Mizzou Researchers Blind and Kill Puppies, University Demands Tens of Thousands for Related Records
And no, the headline isn't an exaggeration.
As reported in the Riverfront Times, four University of Missouri researchers blinded a half dozen beagles, who "were just nine to twelve months at the time they endured the experiment." The researchers then killed the dogs and harvested the eyes after the study (published this past April) proved inconclusive. While it seems like an open question in the media why the researchers didn't try to adopt out the dogs, the answer seems pretty straightforward: they probably couldn't have kept the dogs' eyes if the dogs were alive. Yes, explaining blind dogs to potential adopters isn't easy, but it's doable. Explaining dogs whose eyes have been surgically removed? That's a public relations lift that the University probably wanted to avoid if it could.
As a dog owner and supporter of a local rescue, I find the entire story gross and grotesque. But the problems don't stop there. A nonprofit that works on behalf of beagles like these wanted to get records related to the University's testing on these dogs and others, but the University wants to make that nearly impossible.
Kolde had previously filed a lawsuit against Mizzou on behalf of the Beagle Freedom Project, seeking records relating to the university's care of beagles. The non-profit sought basic records that Mizzou is required by law to maintain. Yet the university sought to charge it $82,222 — as much as $7 a page.
The University of Missouri is a public institution, so it should be easy for taxpayers to access both the details of courses the University teaches and the research its employees conduct. I appreciate the value that can come from research with live animals, and I am not suggesting that it all stop. But if the University is going to conduct this sort of research, it should be done transparently so that taxpayers can judge whether they think that money, spent in their name, is being wisely and ethically invested. In this case, taxpayers have ample cause for concern, and Mizzou once again isn't helping its cause.
View the original at Show-Me Institute →
As confirmed against the Show-Me Institute's website on August 15, 2026, the Institute's stated policy permits reprinting of its published articles and commentary provided the original author receives credit. Letting the Institute know about a reprint is appreciated but is not a condition of use.
This entry was archived under that permission as it stood on the date above. If the Institute's policy changes after that date, it does not apply retroactively to entries already reproduced here under the terms in effect at the time — this is a record of the grant as confirmed, not a live status check.
The original remains hosted at the Institute's own site — use the link below for the canonical version, current formatting, and any images.