Dog Treat Products Settlement, Waggin' Train & Canyon Creek Recall

Dog Treat Products Settlement
Adkins et al. v. Nestlé Purina PetCare Company, et al., Case No. 1:12-cv-02871 (N.D. Ill.);
Matin v. Nestlé Purina PetCare Company, et al., Case No. 1:13-cv-01512 (N.D. Ill.);
Gandara v. Nestlé Purina PetCare Company, et al., Case No. 1:13-cv-04159 (N.D. Ill.)

IF YOU PURCHASED OR YOUR PET(S) USED OR CONSUMED WAGGIN’ TRAIN OR CANYON CREEK RANCH DOG TREAT PRODUCT(S), PLEASE READ CAREFULLY. THIS WEBSITE IS TO INFORM YOU OF A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT THAT MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.

YOU MAY BENEFIT FROM READING THIS WEBSITE. IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE BENEFITS UNDER THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT, YOU MUST SUBMIT A CLAIM FORM.

Case Background
A Settlement has been reached in class action lawsuits claiming that Waggin’ Train or Canyon Creek Ranch brand dog treat products imported from or containing ingredients imported from China (“Dog Treat Products”) were defective and that some pets may have become sick and/or died after consuming the products. A list of the Dog Treat Products can be found here. Defendants Nestlé Purina PetCare Company and Waggin’ Train, LLC have denied any wrongdoing. The Court has not decided which side is right.
Defendants have agreed to create a $6,500,000.00 cash Settlement Fund from which eligible consumers and/or pet owners may receive a cash payment for up to 100% of certain documented economic damages related to their purchase of or their pet’s consumption of the Dog Treat Products, after the payment from the Settlement Fund of the costs of notice and Claims Administration, attorneys’ fees, Class Representative awards, costs, and taxes. Economic damage means the expenses you incurred related to your purchase or your pet’s consumption of the Dog Treat Products, and include veterinary screening or treatment bills and other expenses related to your pet’s illness and/or death.
For each of your pets that used or consumed Dog Treat Products, you may recover up to 100% of certain reasonable economic damages you claim you suffered if you can provide documentation showing the economic damage.
In addition to compensation for expenses supported by documentation, you may also receive up to a $300 payment per pet for reasonable economic damages for which you do not have supporting documentation. You must still complete a Claim Form and provide information about your economic damages to be eligible for payment of your undocumented expenses.
The total amount available for product reimbursement is $700,000, and the total amount available for healthy screenings is $100,000. Reimbursement of Claims may be subject to certain pro rata reductions and other limitations described on this website.

SUMMARY OF CLASS MEMBERS’ RIGHTS AND OPTIONS UNDER THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
SUBMIT A CLAIM	The only way to get a payment. Submit your Claim Form by mail, facsimile or email (.pdf) to the Claims Administrator no later than April 1, 2015.
EXCLUDE YOURSELF	Get no payment. This is the only option that allows you to not be bound by the final judgment and release and to be part of any other lawsuit concerning the issues being settled now. You must exclude yourself from the Settlement Class by no later than February 10, 2015.
COMMENT ON THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT	Write to the Court about why you support or oppose the proposed Settlement. If you want to object to the Settlement, you must do so in writing by May 25, 2015. Filing an objection does not exclude you from the Settlement.
GO TO THE FINAL APPROVAL HEARING	Ask to speak to the Court about the proposed Settlement at the Final Approval Hearing, scheduled for June 23, 2015 (date subject to change).
DO NOTHING	Get no payment. You will not be able to bring or be part of any other lawsuit concerning the issues being settled now, and you will be bound by the final judgment and release in this case.

If you would like further information about the claims asserted in this case, you can review a copy of the Settlement Agreement here.


NOTICE: This website provides a summary of the Settlement and is provided for informational purposes only. In the event of any discrepancy between the text of this website and the original text upon which it is based, the text of the original document shall prevail.

Questions? Contact the Claims Administrator at 1-866-329-9963 or info@DogTreatProductsSettlement.com

