Animal rights activism is nothing new to the meat industry. From undercover “investigations” and coordinated protests to facility incursions and corporate pressure campaigns, livestock producers, processors and food companies have faced these tactics for decades. But some of the most noteworthy developments in animal rights activism in 2026 have occurred outside traditional animal agriculture, targeting facilities involved in animal research.

While the immediate targets may be different, the organizations, tactics and broader implications should be familiar to anyone working in the meat industry.

One of the biggest stories this year has been the closure of Ridglan Farms, a Wisconsin facility that bred beagles for biomedical research. Direct Action Everywhere (DxE) first targeted Ridglan in 2017 when activists, including co-founder Wayne Hsiung, entered the facility, removed three beagles and released footage alleging animal mistreatment. The incident resulted in felony charges that were eventually dropped in 2024. Meanwhile, activists continued pursuing investigations, legal challenges and public pressure against the facility.

In January 2025, a Wisconsin judge found probable cause to investigate alleged animal cruelty and appointed a special prosecutor. That October, Ridglan reached an agreement to surrender its state breeding license and end dog sales for research by July 2026.

The campaign intensified in March 2026, when activists entered Ridglan without permission, forcibly entered buildings and removed beagles. Another large demonstration followed in April, drawing national attention, arrests and criminal charges. The March incident resulted in felony charges against 51 activists, with the cases continuing through the courts. By August, Ridglan had permanently closed its breeding and research operations and 2,115 beagles had been transferred to rescue organizations through negotiated agreements.

While Ridglan’s operations have ended, the broader campaign against animal research continues, with activists already turning their attention to other facilities and companies including Marshall BioResources, another supplier of animals for research, and animal health companies. In June, DxE protested outside Merck’s South San Francisco offices, and an October campaign guide identified additional companies, including Zoetis and Boehringer Ingelheim, as potential targets for demonstrations and disruptions.

It’s worth noting that activists aren’t the only ones taking up this cause. Lara Trump, President Trump’s daughter-in-law and former Republican National Committee co-chair, publicly advocated for rehoming Ridglan’s dogs, urging the facility to accept a $1 million offer to transfer them to rescue organizations. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has championed efforts to reduce reliance on animal testing in biomedical research, while Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced additional measures in September to strengthen federal oversight of dog welfare at research facilities.

These individuals have not endorsed DxE’s unlawful tactics, but their involvement raises concerns for the broader animal agriculture community. Public support from high-profile political figures can bring increased visibility and perceived credibility to causes championed by animal rights organizations, potentially strengthening their influence and ability to attract supporters. That is particularly concerning when organizations such as DxE, which have spent years targeting livestock and poultry operations, are involved in the same campaigns.

DxE is no stranger to animal agriculture. The organization has a long history of entering agricultural facilities, conducting undercover “investigations,” removing animals through what it calls “open rescues,” and organizing campaigns against major meat companies. Its targets have included Smithfield Foods, Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry and Superior Farms. DxE has also used criminal proceedings involving animal removals to advance its arguments about a claimed “right to rescue” animals from agricultural operations.

The meat industry has experienced many of these tactics firsthand, including the growing emphasis on secondary targeting. Activists may pressure customers, suppliers, contractors or other business partners to sever relationships with a targeted company. Restaurants, retailers and foodservice companies have faced similar campaigns demanding changes to animal welfare policies and animal protein purchasing practices.

There’s also a more direct connection to livestock production. Animal health companies develop and manufacture the vaccines, medications and other products farmers and veterinarians rely on to prevent and treat disease and protect animal welfare. Research and development are essential to bringing new animal health products to market and improving the tools available to livestock producers. While activist campaigns do not necessarily disrupt product availability, pressure on these companies and their research partners could have broader implications for animal health innovation.

These developments are also a good reminder of the steps our industry can take to prepare for activist pressure.

First, recognize that animal activism doesn’t operate in isolated sectors. Monitoring campaigns targeting research institutions, universities and animal health companies can provide insight into tactics and strategies that may eventually affect livestock operations or their business partners.

Organizations should also evaluate their own preparedness by reviewing facility security, employee training, biosecurity protocols and relationships with local law enforcement. Establishing clear procedures for handling activist inquiries, protests and potential disruptions can help avoid confusion when an incident occurs.

It’s equally important to understand your business relationships and consider which suppliers, customers or research partners could become targets of activist pressure. Communicating proactively with these partners and establishing a process for sharing verified information can make a difficult situation easier to manage.

Finally, don’t overlook the importance of communication. The meat industry has an opportunity to explain how animal research contributes to animal health, food safety and the continuous improvement of animal care. These conversations are most effective when they happen before a controversy.

The Ridglan campaign shows how persistent animal rights activism can be and how its effects can extend beyond a single facility or industry. For the meat industry, staying informed about these campaigns is part of protecting the farms, businesses and animal health partners we depend on.