Blue Buffalo admits its pet food contained byproducts

Blue Buffalo admits its pet food contained byproducts

Nestlé Purina has legally locked horns with competitor over alleged false claims and false advertising.

Nestlé Purina PetCare Company (Purina) today announced that it has filed a lawsuit in federal court in St. Louis against The Blue Buffalo Company Ltd., for false advertising, disparagement and unjust enrichment – including violations of the Federal Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. §1125(a)).

Blue Buffalo’s promotion, advertising and packaging repeatedly and unequivocally state that its pet food products contain “NO Chicken/Poultry By-Product Meals.” In its complaint, Purina alleges that testing conducted by an independent laboratory revealed that several of Blue Buffalo’s top-selling “Life Protection” pet food products contained significant percentages of poultry by-product meal. Testing was done from samples of multiple formulas of Blue Buffalo pet food purchased at retail stores on both the East and West Coasts.

The complaint also alleges that testing shows Blue Buffalo “LifeSource Bits” contain poultry by-product meal and corn. In addition, several Blue Buffalo products promoted as “grain-free” actually contain rice hulls, despite Blue Buffalo stating on its website that its “grain-free” products will “free your pet from the grains and glutens that cause allergic reactions in some dogs.”

The complaint estimates that Blue Buffalo spent approximately $50 million in 2013 to promote its claims that Blue Buffalo ingredients are superior to competitors. As a result, Blue Buffalo charges premium prices for its products – significantly more than the pet food products they use for comparison purposes on the Blue Buffalo website.

The lawsuit follows a March 2014 decision of the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, which found that Blue Buffalo is engaging in misleading advertising practices with respect to its claims about competing products. The NAD decision recommended that Blue Buffalo correct its television ad campaigns by removing all of its allegations that Blue Buffalo’s competitors are misleading consumers.

A copy of the complaint and exhibits can be found at a website Purina has created to highlight its concerns: www.petfoodhonesty.com.

Part 2 for futher reading:

Blue Buffalo has admitted in federal court that a "substantial" and "material" portion of its pet food contained poultry byproduct meal, according to a release distributed by Nestlé Purina, which sued Blue Buffalo a year ago for false advertising.

After Blue Buffalo advertising claims were brought to the attention of the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus for review, in early 2014 NAD encouraged Blue Buffalo to modify its advertising claims concluding that ads were falsely disparaging to competitors. This included the "True Blue Test," which NAD said conveyed the message that competing "big name" pet food companies were deceiving consumers. This prompted Nestlé Purina to send samples of Blue Buffalo for analysis. As cited in the lawsuit, tests showed the presence of poultry by-product meal in nine out of 10 Blue Buffalo pet food products.

A year to the day after Nestlé Purina PetCare Co. brought its lawsuit against Blue Buffalo Co. LTD, Purina spokesperson Keith Schopp said, "Through a $50 million annual advertising campaign that flooded airwaves and pet food aisles alike, Blue Buffalo told consumers over and over, emphatically and without qualification, that its products never contain poultry by-product meal."

Blue Buffalo has not returned dvm360's requests for comment, but on its website its FAQ page continues to claim that "Blue pet food contains no chicken or poultry-by-product meals." Blue Buffalo filed a countersuit against Nestlé Purina in May 2014 alleging "a sophisticated and carefully orchestrated advertising campaign … that falsely attacks Blue Buffalo's honesty and the quality of its products."

According to the Purina release, Blue Buffalo is requesting additional time to file an amended complaint with the court naming its ingredient suppliers as defendants. Bill Bishop, founder and chairman of Blue Buffalo, issued a letter to customers in October of last year saying the company had learned that one of its suppliers had mislabeled some ingredients. He said Blue Buffalo received shipments of poultry byproduct meal instead of 100 percent chicken meal. Bishop assured customers that the company had stopped doing business with that manufacturing plant.

Schopp says blaming the supplier isn't a satisfactory response. “Blue Buffalo now claims it had no way of knowing the bags contained byproduct meal,” he says. “A manufacturer is responsible for knowing what’s in its product, and a simple audit of its supply chain would have revealed what we discovered after reviewing the documentation.

