Earlier this week, animal advocacy group Dane4Dogs announced that it’s being sued by Ridglan Farms – the embattled dog-breeding-and-research-operation at the center of mounting public outrage.
Why?
Because Ridglan doesn’t like that Dane4Dogs is exposing its ugly insides.
In a desperate attempt to silence the truth and cling to its blood-soaked profit margin, Ridglan is accusing Dane4Dogs of trying to “destroy Ridglan Farms’ business” – a business built on mass-breeding, selling, harming, and discarding dogs – and it’s hoping the legal system goes after those exposing the violence, instead of the violence itself.
Amidst “mounting legal problems” and a loss of clientele, Ridglan is lashing out – shifting blame to Dane4Dogs not just for speaking the truth loudly and relentlessly, but for doing the unthinkable: forcing accountability from within the very institutions that usually protect the animal research industry.
In its desperation, Ridglan has turned to intimidation: smearing, threatening, and now suing Dane4Dogs for allegedly making false and misleading claims.
Only, their claims are neither. Here’s how the record reads:
- A “judge, state and federal regulatory bodies and a lawyer with the Veterinary Examining Board [] all found the allegations by animal advocates to be credible.”
- Wisconsin’s Veterinary Examining Board has more than one active investigation into Ridglan Farms’ operations.
- Former Ridglan employees testified under oath to what Dane4Dogs is claiming.
- State and federal inspectors’ documentation corroborates Dane4Dogs’ claims.
- Nine current employees have revealed “17 years of unlawful surgeries and other violations”.
Also in its desperation, Ridglan is trying to hide behind a grotesque legal technicality by claiming that the dogs who had their eye glands cut off and their vocal cords cut out were research dogs.
As we’ve previously reported, Ridglan plays multiple roles within the animal research industry, but, disturbingly, animal cruelty laws apply only to the dogs it breeds and sells – not to the dogs it experiments on. This is why Ridglan now argues that the dogs subjected to the brutalities at issue were “research” dogs:
. . . mutilating a conscious dog’s eyes or severing their vocal cords is illegal only if the dog is part of Ridglan’s breeding operation. If the exact same dog is subject to the exact same atrocities as part of an ‘experiment’ at Ridglan, it’s completely legal.
But, even this sad “defense” falls apart.
Public USDA records confirm that Ridglan operates primarily as a breeder and dealer of dogs: Ridglan routinely houses 20+ times more dogs as part of its breeding operation than as part of its research operation. (And that’s a low estimate, because breeder/dealer counts are point-in-time snapshots, while research facility numbers span entire years.)
This means that any given dog at Ridglan Farms is well over 20 times more likely to be part of its breeding operation than part of its research operation . . . yet Ridglan wants the authorities to believe that, somehow, each and every dog who had their eyes or vocal cords hacked by non-veterinarians were research dogs. Sure…
And, this is all without even touching the most obvious point: no animal should have these things done to them. Period.
Even if we suspend disbelief and accept the legal reality upon which Ridglan is trying to rely, there’s still this: in its own legal filing, Ridglan effectively admits that what Dane4Dogs and whistleblowers allege did actually happen.
Ridglan specifically asserts that there is nothing wrong with non-veterinarians performing “minor procedures” (like, it would seem, cutting out dogs’ eye glands and severing dogs’ vocal cords) as directed by a veterinarian….
So, to be clear:
Ridglan says Dane4Dogs is lying.
But also says these things did happen.
And that they’re legal.
Because they’re “research”.
That’s not a defense. That’s a confession. And it proves something critical: Ridglan’s lawsuit isn’t based on fact – it’s built on contradiction and desperation.
It’s the move of a corporation scrambling to cover its tracks, caught between admitting the truth and pretending it didn’t happen.
And, it leaves no doubt (if there even was any) that Ridglan’s lawsuit is nothing more than a “‘blatant example of a corporation attempting to cover up its own abuse of dogs by silencing its critics.’”
But it won’t work.
Because the truth is already out.
And, because, thankfully, Ridglan Farms has met its match in Dane4Dogs, which has made clear that “this suit will not deter” their fight to free the dogs still trapped inside Ridglan’s walls.
Let’s stand with Dane4Dogs – to speak up, speak out, and demand justice – no matter who tries to silence us . . . or how.