Do you know who holds the responsibility of assuring pet food safety in the US? Is it FDA? Is it AAFCO?
Most pet food consumers understand that FDA is a regulatory authority over pet food. But many don’t know that FDA works with most State Department of Agriculture in regulating pet food. Many consumers believe AAFCO enforces law with pet food, but…they don’t. AAFCO has no regulatory authority at all. Here’s how the regulatory control breaks down with pet food.
FDA
The Food and Drug Administration is the main regulatory body over pet food. Responsibilities include:
- (infrequent) inspections of pet food manufacturing and ingredient suppliers (excluding USDA regulated suppliers – example meat, see USDA below);
- pet food investigations (based on consumer or veterinary complaint);
- works in cooperation with AAFCO developing (state) laws, defining ingredients, establishing nutritional requirements for pet food/animal feed;
- approves or denies pet food additives or processing aids not defined by AAFCO (GRAS – Generally Recognized as Safe – ingredients).
The FDA’s regulation of pet food is guided by (should be guided by) federal law. Federal laws the FDA is charged with enforcing include the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, the Food Drug and Cosmetic Amendments Act, the Food Safety Modernization Act. However, FDA does not enforce all laws they are required to enforce with pet food/animal feed; through FDA policy the agency allows pet food to violate some federal laws.
State Department of Agriculture
State Department of Agriculture is a secondary regulatory authority over pet food having almost as much responsibility as FDA. Responsibilities include:
- most US States require pet food manufacturers to register each food or treat sold within state boundaries on a yearly basis – often charging fees for each registration (some charge based on tonnage sold, some charge a flat fee per label);
- some states inspect pet food labels for adherence to labeling laws (during the yearly registration process);
- some states randomly test pet food for risky bacteria and/or Guaranteed Analysis claims;
- some states will investigate consumer complaints on their own or in cooperation with FDA;
- some states will inspect pet food/treat manufacturing facilities on their own or in cooperation with FDA;
- some states work in cooperation with AAFCO developing (state) laws, defining ingredients, establishing nutritional requirements for pet food/animal feed.
State Department of Agriculture regulation of pet food is guided by (should be guided by) state law which is always in cooperation with federal law. However, each State Department of Agriculture does not enforce all laws they are required to enforce with pet food/animal feed; states follow FDA’s lead in lack of enforcement of some pet food laws.
AAFCO
The Association of American Feed Control Officials has no regulatory authority over pet food. AAFCO is an independent organization consisting of State Department of Agriculture and FDA members. AAFCO writes Model Bills which are typically accepted as state law (however not accepted in all states). AAFCO has established the nutritional requirements of cat and dog food (to meet a Complete and Balanced claim), has established legal definitions of all pet food/animal feed ingredients, and the labeling requirements of pet food (not public information, owned by AAFCO).
USDA
The United States Department of Agriculture has no regulatory authority over pet food. The USDA does have a voluntary pet food certification program, but it is not acknowledged by FDA or State Department of Agriculture. USDA regulates meat used for human consumption under division FSIS (Food Safety Inspection Services), the agency does not officially regulate meat for pet consumption. Raw pet foods manufactured under constant USDA inspection and meat shipped to a human food manufacturing facility that also manufactures a pet food were under USDA jurisdiction during manufacture, however after they become ‘a pet food’ they no longer are responsibility of USDA. Another division of USDA – APHIS (Animal Plant Health Inspection Services) – provides minor oversight of pet food but only in regards to products that are exported outside the US; their duties are limited to services to assure the exporting pet food product meets importing country’s law.
Meat destined for pet food coming from a USDA inspected processing facility can be inspected and approved (human grade) or it can be condemned meat rejected for use in human food. In many cases meat destined for pet food – because USDA does not have jurisdiction in pet food – is denatured with an agent (typically charcoal dust but can be more toxic substances) to clearly mark the meat as non-human grade. Sometimes pet food manufacturers can make arrangements with USDA to not denature their meat.
Jurisdiction
Each federal or state agency is respectful of the others jurisdiction. As example, in the recent Evanger’s Pet Food issue…meat was the suspect contaminate. Meat falls into USDA’s jurisdiction. Respecting USDA’s jurisdiction, during the investigation of Evanger’s meat supplier FDA turned to sister federal agency USDA for information regarding the meat processing facility. Typically FDA or State Department of Agriculture does not enter a meat processing facility (as it is USDA’s jurisdiction). But FDA and/or State Department of Agriculture can request any information from a fellow agency as part of an investigation.