“Only when faced with undeniable evidence from the lawsuit has Blue Buffalo admitted the truth to the court: a ‘substantial’ and ‘material’ portion of Blue Buffalo pet food sold over the past several years contained poultry byproduct meal," Schopp continues. "It is unclear to us if or when this practice stopped, or whether any Blue Buffalo pet food containing byproduct meal is still on store shelves.”

Schopp asserts that Blue Buffalo owes consumers an apology for false statements, false labels and false advertising. He also calls for the Purina competitor to prove that no mislabeled products remain in the market.

Pet Portraits - Sat, May 9th Winston Salem NC

World Spay Day 2015

Davidson County Animal Shelter, could change be coming?

Commissioners discuss county animal shelter's future

By Wil Petty

The Dispatch

Published: Thursday, October 2, 2014 at 2:32 p.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, October 2, 2014 at 2:32 p.m.

http://www.the-dispatch.com/article/20141002/NEWS/310029985/0/search?p=1&tc=pg

A more in-depth, public discussion is now under way about the future of the Davidson County Animal Shelter.

County commissioners held the discussion Thursday morning due to response from citizens about how the animals are treated at the shelter.

"I have asked the county manager to put this on as a discussion," said commissioner Fred McClure. "Obviously we've had some issues, and I thought we need to bring it out to discuss."

Davidson County Manager Robert Hyatt said he would use this discussion to receive advice from the county commissioners on what direction to take when deciding under which department the animal shelter should fall.

"I feel like with our county staff, we are following your directive," Hyatt said. "If it is something that you want to move, then we can work on making that happen. I can't come back with a firm recommendation at this point and time."

Commissioners McClure and Steve Shell were the most vocal about removing the animal shelter from the sheriff's office.

McClure's ideas include hiring two employees as a way to replace the gas chamber and looking at other options surrounding counties have regarding how they handle the shelters. Sheriff David Grice has said previously about 37 percent of the animals euthanized at the shelter are gassed. The shelter takes in about 6,600 animals yearly, and about 83 percent are euthanized."If we hired two employees, they could eliminate the gassing of any animal as soon as those employees were trained," he said, referencing a conversation he had with Judy Lanier, manager of the Davidson County Animal Shelter. "I think if we are trying to do something immediate, that might be an immediate way to at least accomplish some of what the folks would like to say.McClure also said he believed the animal shelter should not be under the Davidson County Sheriff's Office because Grice doesn't want that responsi"(Grice) has said on multiple occasions that he doesn't want it, and we need somebody in charge of it that does want it," McClure saAnother option McClure brought up was to transfer control of the shelter from the county to a nonprofit. This happened in Guilford County, where the shelter is operated by the United Animal Coalition."Once we do all of that, you can work on a grant to dismantle and eliminate the gas chamber," he said.Shell said the issue has been going on so long, and it was time to move the shelter from being under the DCSO's control."With the limited resources that he's (Grice) got, the budget that he has and the other duties in this county, his recommendation five years ago was that the shelter needed to be removed out from under the sheriff's department," he said. "I agreed with him then and I agree with him now."Shell said he is tired of receiving national blame for events he has no control over."I'm not satisfied with just decreasing the number of animals that we euthanize," Shell said. "I want us to be a role model for every shelter in this country."Shell also said the number of animals euthanized in Davidson County is "totally unacceptable."Hyatt said statewide there is no specific department the animal shelter has to fall under. It is most common for the shelter to be under the health department, sheriff's office or serve as a standalone agency."I still think from an organizational standpoint, where it currently resides makes a lot of sense," he said. "Can it work as a standalone department or under one of the other departments? Sure it can."Commissioner Don Truell said while he agrees with some requests, such as eliminating the gas chamber, he believes the shelter should remain under control of the DCSO."There's only one place to put the dog pound, and that's under the sheriff's department," he said. "We got it in place now, we just have to change the way we are operating it."Hyatt said if it stayed under the sheriff's office, it would limit the influence the commissioners could have on what takes place there.Vice Chairman Todd Yates asked what sort of time line would be needed for the manager to come up with alternative ideas. Hyatt said it would take approximately one month.Commissioner Steve Jarvis said he would like to know if the Davidson County Humane Society would be interested in taking over the shelter."As far as the shelter, I would like to research that," he said. "I think they have a better handle as far as volunteers, and it appears that Forsyth County operates very well with volunteers and does a good job with the animals."Becky Everhart, president of the Davidson County Humane Society, said she thought it was a good idea for the Humane Society to be involved“We would be more than delighted to work with the county, to what degree would be the question,” she said. “We have a board that would make that decision on just how much of a role we would play in the shelteCommissioner Sam Watford said he believed working at the animal shelter is the toughest job in the count"I don't like people criticizing our shelter until they realize what it was like 12 years ago," he said. "It has really improved consideRight now, the budget for the animal shelter and animal control is combiThe board unanimously voted to continue discussion of the Davidson County Animal Shelter at its Oct. 28 meeting. No additional action regarding the shelter too

