Skip to main content

Try searching for

Save the MBR Beagles
Sign The PetitionHow to Help
How to Help
Marches & eventsOrganise something localWrite to your MPSign the petitionSupport the wider movementBuy the merchJoin the WhatsApp communityMP letter toolThe September marchesPhotosCome to an eventDownloads — leaflets & postersUploads — send us your artworkSend evidence — confidentialRead the newsletterContact us
Campaign
TimelineUpdates
The Case
Evidence & FactsThe TrialsThe Bleeding LicenceGreen Hill PrecedentGallery
The Law
Legal FrameworkSection 58 ChallengeEstablishment LicenceProtest Laws & Judicial Review
The Movement
Campaign UpdatesMarshall BioResourcesRidglan Solidarity (USA)Save the Dogs USA
Account
Sign UpSign In
Their FAQ. Our answers.

Marshall BioResources and MBR Acres FAQ: The Other Side

Marshall BioResources has published an FAQ calling campaigners, whistleblowers and even elected politicians purveyors of “disinformation”. Marshall is not just a US company. It owns MBR Acres in Wyton, Cambridgeshire, where around 2,000 beagles are bred every year for laboratories, and B&K Universal in Grimston near Hull. We have answered every one of its questions, in the same order, with sources you can check for yourself, covering both sides of the Atlantic.

Last updated 34 questions15 of 28 avoidedSources

15/28
of its own questions Marshall’s FAQ avoids answering
6,023
dogs died at Marshall’s Green Hill, 2008 to 2012
10
dogs hands-on examined per USDA inspection, whatever the site size
2,000
beagles a year bred at MBR Acres, Wyton
0
replies to our open letter by the 19 July 2026 deadline
MBR says

Our one-line summary of Marshall’s position on each question, in our words. Their original wording is on their page.

Does it answer?

Whether Marshall’s answer actually answers the question it posed. Avoids, half an answer, or answers it. Of 28, it answers 6.

The facts

Court records, inspection records, Hansard and Home Office statistics are stated as fact. Whistleblower accounts are stated as what they are: allegations, from people who were there.

The stamp

Each answer is stamped with the kind of evidence it rests on. Yellow means Marshall’s own answer or the court record confirms it. Red means witnesses or regulators do.

Every question

Marshall’s 28 questions in the order Marshall asks them, then the 6 that people in the UK actually search for and its FAQ never touches.

Marshall’s questions

  1. 01Does Marshall BioResources conduct research on animals?
  2. 02Is Marshall BioResources the “Death Star of vivisection”?
  3. 03Does Marshall subject its animals to poor living conditions?
  4. 04Is it true that Marshall doesn’t care about animals?
  5. 05Does Marshall operate without regulatory oversight?
  6. 06Has Marshall been cited by regulators for inadequate conditions?
  7. 07Can alternatives fully replace animal testing?
  8. 08Do drugs tested on animals fail at a high rate in humans?
  9. 09Do 90% of drugs tested on animals fail in humans?
  10. 10Can’t animal testing be eliminated immediately?
  11. 11Why is there still animal testing if the FDA no longer requires it?
  12. 12Is it legitimate to use dogs when they are unlike humans?
  13. 13Does Marshall euthanise animals?
  14. 14Does Marshall kill dogs with different eye colours?
  15. 15Does Marshall put masks on dogs for inhalation training and testing?
  16. 16Isn’t it cruel that Marshall’s animals never touch grass?
  17. 17Why does Marshall keep operating after multiple whistleblower reports?
  18. 18Do Marshall’s animals have no human contact?
  19. 19Do Marshall’s animals receive veterinary care?
  20. 20Does Marshall employ too few people to care for its animals?
  21. 21Is Marshall affiliated with Ridglan Farms or Envigo?
  22. 22Is Marshall guilty of the same offences as Ridglan and Envigo?
  23. 23Shouldn’t anyone who loves animals oppose animal tests?
  24. 24Why does Marshall hide its operations?
  25. 25What is an open rescue?
  26. 26Why do politicians like Congressman Nick Langworthy oppose Marshall?
  27. 27Will closing Marshall eliminate animal testing?
  28. 28Has Marshall tortured dogs, as alleged by Wayne Hsiung?

