submit an annual report.

Industry Feedback

Both the Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association (WCA) and WFBF have come out opposed to the fee increases.

Tressa Lacy, WCA president from Rio, Wis., voiced her concern at the first hearing on Sept. 11.

“The Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association is in opposition to the proposed fee increases inspections and registrations related to a variety of activities by Wisconsin animal dealers, truckers and markets in ATCP 10 and 12,” she says. “I raise beef cattle with my husband and our 8-month-old in Columbia County. We both work off the farm in agriculture to financially afford our beef and hay farm operation, and I know the cost of these fees will be passed directly on to producers like us.

“The result of such significant increases will be fewer livestock marketing options, the potential for reduced disease traceability and fewer opportunities to sell livestock in the state of Wisconsin. Fewer options inevitably mean lower prices and thinner margins in an industry that is already being pushed on thin profit lines.”

She explains the inspections and animal health protections funded by these programs serve a broad public purpose — protecting animal health and consumer confidence in the meat raised in Wisconsin.

“It is fundamentally unfair to shift the entire cost onto the users as this is certainly a public food safety conversation,” Lacy adds. “I share the industry concern that these initial proposals are just the start of all programs in Wisconsin shifting to being user funded. Other states fund these programs with state support as the benefits are shared by everyone. DATCP should restore and continue the approach for these outlined programs.”

She concluded her comments saying: “WCA respectfully ask that DATCP reconsider these unreasonable fee increases and maintain a funding structure with state support that is fair, practical and supportive of both public health and Wisconsin agriculture.”

Mitch Giebel a WFBF member from Lyndon Station, Wis., also shared his thoughts on the proposed fee increases.

“I’m very concerned about the massive increases of fees being proposed,” he says. “As a young farmer, every dollar really does matter on our operation. We work hard to raise our livestock, and we already face high input costs, tight margins and unpredictability when it comes to marketing. Adding thousands of dollars in new fees, especially increases as massive as what is proposed doesn’t seem realistic. It’ll undoubtedly make it harder and tighter for the sale barns and livestock markets to survive, and unavoidably, it is probably going to be passed to us as the producers and farmers.”

He also explains programs such as animal health, disease control and traceability benefit everybody in the state, not just farmers.

“Healthy animals and safe food are the best interest for our state; other states recognize that and utilize state funding to maintain these programs and cover these costs,” he says. “Wisconsin needs to restore and maintain its state funding that has historically existed for these programs, rather than shifting a substantial burden on a small number of farmers and marketers. I am asking you to please reject these fee increases as they are written. They are too steep, too fast and out of line with our neighboring states.”

WFBF is calling on producers to share their concerns: “These unprecedented fee increases cannot move forward without your voice being heard. Share how these proposals would impact your farm, your business and Wisconsin agriculture.”

New Survey Shows Labor is Serious Challenge for Ag Industry

Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:00:19 GMT

A new survey from the Minneapolis Fed found ag bankers rank labor availability as a top concern for their farm clients.

The survey, which was conducted with ag bankers from the ninth district (Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin), found the issue is viewed as a “serious challenge” for 63% of respondents and a minor challenge for the majority of the remaining 37%.

“It’s becoming more and more difficult to obtain the labor needed to operate,” a Minnesota-based banker told the Minneapolis Fed.

The availability of livestock workers was seen as more limited than crop workers and those surveyed also shared that finding long-term help is more difficult than temporary help due to the seasonal nature of the ag industry.

As far as how this compares to past conditions, 39% of respondents said labor availability has gotten “much worse” over the past five years and 44% said it’s “a little worse”.

The Minneapolis Fed attributes this challenge to the region’s low influx of migrant workers and aging workforce.

According to U.S. Census Bureau data, 10% of animal production employees in the area are foreign born, compared to 18% nationally. The number is even lower for crop production with just 5% of workers being foreign born, compared to 32% nationally.

The region also has some of the lowest unemployment rates in the U.S.