Wil Petty can be reached at 249-3981, ext. 227, or at wil.petty@the-dispatch.com. Follow Wil"If we hired two employees, they could eliminate the gassing of any animal as soon as those employees were trained," he said, referencing a conversation he had with Judy Lanier, manager of the Davidson County Animal Shelter. "I think if we are trying to do something immediate, that might be an immediate way to at least accomplish some of what the folks would like to say."

McClure also said he believed the animal shelter should not be under the Davidson County Sheriff's Office because Grice doesn't want that responsibility.

"(Grice) has said on multiple occasions that he doesn't want it, and we need somebody in charge of it that does want it," McClure said.

Another option McClure brought up was to transfer control of the shelter from the county to a nonprofit. This happened in GuilfordCounty, where the shelter is operated by the United Animal Coalition.

"Once we do all of that, you can work on a grant to dismantle and eliminate the gas chamber," he said.

Shell said the issue has been going on so long, and it was time to move the shelter from being under the DCSO's control.

"With the limited resources that he's (Grice) got, the budget that he has and the other duties in this county, his recommendation five years ago was that the shelter needed to be removed out from under the sheriff's department," he said. "I agreed with him then and I agree with him now.

Shell said he is tired of receiving national blame for events he has no control over.

"I'm not satisfied with just decreasing the number of animals that we euthanize," Shell said. "I want us to be a role model for every shelter in this country."

Shell also said the number of animals euthanized in DavidsonCounty is "totally unacceptable."

Hyatt said statewide there is no specific department the animal shelter has to fall under. It is most common for the shelter to be under the health department, sheriff's office or serve as a standalone agency.A more in-depth, public discussion is now under way about the future of the Davidson County Animal Shelter.County commissioners held the discussion Thursday morning due to response from citizens about how the animals are treated at the shelter."I have asked the county manager to put this on as a discussion," said commissioner Fred McClure. "Obviously we've had some issues, and I thought we need to bring it out to discusDavidson County Manager Robert Hyatt said he would use this discussion to receive advice from the county commissioners on what direction to take when deciding under which department the animal shelter should f"I feel like with our county staff, we are following your directive," Hyatt said. "If it is something that you want to move, then we can work on making that happen. I can't come back with a firm recommendation at this point and time."Commissioners McClure and Steve Shell were the most vocal about removing the animal shelter from the sheriff's office.McClure's ideas include hiring two employees as a way to replace the gas chamber and looking at other options surrounding counties have regarding how they handle the shelters. Sheriff David Grice has said previously about 37 percent of the animals euthanized at the shelter are gassed. The shelter takes in about 6,600 animals yearly, and about 83 percent are euthanized."If we hired two employees, they could eliminate the gassing of any animal as soon as those employees were trained," he said, referencing a conversation he had with Judy Lanier, manager of the Davidson County Animal Shelter. "I think if we are trying to do something immediate, that might be an immediate way to at least accomplish some of what the folks would like to say."McClure also said he believed the animal shelter should not be under the Davidson County Sheriff's Office because Grice doesn't want that responsibility."(Grice) has said on multiple occasions that he doesn't want it, and we need somebody in charge of it that does want it," McClure said.Another option McClure brought up was to transfer control of the shelter from the county to a nonprofit. This happened in Guilford County, where the shelter is operated by the United Animal Coalition."Once we do all of that, you can work on a grant to dismantle and eliminate the gas chamber," he said.Shell said the issue has been going on so long, and it was time to move the shelter from being under the DCSO's control."With the limited resources that he's (Grice) got, the budget that he has and the other duties in this county, his recommendation five years ago was that the shelter needed to be removed out from under the sheriff's department," he said. "I agreed with him then and I agree with him now."Shell said he is tired of receiving national blame for events he has no control ove"I'm not satisfied with just decreasing the number of animals that we euthanize," Shell said. "I want us to be a role model for every shelter in this country.