The questions it doesn’t ask

  1. 29What is MBR Acres?
  2. 30Does MBR Acres kill dogs?
  3. 31What is Camp Beagle?
  4. 32Is it legal to protest at MBR Acres?
  5. 33What has Parliament said about MBR Acres and dog testing?
  6. 34Can the dogs at MBR Acres be rehomed?
Worked at MBR Acres or B&K Universal?

You can send footage, photographs or documents in confidence. No account, no name, no IP address stored.

Part one

Marshall’s 28 questions, answered

01Does Marshall BioResources conduct research on animals?

Admitted in court
MBR says

It does not carry out pharmaceutical or medical device testing.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Answers the word, not the question. Marshall does not run the tests; it breeds and ships the animals the tests are run on. “We do not test” is true, and describes nothing about what the company sells.

The facts

Marshall’s business is breeding animals for experiments.

In the US

Its dogs, cats, ferrets and minipigs are sold to contract laboratories and universities for toxicology tests and invasive studies.

In the UK

MBR Acres in Wyton supplies beagles to contract research organisations including Charles River, Labcorp and Sequani. During the 2025 to 2026 Crown Court trials, the prosecution accepted as agreed fact that a Home Office project licence, held at B&K Universal near Hull and also available at MBR Acres, permits “harvesting of bio-products from live dogs, or from dogs following humane killing” and terminal blood sampling under general anaesthetic from which dogs are not permitted to recover. Those are regulated scientific procedures on animals, inside Marshall’s own group. Read the bleeding licence.

02Is Marshall BioResources the “Death Star of vivisection”?

Their own numbers
MBR says

It does not perform vivisection.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Denies performing vivisection, which nobody claimed. The label is about volume. Whether its animals are purpose-bred to undergo procedures elsewhere is the question, and it is not addressed.

The facts

Marshall is one of the world’s largest breeders of animals for laboratories.

In the US

Federal inspection records from the first half of 2026 counted 33,203 animals across four of its New York sites. White Coat Waste Project has traced Marshall dogs and cats to NIH-funded experiments including induced heart failure, pacemaker implantation, circulatory arrest, spinal cord injury and skull drilling.

In the UK

MBR Acres breeds around 2,000 beagles a year, most sold to laboratories at around 16 weeks old. Home Office statistics recorded 2,646 procedures on dogs in Great Britain in 2024 (4,016 on beagles in 2021, per the House of Commons Library). Marshall also owns sites in France, and operations in China and Japan. It may not hold the scalpel, but it supplies the animals, at industrial scale. See the whole group.

03Does Marshall subject its animals to poor living conditions?

Whistleblower evidence
MBR says

Enclosures provide exercise space, enrichment, social contact, regular cleaning and health checks.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Cites cleaning schedules, USDA compliance and a voluntary accreditation: a snapshot of policy. Says nothing about windowless sheds and wire cages, the earlier citations for standing waste and inadequate veterinary care, or Green Hill.

The facts
In the US

Whistleblower images published by Rise for Animals in 2026 show dogs in wire cages over faeces-strewn floors, ferrets and their young housed in filth, and a dead puppy in a soiled metal container. Earlier whistleblower footage released by PETA showed beagles in barren, faeces-covered wire cages. Former staff quoted by Wayne Hsiung allege “panic cleans” before inspections and puppies suffocating in food pans while seeking warmth.

In the UK

The beagles at MBR Acres live their whole lives in indoor sheds. The public cannot see inside, because Home Office inspection detail is largely kept secret under Section 24 of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act. When the regulator’s November 2024 audit reported no significant problems, the local MP, Ben Obese-Jecty, said correspondence from constituents contradicted it.

04Is it true that Marshall doesn’t care about animals?

Public record
MBR says

It provides humane care, and its work protects hundreds of millions of pets.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Pivots to pet vaccines to frame the business as compassionate, without mentioning that most of its animals are sold into commercial toxicology testing, where the subjects are routinely killed.