Filing a pet food complaint
Consumers can (and should) file a pet food adverse event complaint (pet illness or death) with FDA and with your State Department of Agriculture. It is at the discretion of the agency if an investigation will proceed. For FDA report here: https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ReportaProblem/ucm182403.htm. To find your state representative, go here: http://www.aafco.org/Regulatory
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over 4,000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com
The 2017 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking pet food made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Susan Mazzotti
March 13, 2017 at 2:51 pm
why can’t we know who the major supplier of beef to Evangers is? also, is Real Meat and Ziwi Peak beef ok???
thanks.
susan Mazzotti
Susan Thixton
March 13, 2017 at 2:53 pm
Evanger’s supplier would be considered proprietary information.
Reader
March 14, 2017 at 12:25 am
I walked into my Pet Food Supply store today. One that prides itself on offering super premium choices and boutique brands. I am grateful for the education they’ve given me, in terms of being huge raw food proponents. Done both my dogs a world of good. I believe they really do care about doing the right thing.
Except today I checked to see if Evangers (dry) was still on the shelf. It was. Then I checked the cans. And “Hunk o’ Beef” (among the very few Evangers choices) was sitting there. Now I get the point, that they obviously checked the Lot Numbers. But I asked anyway, were they aware of what caused the recall?
In fact they felt that Evangers would probably become one of the safest foods out there going forward, exactly because another significant mistake would be their final undoing. They admitted to me, thinking it was the supplier, and reiterating how the chain of custody is complicated, just as some other TAPF reader described in another post.
But I thought, how sad anyway. That a company wouldn’t be held to a fundamental accountability. Because if they aren’t, beginning at the retail and customer level, then it makes no “statement” within the Industry. And instead, becomes just another unfortunate mistake, that will eventually be forgotten … or excused … or qualified …..in the interest of maintaining business as usual.
Does it honestly have to be our very own pet that something bad happens to, before a serious incident really matters. Just food for thought …. .
Jane
March 13, 2017 at 3:15 pm
Where does organic certification fit into the mix? Is that the “voluntary pet food certification program” you mention under the USDA?
This might be a whole other post, but what does organic certification cover? We’ve been using Evanger’s and Party Animal organic cat foods, thinking that would provide an additional layer of oversight. But, given the conditions and other problems the FDA found at Evanger’s, I wonder if it really does.
Susan Thixton
March 13, 2017 at 5:07 pm
Organic ingredients would fall under USDA’s jurisdiction – but only as ingredients (same as with meat). Once they are destined for pet food they no longer fall under USDA jurisdiction. To my knowledge, the certification of organic falls back onto the farm – the farm is certified. But as with Evanger’s, should a problem arise with a organic ingredient in a pet food – the FDA would turn to USDA for information on the farm.
Laurie Raymond
March 13, 2017 at 7:43 pm
I’ve had lengthy conversations with one of the owners of Party Animal and the organic certification of ingredients is only the beginning. There are audits and inspections at each step to ensure segregation of organic ingredients from non-organic ingredients and the tear-down and clearing of canning equipment between organic processing and other uses. The folks at Party Animal use Evangers facility because it is the only pet food canning facility certified for organic manufacture. The owners waited some time for Evangers to obtain this certification so that they could make organic pet food. Evangers had to take many extra steps to obtain it. There are ways to authenticate these steps, including inspections, and the folks at Party Animal are quite willing to reveal all information to consumers.
Where there is a big black hole in the supply chain as far as transparency goes, is the processing and/or rendering plants from which companies buy their meat and meat meals. I’m having a paralegal I know research rules and laws governing how these operate. I’ve said before about the Evangers Hunk of Beef contamination, unless there is some gross commingling of carcasses on a joint slaughter and rendering facility, there is no accidental way for sodium pentobarbital to have gotten into that product other than by deliberate insertion. Here’s why: with or without feedlots attached, packing plants receive all their livestock alive. They are driven through the slaughter line, bled, skinned, and cut up. The inedible parts and bones go to a rendering company. Rendering companies receive all their inputs already dead, and from many sources, depending on the products being made. These companies produce meat meals, specific protein meals, bone meals and by product meals for pet and animal feed manufacturers. Feedlots, slaughter operations and packing operations do not have or use sodium pentobarbital. Why would they? The animals are destined for food and to use that drug would disqualify they. besides, they have plenty of lethal options for injured animals that do not involve drugs. No animal could walk through the slaughter line after having been injected IV with sodium pen.
In contrast, rendering companies receive random sourced carcasses, many of which were euthanized with sodium pen. at vet clinics and shelters. If you search for information on how rendering companies operate, the National Renderers Association overview lists 2 types of operation: “packer-renderers” and “independents.” That suggests that at least some packers (slaughter/processors) are jointly operated with rendering facilities. If so, there must be laws and rules to prevent cross-contamination of meat by raw materials or outputs of the rendering process.