(Farm Journal)

At the same time, the median age of workers in the region rose from 51 to 56 in 2021. The number of workers between 45 to 54 has declined over the past decade with a small increase of those between the ages of 25 to 44 and a large increase of those over 55.

(Farm Journal)

$9-Million Loss In 45 Packing Plant Thefts Uncovered, Three Suspects Arrested

Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:46:15 GMT

Uncovering approximately 45 thefts totaling over $9 million in loss, three Florida men have been arrested for stealing semi-loads of frozen beef and pork from packing plants across the Midwest.

Starting June 27, the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office began investigating the events occurring in Nebrask a.

Soon realizing the case reached further than Nebraska, the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office, along with Homeland Security Investigation (HIS) Omaha identified approximately 45 thefts totaling $9 million in loss beginning in June 2021. Investigators described the theft ring as a “sophisticated and ‘highly organized criminal enterprise,’” reports a local news source .

Additionally, the investigators determined the criminal enterprise to be based in Miami and targets beef and pork packing plants specifically in Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wisconsin.

While investigation began in June, thefts continued to occur across the region. In September, more than $100,000 in pork products were reported stolen from the JBS plant in Ottumwa, Iowa .

Utilizing cell phone records and GPS tracking devices, on Oct. 20, investigators identified and arrested three targets in the enterprise, recovering three semi-trailers with stolen merchandise valued at $550,000, says the news source. Yoslany Leyva Del Sol, Ledier Machin Andino and Delvis L. Fuentes were charged with the transportation of stolen goods and money laundering in Florida’s federal court.

A Minnesota news source reports each of the men possesses a valid Class A commercial driver’s license.

At this time, it is unknown what the men did with the stolen meat, however, the investigation remains ongoing.

First Trial For Man Accused of Killing Wisconsin Brothers Set

Fri, 09 Sep 2022 17:35:41 GMT

The first of two trials for a Missouri man accused of killing two Wisconsin brothers is scheduled for Sept. 26, 2022. Garland Joseph Nelson, who has been held without bond since his arrest in July of 2019, is charged in the Western District of Missouri with mail fraud and being in possession of a firearm and ammunition.

The case is related to the murders of Nick Diemel, 35, and Justin Diemel, 24, from Bonduel, Wisconsin. A federal grand jury returned an indictment against Nelson alleging he murdered the Diemel brothers to cover up a $215,000 cattle fraud scheme.

The state of Missouri and the federal government agreed to have Nelson stand trial on the federal counts before the state murder case. In the state case, Nelson is charged with two counts of 1st degree murder and that trial is scheduled for Feb. 6, 2023. The state intends to seek the death penalty.

Federal prosecutors say Nelson entered a business arrangement with Diemel Livestock of which Nick and Justin were principals. Nelson agreed to feed and pasture the cattle and sell them on the sprawling farm owned by his mother. Nelson agreed to send the proceeds to Diemel’s Livestock.

The Diemels shipped loads of cattle to Nelson between November 2018 and April 2019, and he allegedly sold, traded or killed the cattle without sending payment to the Diemel brothers. Prosecutors said Nelson “continued to fraudulently bill the Diemels for feed and yardage for cattle that had been sold, traded or had died.”

The indictment said Nelson “did not properly care for cattle due to incompetence, neglect, or maltreatment. Cattle entrusted to Nelson had high death rates dues to underfeeding, neglect, and/or maltreatment. Nelson fed cattle inadequately and poorly,” reads a statement from the prosecutor’s office. “For example, he dropped hay bales in a pasture for calves but did not remove the plastic covering so that calves ate the plastic and died. In another example, in December 2018, Nelson was entrusted with feeding and caring for 131 calves he co-owned with a Kansas farmer. On May 23, 2019, Nelson dropped off 35 calves at the co-owner’s farm in Kansas, apparently all that survived of the 131. Of the surviving 35 calves, many were emaciated and had ringworm. Some calves had their ears torn as though identifying ear tags had been removed.”