The facts

Care is measured by what the animals experience, not by a company’s statements. Whistleblowers in the US describe filth, untreated injuries, animals killed for cosmetic “defects” and distressing euthanasia (see questions 13, 14 and 28). Marshall’s Italian beagle breeder, Green Hill, was seized by Italian authorities in 2012 after 6,023 dogs died there between 2008 and 2012, and three senior staff were convicted of animal mistreatment (see question 22). In the UK, dogs from MBR Acres go to contract labs testing drugs and chemicals for human use, not pet care (see question 23).

05Does Marshall operate without regulatory oversight?

Regulator record
MBR says

Its housing, feeding and sanitation are strictly regulated by the USDA.

Does it answer?Answers it

Names the regulatory framework directly. Oversight existing is not the same as oversight working, which is what the record shows.

The facts

Regulation exists on both sides of the Atlantic. It is weak, and it is hidden.

In the US

USDA guidance caps hands-on dog examinations at 10 animals per inspection, however large the site. At Marshall’s biggest site, with over 14,000 dogs, that is roughly one dog in 1,500. Two inspectors led 46 of the 48 public inspections of Marshall between 2014 and 2026. AAALAC is a private, industry-funded accreditation, and ISO 9001 is a quality-management standard with nothing to do with animal welfare.

In the UK

MBR Acres holds a Section 2C establishment licence under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, overseen by the Home Office’s Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU). Section 24 of that Act restricts disclosure, so the public cannot see full inspection findings. Section 58 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 exempts animals used under ASPA from normal welfare protections, an exemption campaigners argue should never have stretched to breeding. ASRU’s own 2024 annual report recorded 146 non-compliance cases across 45 establishments, 43% of them relating to inadequate care. That is sector-wide, not MBR-specific, and it shows how common failings are.

06Has Marshall been cited by regulators for inadequate conditions?

Regulator record
MBR says

Its May and July 2026 US inspections were clean, and it holds AAALAC and ISO 9001 status.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Points to two clean 2026 inspections and calls earlier complaints “proven untrue”. Does not give the inspection history, mention the 2023 official warning, or engage with the substance of any older citation.

The facts
In the US

Two recent clean reports do not erase the record. The USDA has cited Marshall for more than 20 Animal Welfare Act violations since 2007. Rise for Animals’ analysis of 48 public reports from 2014 to 2026 found 13 non-compliance items, 11 of them between 2021 and 2024. On 28 June 2023 the USDA issued Marshall Farms Group an Official Warning (ref NY230026) over cat housing. Inspections with extra inspectors recorded violations more than twice as often as those led by the usual pair.

In the UK

The last documented ASRU audit of MBR Acres (November 2024) listed only three minor findings: rust, floor damage and a loose drain cover. That tells you as much about how the inspections work as about the site. Full reports are not published, and the local MP has said constituent evidence contradicts the audit.

07Can alternatives fully replace animal testing?

Government policy
MBR says

Non-animal methods work in narrow areas but cannot yet model complex whole-body effects.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Engages with the science of whole-body models, which is a fair point about the field. Says nothing about Marshall’s own place in the supply chain, or how it intends to adapt as demand for animal models falls.

The facts

Nobody serious claims every test can be replaced tomorrow. The question is direction and investment, and governments are moving.

In the UK

The government’s November 2025 strategy, “Replacing animals in science”, sets the vision of eliminating animal use “in all but exceptional circumstances”, prioritises replacement for specially protected species including dogs, and backs it with a £30 million translational models hub and a new UK Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods. Campaigners’ criticism is that it has no statutory targets and no dog-specific end date.

In the US

The FDA announced in April 2025 a plan to phase out animal-testing requirements, starting with monoclonal antibodies, and the NIH has said it will no longer fund new proposals relying only on animal models.

08Do drugs tested on animals fail at a high rate in humans?

The data
MBR says

The claim lacks context, and animal tests are about safety, not effectiveness.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Never engages with the clinical failure statistic. Pivots to a general defence of preclinical safety testing instead.

The facts

Around nine in ten drugs that pass preclinical testing, including animal studies, go on to fail in human clinical trials, a figure widely cited by the NIH and the FDA. A meaningful share of those failures are for safety and toxicity, the very thing animal tests are supposed to catch. If animal studies reliably predicted human safety, far fewer drugs would fail for unexpected toxicity in people.

