Evanger’s Pet Food is recalling additional lots of pet food. The following statement was sent to retailers this evening (2/28/17).
Dear Distributors and Retailers:
You’ve undoubtedly heard about the many voluntary pet food recalls that have occurred during the past two weeks. You may have had some of the recalled foods on your shelves in your desire to serve your customer’s four-legged children only the healthiest, safest, and most nutritious food on the market.
We are aware that these recalls have caused a great deal of justified concern, mistrust, and anger among pet owners and pet food retailers.
The Evanger’s family, like many families, is also incredibly angry and upset by these recalls.
We’re angry not only because we let you down; but we’re furious that we allowed ourselves to be lied to and deceived by the supplier responsible for introducing pentobarbital into our meat supply
Sadly, this company was once one of our most trusted meat suppliers. But they are solely responsible for the pentobarbital-tainted meat found in some cans of Evanger’s Hunk of Beef and Against the Grain Pulled Beef.
We of course immediately fired this unscrupulous supplier, and have undertaken steps to address this matter in a lawsuit on behalf of our customers and retailers
Furthermore, to ensure the future safety, peace of mind, and well-being of our two legged and four-legged customers, out of an abundance of caution we have decided to issue an immediate recall of the products in which this supplier’s meat may have been used
The 12 oz. cans of dog foods being voluntarily recalled have the following barcodes. The numbers listed below are the second half of the barcode, which can be found on the back of the product label:
Evanger’s: Hunk of Beef: Item # 776155
Evanger’s: Braised Beef: Item # 776150
Against the Grain: Pulled Beef: Item # 776107The three products being voluntarily recalled were manufactured between December 2015 and January 2017, and have expiration dates of December 2019 through January 2021. These products were distributed online and through independent boutique pet stores nationwide.
To-date, Evanger’s and Against the Grain have not received any reports of illnesses, outside of the previously recalled products.
Any consumer that still has this product on hand should return the cans or cases to the retailer where purchased for a full refund or replacement of product. Retailers must return the product to the distributor they purchased it from and distributors are required to quarantine all products with the enclosed lot numbers.Full details on how to process product returns are attached.This recall should be carried out to the consumer level.We are asking for your assistance and that this is done expeditiously. Thank you for your help and partnership.Please complete and return the enclosed response form to your distributor as soon as possible.If you have any questions, call us at 847-537-0102, or contact your Evanger’s sales representative.We will work diligently every day to re-earn your trust. We will continue to provide updates on the status of our voluntary recall, and pending litigation against our former supplier.Sincerely,The Sher Family
Q: Why are you issuing another recall?A: This recall is not based on lab tests or any complaints. This was issued because we’ve learned that our supplier let us down on at least one occasion, and we need to be 100 percent confident in the safety and quality of our foods. The forthcoming voluntary recall covers products that this supplier’s raw materials may have gone into.Q: What products are affected?A: Three products: Hunk of Beef, Braised Beef Chunks with Gravy, and Against the Grain Pulled Beef.Q: What is Evanger’s doing to make sure this never happens again:A:1) Evanger’s is re-vetting all of its current suppliers, and each supplier will be required to sign a letter of guarantee that fiscally ties them to ensuring the product we receive is the product we ordered.
2) Evanger’s has purchased pentobarbital test kits so that it can test all beef raw materials at its unloading dock.
3) Evanger’s will continue random periodic testing for pentobarbital in its products.