The meat meals that come out of a rendering process look like brown powder. The meat chunks in the contaminated Evangers cans are obviously and beyond a doubt meat chunks. Whether from a cow, a horse, or any other animal, that animal walked into the facility, was killed, and ended up sold to Evangers as meat. This doesn’t say anything about its quality, only that it could NOT have been euthanized with sodium pen. Hunk of Beef is a large chunk of meat, plus water, that is cooked in the can. Unless deliberate product tampering took place, it is beyond explaining how sodium pentobarbital came to be there.
But the packing and rendering companies are extremely cagey about being identified with any manufacturer of pet food. Why? This needs and deserves some attention!
Reader
March 14, 2017 at 1:58 pm
Thank you for the information because you’ve been spending a lot of time on research. Much appreciated. Actually the explanation is what Evangers should’ve provided in full transparency. Their “public relations” skills are very lacking in favor of being quite combative instead.
My response to the tampering theory is this. Either the competition is (or was) very jealous of Evangers perceived quality, they decided to take them down a notch. Or Evangers has made their own share of enemies the old fashioned way. Heaven only knows what they’ve done to earn that kind of reputation.
But if they know the supply chain as well as you do, wouldn’t a company feeling truly victimized have reported the names of all the suppliers they use? After all, doing so would be a best kind of safety check point in the best interest of the public..
Mollie Morrissette | Poisoned Pets
March 15, 2017 at 3:00 pm
Hi Laurie,
I’ll take the last comment first re: intentional adulteration. Evanger’s most likely received the contaminated meat (horse, beef – whatever) from a supplier who sold them euthanized animals. How that probably happened is that a dead animal hauler picked up the carcasses from a veterinary university (or some other location) and instead of delivering it to a renderer for processing sold it to a meat processing facility (not under USDA inspection). Legally, a dead animal hauler is supposed to deliver it to a renderer not a meat processing facility.
Another scenario is that cows were euthanized with sodium pentobarbital (although for the reasons you mention unlikely), and were marked as USDA Condemned then taken to a meat processing facility that was not under USDA inspection instead of a renderer and processed and sold as ‘Inedible Meat.’ The meat Evanger’s received was labelled ‘Inedible.’
As far as the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) is concerned, Oregon Tilth is the certifying agency for Evanger’s. The only time Evanger’s was inspected by Oregon Tilth was once during the application process to qualify for inclusion into the USDA/NOP. Currently, Oregon Tilth is reconsidering Evanger’s certification.
In addition to individual ingredients, finished pet food products can be certified organic under the USDA/NOP rule under the animal feed rule. Currently, there are no USDA/NOP rules specific to pet food at this time.
Evanger’s and the certified organic products that are made at their facility are not under constant inspection by Oregon Tilth or the USDA/NOP for that matter.
Hope that helps clarify the matter!
Michelle
March 13, 2017 at 3:17 pm
Kind of a joke isn’t it? It is basically buyer beware. The way I look at it is, if I won’t eat it then neither does my boy.
Susan Thixton
March 13, 2017 at 5:08 pm
The post was not meant to be a joke. It was to explain the responsibilities of regulatory authorities to consumers.
Batzion
March 13, 2017 at 6:16 pm
With the exception of AAFCO, it’s really no different than human food. Susan, you cannot fairly be expected to do everything yourself. We need to mobilize. I’m wondering if Ronnie Cummins at the Organic Consumers Association would be agreeable to a pet food “division” whereby we would have established inroads to petition and contact our Congressmen/women, the FDA, USDA, etc. en masse with experienced muscle behind us: https://www.organicconsumers.org/
prints
March 14, 2017 at 10:55 am
Celebrity chef and talk show host Rachael Ray has an advertising problem.
Despite claims on the label and on the product’s website that her Nutrish brand of dog food is “natural” and devoid of artificial flavors or preservatives, both wet and dry varieties contain chemicals and artificial ingredients, according to a recent class-action lawsuit against the makers of the Food Network star’s product.
At a time when consumers have been shown to project their own preference for natural food onto their furry friends with U.S. sales of pet foods marketed as “natural” exceeding $5 billion a year, the suit against Ainsworth Pet Nutrition alleges that it has “reaped enormous profits” at the expense of pet parents who paid a premium for the Nutrish dog food.
The suit points to several “chemicals and artificial and/or synthetic ingredients” — including L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate, Thiamine Mononitrate, and (to throw you a bone pronunciation-wise) caramel color — that it claims disqualifies more than a dozen Nutrish products as natural pet foods.
For its part, the Nutrish site features an “ingredient glossary” that defines L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate and Thiamine Mononitrate as both being “part of an essential blend of vitamins and minerals that helps support your pet’s overall health.” There is no entry for caramel color.
https://www.truthinadvertising.org/nutrish-dog-food/
Hannie
March 14, 2017 at 8:44 pm
Who regulates pet food in the USA? NOBODY………which is why there are so many issues. The pet food companies are left to do what they want, make as much money as they want as our pets get sick & die. Pretty sad state of affairs I would say. Only way to know what your furbabies are eating? Cook it yourself…….