09Do 90% of drugs tested on animals fail in humans?

The data
MBR says

This is activist “disinformation”, and animal studies identify 71% of human toxicities.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Calls the figure disinformation and answers with a different figure (71%) from a study that measured something else. The failure-rate question itself goes unanswered.

The facts

The 90% figure comes from mainstream drug-development data, not from activists. Marshall’s 71% figure appears to come from a 2000 industry-funded study (Olson et al.) that combined rodent and non-rodent results and looked only at drugs that had already caused toxicity in humans. It did not measure how often animal tests wrongly clear drugs as safe. A 2014 analysis of dog studies (Bailey, Thew and Balls, ATLA) concluded that a lack of toxicity in dogs gives little evidence a drug will be safe in people. That goes to the heart of why beagles are bred at MBR Acres at all.

10Can’t animal testing be eliminated immediately?

Straw man
MBR says

Stopping suddenly would slow medical progress.

Does it answer?Answers it

A direct answer from the industry’s point of view: an immediate ban would slow things down. It answers a demand nobody made.

The facts

Nobody asked for “suddenly”. Campaigners ask for an end to breeding dogs for laboratories, a planned transition, full rehoming, and investment in human-relevant science.

In the UK

On 20 June 2026 we sent an open letter to MBR Acres, its parent companies, its customers and the Cambridgeshire authorities proposing a negotiated, peaceful closure, including an offer to buy the remaining dogs. It gave four weeks for a substantive reply. The deadline passed at midday on 19 July 2026. They did not respond.

In the US

When Ridglan Farms in Wisconsin agreed to close in 2026, more than 2,000 beagles went to rescue organisations. Medical research did not stop.

11Why is there still animal testing if the FDA no longer requires it?

Their own answer
MBR says

The FDA Modernization Act 2.0 does not ban animal research; it only allows non-animal data.

Does it answer?Answers it

A straight legal explanation of what the 2022 Act does and does not do. What it leaves out is how Marshall plans to adapt to a law that has removed the requirement for its product.

The facts

Marshall is technically right, and that is the point. Since December 2022, US law no longer requires animal testing before human trials, so when dogs are still used it is a choice, not a legal obligation. In the UK, dogs are a specially protected species under ASPA and can lawfully be used only where no other species or method is suitable, and the government has now committed to eliminating animal use in all but exceptional circumstances. The justification for mass dog breeding is shrinking in both countries.

12Is it legitimate to use dogs when they are unlike humans?

The data
MBR says

Dogs share anatomical and physiological traits with humans.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Lists the systems dogs and humans share. Leaves out the metabolic and immunological differences that let a drug pass in a dog and fail in a person, which is the actual objection.

The facts

Beagles are used largely by convention and convenience: they are small, gentle and easy to handle. Research on dog toxicity studies (Bailey et al., 2014) found they are poor at confirming a drug is safe for people. The British public is clear: 86% find testing on dogs unacceptable (Ipsos MORI for the UK government, 2018). At the Westminster Hall debate on 27 April 2026, prompted by petition 736578 with more than 121,000 signatures, fourteen MPs from across the main parties called for an end to dog testing.

13Does Marshall euthanise animals?

No denial
MBR says

It aims to match numbers to demand and looks for adoption first.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Talks about matching supply to demand, adoption first, and expanding rehoming. Never says whether animals are killed when adoption does not happen, how often, or how many. Soft-pedalling, not an answer.

The facts

Read that answer again. It does not say no.

In the UK

The prosecution accepted in Crown Court that a licence available at MBR Acres permits terminal blood sampling on dogs who are never allowed to wake up, and harvesting from dogs “following humane killing”. In December 2022 two puppies removed from MBR Acres, Love and Libby, were intercepted by police and returned to the site. MBR has never publicly said what happened to them.

In the US

Former staff quoted by Wayne Hsiung allege dogs were killed by abdominal injection of sodium pentobarbital, some thrashing and screaming for five to ten minutes before dying.