Shell also said the number of animals euthanized in Davidson County is "totally unacceptaHyatt said statewide there is no specific department the animal shelter has to fall under. It is most common for the shelter to be under the health department, sheriff's office or serve as a standalone age"I still think from an organizational standpoint, where it currently resides makes a lot of sense," he said. "Can it work as a standalone department or under one of the other departments? Sure it can."

Commissioner Don Truell said while he agrees with some requests, such as eliminating the gas chamber, he believes the shelter should remain under control of the DCSO.

"There's only one place to put the dog pound, and that's under the sheriff's department," he said. "We got it in place now, we just have to change the way we are operating it."

Hyatt said if it stayed under the sheriff's office, it would limit the influence the commissioners could have on what takes place there.

Vice Chairman Todd Yates asked what sort of time line would be needed for the manager to come up with alternative ideas. Hyatt said it would take approximately one month.

Commissioner Steve Jarvis said he would like to know if the Davidson County Humane Society would be interested in taking over the shelter.

"As far as the shelter, I would like to research that," he said. "I think they have a better handle as far as volunteers, and it appears that Forsyth Countyoperates very well with volunteers and does a good job with the animals."

Becky Everhart, president of the Davidson County Humane Society, said she thought it was a good idea for the Humane Society to be involved.

“We would be more than delighted to work with the county, to what degree would be the question,” she said. “We have a board that would make that decision on just how much of a role we would play in the shelter.”

Commissioner Sam Watford said he believed working at the animal shelter is the toughest job in the county.

"I don't like people criticizing our shelter until they realize what it was like 12 years ago," he said. "It has really improved considerably."

Right now, the budget for the animal shelter and animal control is combined.

The board unanimously voted to continue discussion of the Davidson County Animal Shelter at its Oct. 28 meeting. No additional action regarding the shelter took place.

Wil Petty can be reached at 249-3981, ext. 227, or at wil.petty@the-dispatch.com. Follow Wil on Twitter: @WilPetty

Bravo Turkey & Chicken pet food recall

September 26, 2014 – Bravo of Manchester, CT is recalling select lots of Bravo Turkey and Chicken pet foods for dogs and cats because they could be contaminated with Salmonella.

About Salmonella

Salmonella can affect animals eating the products and there is risk to humans from handling contaminated pet products, especially if they have not thoroughly washed their hands after having contact with the products or any surfaces exposed to these products.
Healthy people infected with Salmonella should monitor themselves for some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever.
Salmonella can result in more serious ailments, including arterial infections, endocarditis, arthritis, muscle pain, eye irritation, and urinary tract symptoms.
Consumers exhibiting these signs after having contact with this product should contact their healthcare providers.
Pets with Salmonella infections may be lethargic and have diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, fever, and vomiting.
Some pets will have only decreased appetite, fever and abdominal pain. Infected but otherwise healthy pets can be carriers and infect other animals or humans.
If your pet has consumed the recalled product and has these symptoms, please contact your veterinarian.

How Was the
Product Distributed?

The recalled product was distributed nationwide beginning on November 14, 2013 to distributors, retail stores, internet retailers and directly to consumers.

What’s Being Recalled?