Terri Christenson Janson
March 17, 2017 at 9:35 am
This is why I do cook my own dogs food.
Spencer
May 12, 2017 at 12:38 pm
Need some help! I am in California and am trying to understand the laws behind rendering. This is what I know – CA department of food and agriculture give licenses to facilities to sell a fertilizer. However, I can’t find anything on regulating the facility via monthly inspections, looking at incoming materials, tonnages, etc…
Who monitors this information? And do rendering facilities have to obtain a permit to operate of sorts from any other government agency other than the local air board?
Thanks.
Reader
May 12, 2017 at 5:01 pm
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article2580368.html – (This is a case story in the Sac Bee, but identifies the following agency:) “Officials with the California Department of Food and Agriculture, which regulates rendering plants, said their records show no adverse findings for the plant.”
http://www.nationalrenderers.org/about/faqs/#regulated-us – Rendering plants are regulated by a variety of federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Federal agencies with significant regulatory jurisdiction over rendering plant operations include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for animal feed ingredients, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for air and water, USDA for certain food products, the Department of Transportation (DOT) for the transport of material to and from rendering plants, and the US Department of Labor for employment and safety laws.
State departments of agriculture typically regulate the transport and handling of materials processed in rendering plants, and certain licensure and product quality matters. State and local agencies also oversee enforcement of applicable environmental, safety, health, and employment regulations.
The 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) requires renderers to comply with new and extensive regulations to improve feed and food safety. Many industries are subject to this law in addition to rendering. FSMA gave FDA sweeping new authorities to implement the new law. FDA has issued regulations for hazard analysis, preventive controls, corrective actions, validation, verification and monitoring of processes, record keeping, foreign supplier verification and employee training. FSMA also gave FDA new authority to initiate mandatory recalls of adulterated products.
Most renderers produce animal food ingredients and must comply with FSMA regulations and are subject to periodic unannounced FDA inspections. The major FDA regulation affecting rendering is called “Current Good Manufacturing Practices and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Food for Animals.” The NRA (National Rendering Association) has been very proactive with its members in regards to training and implementation of this regulation.
https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/ahfss/mpes/ – (In Calif.) The Meat, Poultry and Egg Safety Branch also licenses and inspects the following: Renderers who recycle animal carcasses, packinghouse waste and inedible kitchen grease into animal feed ingredients and inedible industrial fats, oils, and other products. Collection Centers used for temporary storage of animal carcasses, packinghouse waste and inedible kitchen grease before transport to a licensed rendering plant. Dead Animal Haulers who transport carcasses of dead livestock and horses. Pet Food Slaughterers who slaughter animals for use as pet food. Pet Food Processors who prepare fresh or frozen raw meat products for pet food. Importers of fresh or frozen raw meat, meat by-products, horsemeat, poultry meat or poultry meat by-products for pet food or horsemeat for human food.
https://www.agriculture.ny.gov/FS/pdfs/circs/art5c.pdf -ARTICLE 5-C LICENSING OF RENDERING PLANTS – (Revised April 13, 2015)
_____
You’re kidding right, that Google isn’t working for you; sounds like maybe you’re doing a research paper for school … .
Pingback: Why I Chose Grain Free Food For My Dog - Happy Rescue Tails
Pet mom
January 6, 2019 at 4:55 pm
Are raw pet food companies allowed to state on their label “manufacturerd under constant usda supervision”? Does aGFSI-fSSC 22000 EU certfied facility have any worth in showing human vs feed grade?
Susan Thixton
January 6, 2019 at 5:13 pm
No – at this point pet food companies are not allowed to state manufactured under constant USDA inspection. The “UE certified” only means the pet food meets the regulations of Europe for pet food imports. It does not certify human grade.
Marc
November 20, 2019 at 6:01 am
Susan Thixton, Thank you for explaining the Pet Food companies information. We just got a Puppy and I was looking for information about the Current Pet Foods available. I have always read the nutrition Information on the Dog and Cat food packages but became more aware since I lost a Pet to a pet food contaminate over 13 years ago. Today the pet foods available are overwhelming. I will continue to strive to purchase the Highest Quality Nutritional Pet food and Pray to keep my furry friends healthy.
Artem
December 3, 2021 at 9:48 am
If it is possible could you answer my question? How is water for pets regulated? Is it “food” or “veterinary product”?
Susan Thixton
December 3, 2021 at 10:12 am
I don’t know who or if anyone regulates the water pets drink. There is also water added into pet foods during manufacturing, and I don’t believe anyone directly regulates that water either.