World Spay Day 2015

Nutrisca Dog Food Recall for Feb 2015

Nutrisca Dry Dog Food Recall Because of Possible Health Risk

• February 11, 2015


• By:
  Eric @ Pet Food Recall
All Recalls, Dog Food Recalls
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 11, 2015 – Perham, MN – Tuffy’s Pet Foods, Inc. of Perham, MN is voluntarily recalling specific lots of 4 lb. bags of Nutrisca Chicken and Chick Pea Recipe Dry Dog Food because they have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella. Tuffy’s manufactured the product for Nutrisca.
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. 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. 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. No Salmonella-related illnesses in people or animals have been reported to date in association with these products.
The recalled product was distributed in the 4 lb. bags nationwide to distributors, brokers, retail stores, and internet retailers. The recalled product is limited to Nutrisca Chicken and Chick Pea Recipe Dry Dog Food in 4 lb. bag sizes, bearing UPC Code “8 84244 12495 7″ (found on lower back of the bag). Products included in the recall are identified by the below first 5 digits of the Lot Code (found on upper back of the bag) and “Best by Dates” (found on upper back of the bag). No other bag sizes or other Nutrisca dog food, cat food, biscuits/treats, supplements or other products, are affected by this announcement.
First five digits of Lot Codes:
4G29P, 4G31P, 4H01P, 4H04P, 4H05P, 4H06P
Best By Dates:
Jul 28 16, Jul 30 16, Jul 31 16, Aug 03 16, Aug 04 16, Aug 05 16

The recall was initiated after a routine sampling program by the Ohio Department of Agriculture revealed the presence ofSalmonella in one 4 lb. bag of product. The company is coordinating this voluntary recall with the FDA, and is issuing the recall action out of an abundance of caution.
Consumers who purchased the 4 lb. bags of the dry dog food product subject to the voluntary recall (as identified above) should stop using the product, discard it in a safe manner (example, a securely covered trash receptacle), and contact Nutrisca at the number below for further information.
For consumer information or questions regarding this voluntary recall, please contact Nutrisca at 1-888-559-8833.

 

 

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.

 

Kong Aussie Sticks Dog Treat Recall

September 25, 2014 – Kong Aussie Sticks dog treats have been quietly recalled by the product manufacturer, JAKKS Pacific of Walnut, California due to possible contamination with mold.

http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-recall/kong-aussie-sticks-recall/


The products being recalled have the following item numbers:

• Item 75559
• Item 75560

And these “Best Before” dates:

• 1/30/16
• 1/31/16

According to a JAKKS Pacific company spokesperson:

“The products were not dried properly so a small percentage of finished goods have gone moldy.
“Majority of the product is fine, and the mold was caught at our DC, but some product may have made it to PetSmart so we are recalling all the product at PetSmart and destroying all the product we have at our DC.”

Where Was the Product Sold?

According to a letter obtained from JAKKS Pacific and forwarded by Kong to The Dog Food Advisor, the recalled product was sold only at PetSmart.
No further store location, online sales or other distribution details have been provided by either company.

Silent Recall?

We are troubled by the covert nature and lack of transparency exhibited by both companies associated with this particular event.
Obtaining confirmation and collecting details about this recall were especially challenging. Apparently, the companies only notified PetSmart and relevant distribution centers.¹
And as far as we can tell, neither has made any effort to post a public notice.

What to Do?

According to JAKKS Pacific in that same email, the “product can be returned to PetSmart for a full refund.”
Just the same, here are the customer service contact numbers for the two companies:
You may contact JAKKS Pacific at 877-875-2557, Monday through Friday from 7:30 am to 5:00 pm PT. Kong can be reached at 303-216-2626.
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.

Animal Transport Contact Info for the USDA and APHIS

So you feel uncomfortable about an animal transport that you witnessed and you don't know who to contact and where to start, let's start with the USDA and APHIS.

Animal Rescue groups or even those portraying themselves as an animal rescue group or animal transporter still need to follow the basic laws in place to protect the animals they all proclaim they are working to save. However these day's we have an issue with Puppy Flippers, Class B Dealers and rescue for profit are all now hiding behind the animal rescue name and claim for a fast buck and their new household income.

Shelter dogs and cat's being sent from one state to another are required to have a health cert, water bowls, water, leashes, a log book of the travel time and a USDA Animal Transport License are all to be on board when these transports take place. These are all precautions put in place to put the animals health and care first, something most of these mass animal transports do not do on their own.

I personally am disgusted at the lack of care for these animals while on these state to state transports and I know many others are as well but people just do not know where to start to alert an official office let alone how to place a formal complaint. So here are just a few pointers.

Screen shot all of your evidence or questionable activity and save  it to your computer. Gather as much information on the animal transport, the departing location, arriving location, how many animals are on board, where they might have come from ( list a county animal shelter if that's the location) and the people names or groups that are involved as you can.

You can either file a complaint with the USDA/APHIS at:  http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/aw_complaint_form.shtml


Or you can email them directly via the contact list listed below. You may need to click on the picture to enlarge the print for your better view.

This is only the first step in how to help the animals forced on these transports. Please stay tune for the next 2 blogs on what other departments need to be contacted and how you can help clean up the animal transport world that so many have jumped in the last few years as their new way of income.  Something the IRS is also interested in due to all the undeclared taxable income for so many who claim to be unemployed and are receiving state benefits thru their local Health and Humane Services Departments.