Q: How do we know the other beef products are safe?A: The contaminated beef has been traced back and isolated to one supplier. The other beef products came from other suppliers. We are spot testing their products as well, but have no reason to believe they have violated our contracts. Some tests for other loaf style beef products have already been completed and have come back negative for pentobarbital.Q: Why did Evanger’s test for horsemeat?A: Evanger’s has been making Hunk of Beef since 2002 without incident. There were missing pieces in the puzzle as to why these pugs got sick. When pentobarbital popped up, we did heavy research and found that it is not common practice to euthanize cows, but it is common practice to euthanize horses. Things just weren’t adding up, and we wanted answers.Q: If the FDA tested negative for horsemeat, why did you publish your test results?A: Evanger’s knew the announcement about horsemeat would have a negative impact, but felt transparency was best. We felt the right thing to do was to come out and tell the public of our findings, even though the FDA’s findings detected only beef.Q: Whose fault is this?A: Our name is on the label, so it’s our fault. However, we were deceived by our supplier who is responsible for introducing pentobarbital into our meat supply.Q: Why hasn’t the supplier been named?A: The FDA is investigating the supplier, and we are taking legal action against them.Q: Is it true that the beef supplier was not USDA inspected?A: No, that is not true. FDA investigators questioned the USDA FSIS inspection status of the supplier on 2/8/2017. FDA was advised that the supplier is not inspected by USDA-FSIS, but by USDA-APHIS as it specifically processes meat for pet foods, and was shown the USDA-APHIS number of the supplier, which is also on every pallet that comes in from the supplier and on their bills of lading and invoices. The investigators were unaware that another USDA branch that covers pet food existed. This fact was ignored in the FDA’s press release.Q: Why did the FDA say they couldn’t verify in which products the beef went into in their press release?A: We do not know. The inspectors asked in which products the meat is used, and were told that in the specific lot that was recalled, only Hunk of Beef was made. They were also told that we use this supplier’s beef for three products: Hunk of Beef, Braised Beef Chunks with Gravy, and Against the Grain Pulled Beef. Any records that were requested were given to the FDA, and all records were available to them, if they asked.Q: Are you the only pet food company that purchases from this supplier?A: No, we know that there are at least two high-quality premium brands that purchase from this supplier.Q: What changes will Evanger’s make going forward/what is the silver lining?A: In addition to the testing mentioned above, Evanger’s has started a campaign in an ongoing effort to have the FDA put an end to allowing pentobarbital into pet food. There should have been a zero tolerance policy for pentobarbital when the FDA discovered it in pet foods in 1998, and there should be a zero tolerance policy now.Q: Why did this happen with Hunk of Beef?A: Hunk of Beef is a very unique product. Any of the natural (or unnatural) elements of the beef are in the can. Any pathogens are killed in the heat sterilization process, but because it is ONE INGREDIENT and not mixed with anything else, the product was more exposed than any blended product would have been.Q: The FDA previously allowed pentobarbital in pet food?A: To our dismay, yes. The FDA did two studies on pentobarbital in pet food. In 1998, of about 100 pet foods tested, about 50 contained pentobarbital. In 2001, the FDA did a follow-up study performed by the Center of Veterinary Medicine. They injected 10 Beagles for eight weeks at double the amount of pentobarbital that was present in the pet foods. The Beagles showed no adverse reactions, so the FDA determined the amount of pentobarbital typically found in a pet food, if present, is considered safe. The FDA did no long-term studies on the effects of those foods. The FDA probably never expected an innovative product like Hunk of Beef to come along.Q: What should stores do with the recalled product?A: Please return the recalled product to your distributor for credit. The upcoming recall is for the three Hand Packed beef products with a December 2019 expiration date or later.Q: Has the FDA ever posted a second press release after a recall press release has already been issued?A: On very rare occasions the FDA will issue a second press release, but the FDA has never released an “editorial” as it did with Evangers.Q: The FDA wrote that there were “serious issues” at the facilities. Is this true?A: Evanger’s has responded officially to the FDA about these comments. In some instances the investigators made observations without full knowledge of the operations of the firm, and other observations were made which are not true. Evanger’s was not issued any violations as a result of the inspection.An example of an untrue observation is that an inspector saw cracks in our floor. The “cracks” were actually expansion joints that are put into all new floors to prevent cracking.Q: Was there condensation dripping into the cans like the FDA reported?A: NO. There was condensation in areas of the plant because the temperature in Chicago was 35 degrees, then jumped to 57 degrees the following day. Since we manufacture using steam, the steam combined with the extreme temperature swing caused condensation. However, no condensation would have or could have entered any of our raw materials or in-process product because all materials are covered and protected at all times.Q: Was there pooling water in the plant?A: NO. We use over 20,000 gallons of water per day and water is never stagnant in our facility. Water is frequently used and flowing during cleanup and sanitation procedures which happen throughout the day.Q: Was a fly really observed?A: There are no flies in Illinois in winter.
Donna Frano
February 28, 2017 at 8:16 pm
I had a can of Hunk of Beef. Tried to feed it to my persnickety dog. She turned up her nose at it and it got tossed.
Thank God.
Jeanette Owen
February 28, 2017 at 8:30 pm
Most these pet food company owners have their heads up there butts – that’s where their “pet food” comes from.