The product can be identified by the batch ID code (best used by date) printed on the side of the plastic tube.
1) These products are being recalled because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
RAW FOOD DIET BRAVO! TURKEY BLEND FOR DOGS AND CATS
Product Number: 31-102
Size: 2 lb. (32 OZ) plastic tubes
Best used by date: 11-05-15
UPC: 829546311025
Keep Frozen
Bravo! Blends All Natural Chicken Blend diet for dogs & cats
Product Number: 21-102
Size: 2 lb. (32 OZ) plastic tubes
Best used by date: 08-11-16
UPC: 829546211028
Keep Frozen
2) These products are being recalled out of an abundance of caution because they were manufactured in the same manufacturing facility or on the same day as products that tested positive.
Premium Turkey Formula BRAVO Balance RAW DIET
Product Number: 31-405
Size: 5 lb. (80 OZ) 2.3KG plastic tubes
Best used by date: 11-05-15
UPC: 829546314057
Keep Frozen
Bravo! Blends All Natural Chicken Blend diet for dogs & cats
Product Number: 21-105
Size: 5 lb. (80 OZ) 2.3KG plastic tubes
Best used by date: 08-11-16
UPC: 829546211059
Keep Frozen

Why It’s Being Recalled

The recall was initiated after routine testing by the Nebraska Department of Agriculture revealed the presence of Salmonella in two lots of product.
This batch tested negative by a third party independent laboratory prior to release for distribution to consumers.
No additional products affected by this recall.
The company has received no reports of illness in either people or animals associated with these products to date.

Other Products Being Withdrawn

In addition to the voluntary recall of the above products, Bravo has chosen to voluntarily withdraw the following poultry products from the marketplace to provide its customers with the certainty of safety.
Those products include all sizes (2 lb., 5 lb. and 10 lb.) of Bravo Chicken Blend(s), Bravo Turkey Blend(s), Bravo Balance Chicken Balance and Bravo Balance Premium Turkey Formula frozen raw diet products with best used by dates between June 20, 2016 and September 18, 2016.
This is being done out of an abundance of caution despite no evidence of any manufacturing defect or distribution problem.
None of these products are known to have tested positive for the presence of pathogens.
This market withdrawal has not been requested by the FDA but is being conducted voluntarily by Bravo.

What to Do

The recalled product should not be sold or fed to pets.
Pet owners who have the affected product at home should dispose of this product in a safe manner (for example, a securely covered trash receptacle).
Customers who have purchased the recalled pet food can return to the store where purchased and submit the Product Recall Claim Form available on the Bravo website for a full refund or store credit.
More information can be found at www.bravopetfoods.com. Or by calling 866-922-9222 Monday through Friday 9 am to 5 pm ET.

Regulatory Contact

U.S. citizens can report complaints about FDA-regulated pet food products by calling the consumer complaint coordinator in your area.
Or go to http://www.fda.gov/petfoodcomplaints.
Canadians can report any health or safety incidents related to the use of this product by filling out the Consumer Product Incident Report Form.

 

Update on the NC Wildlife Policy and our NC County Animal Shelters

                                 (click on picture for full view)

Update on NC Animal Shelter Events: In late April 2013, most is not all NC County Animal Shelters were sent a reminder to NOT be transporting or euthanizing our wildlife unless they show signs of rabies. And if they shows signs of rabies then other steps must take place, not just euthanasia. If your NC County Animal Shelter is still euthanizing our wildlife for lack of knowledge or for the “ thrill”, please step up, write down the events that took place and contact both the NC Wildlife Commission( POC is Gordon Myers)  Phone: 919-707-0010   email   wrccomments@ncwildlife.org or gordon.myers@ncwildlife.org  and the NC   Dept of Agra at  AGR.AWS@ncagr.gov                            

Opossums are not vicious creatures,  their only means to frighten you is to show their teeth and play dead. Please respect our wildlife in NC and let’s learn to co-exist. Same for foxes, skunks, bats, beavers and so on.

To read the PDF in full:

http://www.ncwildlife.org/Trapping.aspx\Go then go to the right of the page and click on the link for PDF for ACO and wild animals

 

What simple required item is missing from many North Carolina Animal Shelters?

You guessed it, scales. In North Carolina we have many county animal shelters euthanizing animals daily and not following the AVMA, AHA or HSUS Guidelines of weighing an animal prior to euthanasia. Why is such an essential item missing from our NC high kill shelters? And why is this marked acceptable on the NC Department of Agriculture State Inspection Forms?

