WASHINGTON, D.C. — The closure of a controversial dog breeding facility in Wisconsin is shining a national spotlight on other operations across the country much closer to home.
For decades, thousands of beagles never knew life outside a cage — bred and raised exclusively for medical experimentation and laboratory testing at Ridglan Farms in Wisconsin, where allegations of brutal neglect sparked national outrage.
One New York lawmaker says it’s time to end the taxpayer-funded breeding of dogs for laboratory experiments once and for all.
“This is barbaric, it’s cruel,” said Rep. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y. “We are killing perfectly healthy dogs in the name of the science, when it doesn’t need to be done anymore.”
About 1,500 dogs were rescued from Ridglan Farms in May, but Langworthy says Wisconsin is not the end of this horror story. He’s now turning his attention to Marshall Farms in Wayne County, New York, also known as Marshall BioResources.
Langworthy said it’s the largest breeding facility in the U.S. that sells dogs and other animals to laboratories, including universities, testing facilities and other companies.
Langworthy added that Marshall is 10 times the size of the facility in Wisconsin and that there are 60,000 animals, but only 100 employees.
“That’s not enough people to care for 60,000 animals,” Langworthy said.
In a statement, the company said, “Marshall BioResources employs more than 200 people in New York,” but did not specify how many of those employees work on-site at the facilities.
As for the animals, a spokesperson said, “While we do not disclose specific numbers related to our animals, the activists are overstating the figures.”
“They are the pipeline. That’s where the animals start their lives and then they end their lives in the laboratory and never get to see the light of day,” said Kathleen Conlee, vice president of animal research issues at Humane World for Animals, formerly the Humane Society of the U.S. “The public is blind to what’s happening in these places,” she added.
It’s an issue that Conlee knows well.
“I did work at a big primate breeding and research facility in my past,” Conlee said.
After nearly three decades of advocating against the practices she saw firsthand, Conlee says, “Not enough has changed, that is for sure.”
Beagles have long been the preferred breed for laboratory testing because of their small size and gentle temperament. They are commonly used in toxicity testing for pharmaceuticals, pesticides and consumer products.
“We have done undercover investigations and people walk in the room and those dogs are still wagging their tails, happy to see somebody. And it just is heartbreaking how we just turn on them like that,” Conlee said.
In the U.S., the practice of breeding and testing animals, including beagles, is legal and, in many cases, funded by taxpayers. Langworthy is fighting to change that.
“People don’t want to see animals, that we as Americans keep as pets, being used and killed unnecessarily in very harmful and inhumane conditions,” Langworthy said. “We want to see this process banned. I want to do so legislatively. I want to codify this. Cut off the money and prevent this horrible research from going on.”
In addition to legislative efforts, Langworthy has also urged the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to advance policies that phase out invasive testing on dogs and other larger animals.
“I’m excited about what’s coming out of HHS. They want to move to stop this,” Langworthy said.
Marshall BioResources responded to our request for comment and confirmed it raises “dogs, cats, ferrets, and minipigs for required scientific, medical, and veterinary research conducted by our customers.” The company said it “does not conduct any pharmaceutical or medical device research, including discovery- or safety-related studies.”
In the statement, Marshall BioResources accused Langworthy of “associating himself with activists facing serious felony charges,” adding that the congressman “is directly responsible for spreading disinformation that endangers the health and safety of his constituents and their pets.”
The company argues that ending animal research before validated alternatives are available could threaten national security and biomedical research.
“The result would not be less animal testing; instead, the required animal testing would be moved to other countries to be conducted with less oversight, less accountability, and reduced influence over research practices and quality standards. This would affect the development of vaccines, biologics, military medicine, infectious disease countermeasures, and other critical medical advancements that support pandemic preparedness and biodefense capabilities,” Marshall BioResources said in a statement.
“Breeding animals for use in medical research in the United States is highly regulated and subject to ongoing oversight. Our facilities are regularly inspected by the USDA to ensure compliance with federal animal welfare standards. Our most recent unannounced inspection in May 2026 resulted in a ‘clean report’ with no citations or observations,” the statement said.
“Humane research with dogs benefits dogs. Restricting humane breeding of dogs for research is akin to straining the drug development process, which then strains the development of new medical treatments for dogs, other pets, farm animals and wildlife,” said Eva Maciejewski, spokesperson for the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR) and the Foundation for Biomedical Research (FBR).
According to the FBR, federal regulations require that new medicines for human consumption are humanely tested in two different species to ensure safety and effectiveness: a rodent species and a nonrodent species based on what is most relevant in the drug study, oftentimes a pig, monkey or dog.
“Pharmaceutical companies use these findings to develop new medications,” Maciejewski said. “Marshall BioResources and other animal breeding facilities provide animals to university and pharmaceutical labs, including some university labs that receive taxpayer funding. This system is the gold standard for biomedical advancements leading to new medications.”
Maciejewski says the FBR and the NABR have determined that “22 of the top 25 most prescribed drugs have benefited from humane research and testing with dogs.”
That being said, Conlee argues that most animal-tested drugs fail during human trials.
According to the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Roadmap to Reducing Animal Testing in Preclinical Safety Studies, there is growing scientific recognition that animals do not provide adequate models of human health and disease.
The FDA Roadmap states, “Over 90% of drugs that appear safe and effective in animals do not go on to receive FDA approval in humans predominantly due to safety and/or efficacy issues.”
“90% of drugs ultimately fail in human trials after being relied on animal tests, including those dogs who are the default for that non-rodent. So is 90% failure acceptable? Think of how many people we could have saved if we hadn’t had all those drug failures,” Conlee said.
With major advances in medical and research technology, Conlee argues that taxpayer dollars should be invested in scientifically validated new approach methodologies (NAMs), such as organ-on-a-chip systems, computational modeling, advanced in vitro assays and artificial intelligence.
Conlee says progress has been made, but she believes breeders, researchers and regulators need to play a bigger role in pushing back against what she calls “inhumane” practices that have not changed in decades.
“I’m very excited about the direction we’re going in,” Conlee said. “But we need to keep our foot on the gas and get as much accomplished as we can, because every day that goes by, there are animals suffering in these places like Marshall Farms.”