If rehoming really is the priority, Marshall can publish how many animals it kills and how many it rehomes each year, in both countries. It has not.

14Does Marshall kill dogs with different eye colours?

Whistleblower evidence
MBR says

This is a deceptive activist talking point.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Labels it a deceptive talking point and offers a general assurance of humane care. No yes, no no, and no explanation of how animals with non-conforming traits are dealt with.

The facts

It is not an activist talking point. It comes from former staff. Whistleblower testimony published by Wayne Hsiung in August 2026 alleges hundreds of dogs a year are killed at Marshall’s US operation for minor cosmetic issues such as tail kinks or eye colour, because “non-standard” animals are harder to sell. Rise for Animals has published similar claims. Marshall could settle it in an afternoon by publishing its culling records, including for MBR Acres.

15Does Marshall put masks on dogs for inhalation training and testing?

Their own answer
MBR says

False. Dogs may wear masks for required inhaled-medicine studies, and screening is now done by clients.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Calls the claim false, then confirms dogs may wear masks for inhaled-medicine studies and that the screening now happens at client sites. Moves the practice downstream while confirming it exists, and says nothing about conditioning animals to restraint before they are shipped.

The facts

Marshall’s own answer confirms dogs are fitted with masks, and that this “screening” used to happen on its own premises. Whistleblower footage shows tethered, masked dogs frantic to escape their restraints. PETA previously released footage of beagles being trained to wear tight-fitting inhalation masks. Former staff quoted by Hsiung allege mask training linked to toxic gases and describe a dog dying after trying to escape restraints. Many of the UK contract laboratories that buy MBR Acres beagles carry out inhalation toxicology.

16Isn’t it cruel that Marshall’s animals never touch grass?

Their own answer
MBR says

Animals are raised in conditions similar to the labs they will go to, which reduces stress.

Does it answer?Answers it

One of the few straight answers on the page. It confirms the dogs are raised indoors from birth, and presents that as a kindness.

The facts

Marshall does not deny it. Its answer confirms these dogs are raised indoors from birth specifically to prepare them for laboratory life. The same applies at MBR Acres, where puppies leave the sheds at around 16 weeks for a lab. A beagle is a scent hound bred for the outdoors. Never feeling grass is not “enrichment”. It is the whole problem.

17Why does Marshall keep operating after multiple whistleblower reports?

Multiple witnesses
MBR says

The reports are untrue, and its 2026 inspections were clean.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Says the “extremely limited instances” were proven untrue and cites two clean 2026 inspections. Does not address the substance of any specific complaint, from any of the several separate sources.

The facts

In the US the reports come from several separate people over many years: PETA’s whistleblower footage, images published by Rise for Animals in 2026, and testimony from multiple former staff published by Wayne Hsiung in August 2026. A former US federal prosecutor, Bonnie Klapper, has written a criminal referral letter on the allegations. In the UK, a clean regulator audit was publicly questioned by the local MP. An inspection that examines a handful of animals out of thousands cannot disprove what staff saw every day.

If you have worked at MBR Acres or B&K Universal, you can contact us in confidence. No account, no name, nothing stored that identifies you.

18Do Marshall’s animals have no human contact?

Do the maths
MBR says

Animals get regular socialisation with people and other animals.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Denies complete isolation, which nobody alleged. Does not give the number of carers per animal, which is what would answer it.

The facts

Marshall says it employs just over 200 people in North Rose. The USDA counted over 26,000 dogs, puppies and ferrets at one North Rose site in May 2026. Even if every employee worked full time on animal care, that is well over 100 animals per person, before shifts, holidays, cleaning and admin. MBR Acres does not publish its staffing for around 2,000 dogs.

19Do Marshall’s animals receive veterinary care?

No numbers given
MBR says

Animals get regular veterinary examinations, as required by the USDA.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Describes the organisational set-up: vets on site, technicians monitoring. Bypasses the inspection history of untreated conditions and gives no vet-to-animal ratio.

The facts

Marshall does not say how many vets it employs or how many animals each is responsible for, in the US or the UK. US whistleblowers describe untreated injuries from unsafe housing, frequent deaths and neglect of basic veterinary needs (Rise for Animals, 2026). Former staff allege that when a vein could not be found for euthanasia, a dog’s neck was stood on during the injection (Hsiung, 2026). Legal minimums are not the same as good care.