We can not rely on the euthanasia staff to state they can view any animal and guess it's weight, therefore they don't see the need for a set of scales, as many of these sames shelters list animals via the wrong sex. So if you can not tell the difference of a male versus a female animal why should we be comfortable that you can size up the weight of an animal prior to euthanasia?

Taken straight from the American Humane Handbook on Euthanasia for animals, why is this not being adhered to in many North Carolina County Animals Shelters?

I urge you to please reach out to the NC Department of Agriculture and press them to require the state inspectors to account for how many county animals shelters have scales on site, what brand and if they are properly working at the time of Inspection.

Link to contact the NC Department of Agriculture:
Other supporting links:  http://www.ncagr.gov/

https://www.avma.org

http://www.americanhumane.org

And while your requesting the accounting of scales for euthanasia ask them to account for the stock supply for all the gauge needles and if they are properly being administered for each weight and size of the animals they euthanize as recommended. Due to current complaints we already know we have an issue with some North Carolina County Animals Shelters using the wrong gauge of needles during euthanasia.

It's heartbreaking enough that NC kills as many animals in their shelters as they do but if it's going to be performed should it not be preformed as humanely as possible?

And maybe in the not so distant future we can make it mandatory for all county shelters to also submit their shelter stats to the state for a for accurate accounting of animals euthanized, returned to owner, adopted and so forth. With 9 current counties refusing to report their shelter stats it makes one's mind wonder what they are hiding. The below list the NC Counties that failed to report their 2012 Shelter Stats.

Duplin                 Hoke

Edgecombe        Hyde

Forsyth              Lee

Franklin             Sampson

Stokes

The revolving door of homeless Shelter Animals in North Carolina

   ( click on image for larger view)
             

 It’s a sad state of affairs and breaks one’s heart if you really look into the North Carolina System, whether it’s failed Inspection reports for simple day to day routines like not serving mouldy food to the animals, not spraying down the kennels with the animals still located inside or something much more heinous like not mixing the correct dosage of the euthanasia drugs when taking an animal’s life.

Thousands upon thousands of North Carolina County Shelter Animals are never ever seen by the General Public before they are killed. Whether it’s the Shelter Staff who chooses to deem a dossal dog aggressive just to kill early, a Shelter Staff who dislikes one breed over another, one size over another, it’s a horrible shame that all of these animals fate are sealed many times by the hands of the wrong people.

In North Carolina most Shelter Staff are hired without any knowledge or background in the field of animals. Most have never been given a copy of the NC Animal Welfare Act to read and understand let alone even been told it exists.   There is no excuse for this lack of training or protocol by either the County’s Hiring Dept. or the Employee’s themselves.

What we have here is a broken system and one that seems very resistant to even entertain positive change for the future as after all this is an Agriculture State, one that prefers to protect the Farmers, Hog’s, Chicken, Turkeys than to take the time to define the distinct difference in these animals. NC is in a state on confusion and confliction as they can’t distinguish the difference in a domesticated animal and a farm animal.
 

 

  ( click on image for larger view)

This is why we are listed as a High Kill State and will most likely be the last State to take progressive measures and end the Gas Chambers for these same Shelter Animals. NC isn’t even entertaining the idea of a Bill to remove their Gassing Chambers anytime soon, this alone shows how far behind the times North Carolina is.

Just remember when travelling thru the State of North Carolina, don’t stop for gas, food or a bathroom break if you have an animal in the vehicle. Because if your beloved family member was to escape, they might find their way into one of these locked down Gassing Shelters who still have not one microchip scanner on site to be used by their employees prior to euthanizing your cherished pet.

Shame on North Carolina and their broken County Shelter System, we are an embarrassment to all!

 

  ( click on image for larger view)

To view the full report County by County please click here: http://www.ncagr.gov/vet/aws/Fix/index.htm

Pender sheriff asks SBI to look into animal shelter allegations

http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20130327/ARTICLES/130329702/1004/ARTICLES?Title=Pender-sheriff-asks-SBI-to-look-into-animal-shelter-allegations

Pender sheriff asks SBI to look into animal shelter allegations

By F.T. Norton
Fran.Norton@StarNewsOnline.com

Published: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 at 5:01 p.m.

