Those of us working to free animals from labs have long been accused of peddling inaccuracies and relying on “emotion” over evidence. 

TRS Labs made that claim just last week.

Now, Ridglan Farms and the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR) are saying the same to the Dane County Board of Supervisors.

Only, TRS, Ridglan, and NABR are the ones pushing inaccuracies and ignoring hard evidence — evidence now documented by the State of Wisconsin itself.

Records newly-obtained by The Marty Project show that the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection (DATCP) — the very state agency charged with regulating Ridglan’s Wisconsin dog-breeding license — has documented Ridglan’s commission of over 300 offenses against animals. 

It’s true: DATCP is set to charge Ridglan with 311 separate acts of unlawful neglect and veterinary malpractice, spanning years.

DATCP’s findings include:

• 3 instances where Ridglan failed “to provide daily body, mobility, and behavior checks,” resulting in one dog being left suffering from a ruptured cyst on her foot and two dogs being left suffering from “swelling” and “apparent, deep abrasions or puncture wounds.”
• 308 instances where Ridglan failed “to handle a dog as carefully as practicable and in a humane manner that does not cause physical injury or unnecessary injury.” That’s 308 dogs who had their eye glands cut out by untrained Ridglan staff without receiving a local or general anesthetic beforehand, without being given pain meds afterward, and without being subject to follow-up checks. DATCP reports that even Ridglan’s own managing veterinarian admitted that “the surgeries at [Ridglan] are routinely performed by untrained individuals without the proper and required education” — that, as concluded by DATCP, Ridglan routinely engages in “veterinary malpractice.”

Exactly as former staff and witnesses have been saying while the industry called them liars.

And yet, ironically, even as the state confirms what Ridglan and its supporters have long denied, the animal research industry keeps doing what it accuses us of: pushing falsehoods, distortions, and emotions in place of fact.

Unlike what TRS Labs, Ridglan, and NABR have clamored to impress upon the Dane County Board of Supervisors:

❖  Ridglan is not “highly regulated,” and its “clean” USDA inspection reports are neither proof of compliance nor evidence of their “commitment to providing excellent animal care.”

USDA oversight of animal research is known to be deferential to industry and limited. For facilities like Ridglan that claim AAALAC accreditation, the USDA does not even perform full inspections of the facilities, as required by law.

Moreover, DATCP’s findings prove the very opposite of what the USDA recorded: hundreds of violations that occurred during the same years the USDA failed to document any of them. So, unlike what NABR attempts to assert, DATCP’s findings call the USDA’s inspections into question, not the other way around.

❖  Adoption of Resolution 2025-119 would not (unfortunately for us animal advocates) spell “catastrophe” for the animal research industry; and it would not place humans and dogs at risk.

Here’s the deal:

Resolution 2025-119 is hard-hitting but non-binding. Indeed, the Dane County Board can urge, but not force, DATCP to take any enforcement action. As such, the industry’s claims that the adoption of this Resolution would result in an industry “catastrophe” is unfounded, especially if Ridglan is truly compliant with state regulations (and, therefore, DATCP would have no basis upon which to take the actions contemplated by the Resolution) — but, Ridglan and co. are panicking (and, apparently, catastrophizing) because Ridglan has not been compliant, is currently facing 311 violations, and knows that DATCP could be warranted in wielding its discretion to revoke its breeding license.  

Resolution 2025-119 calls on DATCP to revoke Ridglan’s state-issued breeding license only. Doing this would make a powerful political statement while saving thousands of dogs’ lives each year, but it would not (again, unfortunately) bring dog research to a halt: available records suggest that dogs account for a tiny fraction (far less than 1%) of all animals used in U.S. labs and that Ridglan’s annual sales of dogs to other facilities may account for less than 5% of the dogs reported by U.S. labs in recent years.

Resolution 2025-119 does not extend to Ridglan’s federal animal research registration. Therefore, Ridglan’s claim that passage of the Resolution would result in dogs being pulled from active research studies is nothing more than yet another example of the facility inappropriately conflating two arms of its operation. Ridglan is either confused about its state and federal licenses and registrations, inappropriately commingling its operations, or deliberately misrepresenting its operations to scare policymakers into inaction — any of which should give regulators at both the state and federal levels serious pause.

❖  The revocation of Ridglan’s dog-breeding license would not jeopardize “science” — certainly not the ethical kind anyway.

The animal research industry claims that the brutalization of dogs in labs has been critical to the development of drugs and devices beneficial to humans and other animals (such that the discontinuation of this practice would be bad for humans and other dogs). But, as is true with other animals, the animal research industry has never been able to prove this claim and, in fact, relies on sleight of hand in making it: dogs have been used in drug and device research because regulations have required it, not because science has demanded it. In turn, the fact that dogs were used in research does not mean that they were necessary for that research (or, of course, that their use was ethical) — though the self-described voices for “science” continue to conflate correlation (use) with causation (necessity) for purposes of their propaganda.

❖  It is not “unfair” to be held accountable for harmful conduct, no matter who you are.

Ridglan calls Resolution 2025-119 “unfair” because it threatens Ridglan as a long-standing business and employer. (But, we’re the emotional ones, right?) 

This is patently absurd, especially given that Resolution 2025-119 stems directly from Ridglan’s own, intentional, longstanding conduct. Ridglan fears accountability, which actually represents fairness. (And, we’ll say it again: Ridglan would have no reason to fear this Resolution if the facts were truly on its side….)

For its part, NABR does make three points worth repeating — just not in the ways it intended.

First, “[r]evoking Ridglan Farms’ breeder license would” have “consequences for Americans’ health and the strength of our biomedical research enterprise.” Exactly right — it would challenge the existing, unethical paradigm that harms all animals, humans included, thereby having positive consequences for our collective health and strengthening any version of our “research enterprise.”

Second, “[l]etting ideologically-motivated, radical special interest groups and individuals dictate the future of science” would be dangerous. Correct, again – which is exactly why NABR, itself among the most powerful pro-animal-research special interest groups that thinks ethical consideration for others is a radical concept, should not be allowed to lead us. 

Third, policymakers should “side with science and facts.” Agreed, yes — and doing this means promoting ethical research, holding Ridglan accountable, and adopting Resolution 2025-119.

Bottomline: The industry’s narrative is collapsing, and its panic tells us everything we need to know.

The industry can spin. It can conflate. It can posture. 

It always does. 

But it can’t change the truth.

Now it’s up to us — and to Dane County leaders — to turn that truth into action.

Share this news on X or Bluesky. 
Or copy, paste, and share this link anywhere else:
riseforanimals.org/news/ridglan-offenses