20Does Marshall employ too few people to care for its animals?

Do the maths
MBR says

It employs more than 200 people in North Rose, including vets.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Answers with a total head count. The 200 includes administration, maintenance and shipping. The question was about care, and the ratio of direct carers to thousands of dogs is not given.

The facts

200 staff for tens of thousands of animals is precisely the concern. The USDA’s May 2026 count at one site was 9,171 adult dogs, 5,394 puppies and 11,706 ferrets. Marshall has not published staff-to-animal ratios, vet numbers or shift cover for North Rose, MBR Acres or B&K Universal. If those figures are reassuring, it can release them.

21Is Marshall affiliated with Ridglan Farms or Envigo?

Context
MBR says

It has never been affiliated with either.

Does it answer?Answers it

Correct and direct: no corporate link. It is the next question where the sidestep happens.

The facts

Correct: they are separate companies. The comparison is about the business model. Envigo’s Cumberland, Virginia site was shut down in 2022 after federal action and around 4,000 beagles were removed; its parent, Inotiv, later pleaded guilty and paid a record Animal Welfare Act penalty. Ridglan Farms surrendered its breeding licence in April 2026 after a Wisconsin court found probable cause of felony animal cruelty. One UK footnote: the Wyton site now called MBR Acres bred beagles for decades under previous operators Interfauna and Harlan before Marshall took over, and Harlan is the company that later became Envigo. Mass breeding of dogs for laboratories has ended in scandal again and again.

22Is Marshall guilty of the same offences as Ridglan and Envigo?

Court record
MBR says

It will not comment on others, and points to its 85-year record.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Declines to comment on other companies and offers an 85-year history instead. Whether Marshall’s own practices resemble the ones that closed Envigo, which is the actual question, is not addressed.

The facts

Marshall’s own record includes Green Hill in Montichiari, Italy, a beagle breeder in the Marshall group. Italian authorities raided it in 2012 and seized around 2,500 beagles, with about 3,000 eventually rehomed. Records showed 6,023 dogs died there between 2008 and 2012, and evidence included dogs killed with Tanax without prior anaesthesia. Three senior staff were convicted of animal mistreatment in 2014 and sentenced to prison, with the convictions upheld on appeal in 2015. An 85-year history is not a defence. It is a longer record.

23Shouldn’t anyone who loves animals oppose animal tests?

Follow the dogs
MBR says

Hundreds of millions of pets rely on animal testing for their medicines and vaccines.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Pivots to pet medicine. Does not say what proportion of Marshall’s animals go to veterinary work versus human drug and chemical toxicology.

The facts

Many Marshall dogs are not used for pet medicine at all. In the US, White Coat Waste Project’s August 2026 investigation traced Marshall dogs to NIH-funded experiments including induced heart failure, obesity and diabetes, and circulatory arrest. In the UK, MBR Acres beagles go to contract research organisations for drug and chemical testing, largely for human products. Veterinary medicines can be, and increasingly are, developed through clinical studies in pets who are already ill, with their owners’ consent. Loving animals and opposing breeding them for laboratories is entirely consistent.

24Why does Marshall hide its operations?

Court record
MBR says

Its North Rose site is part of the local community and supports 200+ jobs.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Answers a question about jobs and community. The question was about access, why a congressman is turned away at the gate and journalists are detained, and that is not touched.

The facts
In the US

Congressman Nick Langworthy was refused a tour of the North Rose site by security in May 2026, and journalists documenting the site have reported being detained.

In the UK

MBR Acres has taken campaigners to the High Court for injunctions restricting protest (from 2021, including MBR Acres v Curtin [2025] EWHC 331). Since 11 February 2026 the site has been treated as “key national infrastructure” under the Public Order Act 2023, so “interfering” with it carries up to 12 months in prison and an unlimited fine. The first arrests under that law came on 24 February 2026, and a High Court judicial review of the regulations was filed on 2 March 2026. Cambridgeshire Police have spent more than £2.1 million policing peaceful protest there since 2021. At the April 2026 debate the local MP said the legislation was introduced for no reason other than to address Camp Beagle. An open company would let people see inside instead. The protest laws, explained.