State investigators are looking into allegations of criminal wrongdoing at the embattled Pender County Animal Shelter, a spokeswoman confirmed Wednesday.

According to the Jennifer Canada, assistant public information specialist for the N.C. Department of Justice, at the request of the Pender County sheriff, the State Bureau of Investigation is conducting “a preliminary inquiry to determine if a criminal investigation is warranted.”

The shelter in Burgaw has been under fire recently by animal rights activists who allege it is being mismanaged, animals are being mistreated and shelter staff are stealing food and items donated to the animals.

Since 2007, the shelter has received a number of unsatisfactory reports during state inspections, N.C. Department of Agriculture inspection records show.

Most recently, an inspection March 11 found among less egregious violations, there were seven cats in a pen with one litter box, holes in the kennels were large enough for animals to stick legs through and get injured, cats were being housed in traps-cages without litter pans and 18 cats had received no medical care for matted eyes and nasal mucus, resulting in them being euthanized, the report said.

A reinspection Monday found the shelter had corrected the majority of the errors, to include getting vet care for sick or injured animals and providing appropriate housing and litter boxes for cats.

“Cleaning was ongoing during this inspection. Grounds were cleaner and more organized today,” the report states.

The next inspection is April 25.

F.T. Norton: 343-2070 

Diggin' Your Dog Treat Recall

                     Yes another recall on dog treats. Diggin' Your Dog is now on the list:
                                 http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm342968.htm

Recall -- Firm Press Release

FDA posts press releases and other notices of recalls and market withdrawals from the firms involved as a service to consumers, the media, and other interested parties. FDA does not endorse either the product or the company.

Diggin' Your Dog Recalls Strippin' Chicks Pet Treats Distributed in Colorado and Nevada Due to Possible Salmonella Hazard

Contact
Consumer:
1-775-742-7295

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - March 7, 2013 - Diggin' Your Dog™ announced today that they are voluntarily withdrawing one lot of its Strippin' Chicks™ Pet Treats produced on 8-30-12 because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella. The sample was obtained in Colorado and the company has accounted for its distribution in Colorado of this lot.

No other Diggin' Your Dog™ products, lots, or production dates are affected.

The lot being voluntarily withdrawn is: Strippin' Chicks™ Pet Treats 5 oz Bag. Lot Code 250322 Use By Date: 2-23-14.

Healthy people infected with Salmonella should monitor themselves for some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever. Rarely, Salmonella can result in more serious ailments, including arterial infections, endocarditis, arthritis, muscle pain, eye irritation, and urinary tract symptoms. Consumers exhibiting these signs after having contact with this product should contact their healthcare providers.

Animals with Salmonella infections may be lethargic and have diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, fever, and vomiting. Some animals will have only decreased appetite, fever and abdominal pain. Infected but otherwise healthy animals can be carriers and infect other animals or humans. If your animals have consumed the recalled product and have these symptoms, please contact your veterinarian.

Diggin' Your Dog™ takes the matter of consumer protection and safety very seriously and strives to deliver only the safest products available.

Diggin' Your Dog™ is committed to providing the highest-quality pet treats possible to their customers. As a precautionary measure, Diggin' Your Dog™ will continue to produce all products in very small, handmade lot batches.

No Other Diggin' Your Dog™ products are affected by this voluntary withdrawal. Customers who have purchased this lot code are urged to stop feeding the product to their pet, remove the lot code from the packaging, and discard the contents.

A full refund, plus $1.00 to cover postage will be received by mailing the UPC and lot code to:
Diggin Your Dog, LLC, PO Box 17306 Reno, NV 89511.
All refunds will be processed within ten business days (plus postage time).

Diggin' Your Dog™ values the efforts of all agencies dedicated to the safety of the industry and is committed to consumer safety at all levels.

For questions or more information, contact Diggin' Your Dog™.
By phone at 775-742-7295 Mon-Fri 8:30AM - 4:00PM Pacific Standard Time
Email us at info@dydusa.com.

###

RSS Feed for FDA Recalls Information¹ [what's this?²]

Photo: Product Labels³

Recalled Product Photos Are Also Available on FDA's Flickr Photostream.⁴