Nick Diemel continued to press Nelson for payment and sent no more cattle to him. The indictment states Nelson sent the Diemels a $215,936 bad check. His account had a balance of 21 cents at the time. Prosecutors say the check had been intentionally torn so it could not be cashed.

In an attempt to collect on the deb, the Diemel brothers traveled to Nelson’s farm near Braymer, Missouri, on July 21,2019. They were never seen again. When the brothers missed their flight back to Wisconsin their family reported them missing.

The affidavit filed against Nelson states that he “acted alone or in concert with others in committing the act of murder against both Nick and Justin Diemel.” The affidavit says Nelson drove the Diemel brothers’ rental vehicle to a park-and-ride near Holt, Missouri. Nelson stated that he left the keys in the ignition and removed the Diemel brothers’ cell phones and tossed them along the roadway. He arranged for someone to pick him up and take him back to the farm.

Remains were found by detectives in a 55-gallon barrel in a pole barn on the Nelson farm. The affidavit states Nelson admitted to burning the remains, crushing the burn barrels, and cleaning up blood in a barn. A blood stain on Nelson’s clothing was a DNA match for Nick Diemel, according to the affidavit.

A neighbor described hearing the sound of multiple gunshots coming from the direction of the Nelson farm at about 11:15-to-11:30 on the morning of July 21. That’s the time Nelson admitted that the Diemels were on the property prior to Nelson driving their rental vehicle to Holt.

A fired 30-30 caliber cartridge was found in Nelson’s clothing, and 30-30 caliber ammunition was found in Nelson’s vehicle. Nelson was in possession of a 30-30 caliber rifle.

Change Of Venue Sought In Diemel Brothers Murder Case

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:56:04 GMT

A Missouri man accused of murdering two Wisconsin brothers last year is seeking a new judge and a change of venue for his trial.

In a Zoom hearing on Monday, an attorney for Garland Joseph Nelson filed the motions. Nelson has been held without bail since July 26, 2019.

Nelson faces two counts of first-degree murder and several other charges in the deaths of Nick Diemel, 35, and Justin Diemel, 24, of Shawano County, WI, partners in a cattle operation. Court documents said the two traveled to Missouri last July to collect a $250,000 debt. The brothers were reported missing July 21 when they failed to show up for a flight home and did not answer their phones.

Caldwell County, MO, Sheriff Jerry Galloway announced charges against Nelson on Oct. 23, 2019, including two counts of first degree murder, two counts of abandonment of a corpse, tampering with physical evidence, unlawful possession of a firearm and armed criminal action.

According to a probable cause statement, Nelson shot the brothers, put their bodies in 55-gallon barrels and used a skid loader to move them one at a time from a barn to a pasture. There, he allegedly burned them using diesel fuel and an unknown liquid. Nelson told investigators he then dumped the remains on a manure pile and hid the barrels elsewhere on his property, about 70 miles northeast of Kansas City, MO. Their remains were found in Missouri and Nebraska.

The Diemel brothers operated Diemel Livestock, Navarino, Wisc., and they had business dealings with cattlemen in multiple states.

Nelson has a previous conviction for selling cattle that didn’t belong to him. According to a Department of Justice news release in 2016, Nelson was sentenced in federal court to two years in federal prison without parole “for a cattle fraud scheme that resulted in losses of more than $262,000 to his victims.”

Nelson reported to the Bureau of Prisons on Nov. 21, 2016, to begin serving that sentence.

In August of 2019, after Nelson had been arrested in connection with the Diemel case, he was charged in Bourbon County, Kan., with five counts of transporting diseased animals across state lines and endangering the food supply. The charges stem from alleged violations on May 1, 2020, more than two months before the Diemel brothers came to Caldwell County, MO., to visit Nelson’s farm.

Related stories:

Missing Diemel Brothers’ Business Described By Wisc. Auction Manager