25What is an open rescue?

Court record
MBR says

It is a deceptive term for trespass and theft.

Does it answer?Half an answer

Gives Marshall’s legal characterisation, which it is entitled to. Does not mention that British juries have twice acquitted people who did it.

The facts

An open rescue is when people remove animals they believe are suffering, without hiding their identities, and accept the legal consequences so a court can hear why they acted. In the UK, beagles were removed from MBR Acres in June 2022 and December 2022, leading to five Crown Court trials in 2025 and 2026. Two juries acquitted nine defendants, including Animal Rising director Rose Patterson, in what was described as the first not-guilty verdict for an open rescue of laboratory animals in UK history. Others were convicted and received suspended sentences. It was during these trials that the prosecution confirmed the terminal bleeding licence (question 1). We do not encourage anyone to break the law, but British juries clearly did not all accept that this was simple theft.

26Why do politicians like Congressman Nick Langworthy oppose Marshall?

Cross-party
MBR says

Langworthy associates with activists facing felony charges and spreads disinformation.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Attacks the congressman’s associations rather than answering his criticism. Nothing on what he saw, or was prevented from seeing, at the gate.

The facts
In the US

Langworthy, a Republican New York congressman, visited the North Rose site in May 2026, was denied a tour, called the facility “a stain on New York”, and backs the PAW Act and the Protect Our Pets Act to end taxpayer-funded breeding of animals for laboratories.

In the UK

Opposition is cross-party here too. At the 27 April 2026 Westminster Hall debate, fourteen MPs called for an end to dog testing, including Labour’s Lee Pitcher (“the time has come to end animal testing”), the Green Party’s Adrian Ramsay and the Liberal Democrats’ Caroline Voaden. Attacking elected representatives rather than answering them is telling.

27Will closing Marshall eliminate animal testing?

Straw man
MBR says

No: it would push research overseas and harm US science and jobs.

Does it answer?Answers it

Directly addresses the supply-and-demand argument. It is answered above on the merits.

The facts

No single closure ends animal testing, and nobody claims it does. But supply drives use, and removing the biggest sources of laboratory dogs speeds up the switch to better science. Marshall is already an international company, with UK sites (MBR Acres and B&K Universal), sites in France, and operations in China and Japan, so its “overseas” warning rings hollow. The same argument was made about Ridglan, which closed in 2026 without research collapsing. More than 65 companies have already cut ties with MBR Acres, and the UK government has committed to eliminating animal use in all but exceptional circumstances.

28Has Marshall tortured dogs, as alleged by Wayne Hsiung?

Multiple witnesses
MBR says

The claims come from one disgruntled former employee and are contradicted by unannounced inspections.

Does it answer?Avoids the question

Dismisses the claims as activist manipulation of one former employee and points to clean inspections. No engagement with any specific allegation, the other witnesses, the photographs, the internal documents or the prosecutor’s referral letter.

The facts

Hsiung’s evidence, published on 31 August 2026, is not one employee’s word. It includes video testimony from multiple former staff, photographs, inspection records and internal USDA APHIS documents, and a criminal referral letter from former federal prosecutor Bonnie Klapper. Allegations include dogs thrown into cage walls, painful euthanasia by abdominal injection, a dog’s neck stood on during an injection, puppies suffocating in food pans, and dogs killed over tail kinks or eye colour.

For transparency: Hsiung faces separate felony charges in Wisconsin connected to Ridglan Farms. That does not change what the footage shows. As covered in question 5, an inspection that hands-on examines ten dogs cannot disprove what staff witnessed daily. Watch the evidence and decide for yourself.

The pattern

How does Marshall’s FAQ avoid answering the questions?

Marshall wrote the questions. Of its 28, we count 15 avoided, 7 half-answered and 6 answered. The same five moves do the work every time.

  1. 01

    Answer the word, not the question

    “We do not test” (they breed the animals the tests are run on). “We do not perform vivisection” (their animals are bred for it). “Not affiliated with Envigo” (the question was whether the practices are similar).

    Questions 1, 2, 22
  2. 02

    Cite the snapshot, not the record

    Two clean inspections in 2026 are offered against more than 20 Animal Welfare Act citations since 2007, an official USDA warning in 2023, and a subsidiary whose managers were convicted of animal mistreatment.

    Questions 6, 17, 28
  3. 03

    Defend the industry, not the company

    The failure-rate, alternatives and FDA questions get general defences of animal research. Marshall’s own place in the supply chain, and what it will do as demand falls, never comes up.

    Questions 7, 8, 9, 11
  4. 04

    State the policy, never the number

    200 staff, but no carer-to-animal ratio. Vets “as required by law”, but no vet-to-animal ratio. “Adoption first”, but no kill count. “Match supply to demand”, but no figure for surplus.

    Questions 13, 18, 19, 20
  5. 05

    Attack the messenger

    Whistleblowers are “disgruntled”, a congressman “associates with activists”, the evidence is “disinformation”. Not one specific allegation is engaged with on its facts.

    Questions 14, 26, 28
Part two

Six questions Marshall’s FAQ doesn’t answer

Marshall’s FAQ is written for New York. These are the questions people in Cambridgeshire, Huntingdon and the rest of the UK type into a search box about the site on Sawtry Way.

29What is MBR Acres?

The facts

MBR Acres is a beagle breeding facility on Sawtry Way (B1090), Wyton, near Huntingdon in Cambridgeshire, owned by US-based Marshall BioResources. It breeds around 2,000 beagles a year and holds around 2,000 dogs at any one time, most sold at about 16 weeks old to contract research laboratories. Beagles have been bred on the site for around fifty years under previous operators, with Marshall taking over in about 2014 to 2015. It operates under a Section 2C establishment licence from the Home Office. The full picture is on our facts page.

30Does MBR Acres kill dogs?

The facts

MBR Acres has not published figures for how many dogs die or are killed on site. The prosecution accepted in Crown Court that a Home Office licence available at MBR Acres permits terminal blood sampling under general anaesthetic, from which dogs are not permitted to recover, and harvesting of bio-products from dogs following killing. Dogs sold to laboratories are normally killed at the end of studies. MBR Acres has not taken up the offer, made in our June 2026 open letter, to buy and rehome its remaining dogs.

31What is Camp Beagle?

The facts

Camp Beagle is a continuous, peaceful protest vigil at the gates of MBR Acres, running since June 2021 and described as the longest continuous animal-rights protest of its kind. In October 2021 the High Court allowed the camp to remain, subject to keeping its distance from the gates. It was shortlisted for the Lush Prize in May 2026. Camp Beagle is a separate campaign from this one; we are independent of it.

33What has Parliament said about MBR Acres and dog testing?

The facts

Petition 736578, calling for an end to testing on dogs for products for human use, gathered more than 121,000 signatures and was debated in Westminster Hall on 27 April 2026, following an earlier debate in January 2023. Fourteen MPs from across the main parties called for an end to dog testing. The government’s November 2025 strategy commits to eliminating animal use in all but exceptional circumstances, but sets no end date for dogs.

34Can the dogs at MBR Acres be rehomed?

The facts

Yes. When Ridglan Farms in Wisconsin, a US beagle breeder of similar scale, agreed to close in 2026, more than 2,000 dogs were transferred to rescue organisations. After Green Hill in Italy was seized in 2012, around 3,000 beagles were rehomed. The beagles rescued from MBR Acres in the 2022 open rescues were rehomed. We have offered to buy MBR Acres’ remaining dogs as part of a negotiated closure. The dogs are not the obstacle. The company is.

Check everything

Sources

Every figure on this page traces to one of these. If you find one we have got wrong, tell us and we will correct it and say so.

This page is published by Save the Dogs UK, an independent campaign. It is not affiliated with Marshall BioResources, MBR Acres, or any other organisation, and it is not Marshall’s FAQ: it is our reply to it. Where we describe Marshall’s position we paraphrase; its own words are on its own website. Allegations from former staff are reported as allegations. Nothing here is legal advice.