T Allen
February 28, 2017 at 8:45 pm
I love the last 4 questions! They are SO lying. Expansion joints are “cracks in the floor” because they can’t be sanitized. They admit there was condensation, it’s not allowed and if they have it it was likely dripping onto the wrong places. Pooling water means it wasn’t squeegeed between cleanings and at 57* you get flies, even in the winter. Good thing it was APHIS doing the inspection (not human grade) because FSIS they would have been shut down for the condensation alone. Reason…imagine open metal beams overhead in a kitchen. Flies land and poop, condesation forms and washes poop off when it drips (along with dirt, rust, etc) right into/ onto the product or equipment that will contact the product. Yummy.
Jane
February 28, 2017 at 8:46 pm
I just saw an article on Pet Food Industry in which he’s now claiming that the adulterated pet food didn’t technically kill the affected dog.
“The one that didn’t survive was a 13- or 14-year-old Pug that had some health issues,” said Sher. “The decision was made to euthanize the fourth Pug.”
They’re spinning this so hard that I’m getting dizzy!
Do you know what happens to food that’s recalled like this? Are they compelled to destroy it?
tinab158
February 28, 2017 at 8:50 pm
I really want to know who the supplier is and what other dog food manufacturers they supply with meat.
Dianne & Pets
February 28, 2017 at 9:33 pm
They have been known to show up overseas with the lot numbers covered by a new label.
mickey
February 28, 2017 at 10:01 pm
who are the other two brands that use that supplier?
Tim
February 28, 2017 at 10:16 pm
What a perfect way to end such a revolting promotional release.
“There are no flies in Illinois in winter.”
Nothing to see here, folks.
Ian
February 28, 2017 at 11:02 pm
I know. “There are no flies in Illinois in winter.” ha ha ha ha ha ha. Unless the interior of the buildings and storage buildings and production lines are all kept below freezing (they just said temperatures were 57 degrees one day causing the condensation) there certainly could be flies. I am really surprised they would outright call the inspectors liars. Susan, I am very interested in your take on “The investigators were unaware that another USDA branch that covers pet food existed. “
Cheryl Bond
March 3, 2017 at 12:57 am
“Susan, I am very interested in your take on “The investigators were unaware that another USDA branch that covers pet food existed. “
I too, would like some clarity on this. How in the world does Investigator’s NOT know about this? This just seems too BIZZARRE!
Evanger’s denounces ALL of the Investigator’s findings…I seriously don’t know who to believe! I also remember from the original post that FDA also sighted…Birds flying around, un-working refrigeration, raw meat being processed on porous wood table tops (WTH?!) & then of course, WHERE would that raw meat go, if there was not working refrigeration?!!!!
It also seems quite unbelievable that if these violations were true, that the FDA only would cite them in a report, verses give them legitimate violations, or hault all production right then & there! I mean WTH kind of violations does it take to make that happen? With the above cited violations, I mean SERIOUSLY! that seems more than enough! Who are we to believe? The FDA or Evanger’s? Like another person commented…”they’re spinning this so much, my head hurts!” ?
I am sure we are all eagerly waiting to hear your take on all of this Susan!
Susan Thixton
March 3, 2017 at 8:22 am
I’m working on the post. Investigators knew what they were doing, so did Evanger’s. I believe Evanger’s was trying to use smoke and mirrors (through use of official sounding acronyms) to make them look innocent.
Shell Huber
February 28, 2017 at 10:27 pm
I would never buy anything made by them. The owners are not to be trusted or believed. Remember the stealing of gas and electricity?
Lynn Marie Utecht
February 28, 2017 at 10:28 pm
This company is just unbelievable. This Q and A has slime written all over it. Turns my stomach.
maxine
February 28, 2017 at 11:14 pm
I thought their answers were way more concise than every other companies’ reply ive read in the past.
Observer
March 1, 2017 at 2:00 am
A perfect chapter in the book: “How to Deflect Blame 101” … should be required reading for all disciples of Evanger’s.
My guess is, the “Sher’s” themselves didn’t craft this latest release (well maybe except for the Fly part!).
It has “Legal” written all over it.
Let the lawsuit begin….
Peter
March 1, 2017 at 6:08 am
No wonder it took the Shers a week to finalize the expanded recall: they needed time to craft their spin to diffuse responsibility. They should offer an anti-nausea drug to anyone expected to read it without becoming dizzy. I think that an effective in-store display for their products should make the cans whirl on the shelves.
The Shers insist that FDA inspectors are “unaware” of who does what with regulation of pet food manufacture. To defend their statements– and confuse consumers– they again mis-state that relationship: USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has no involvement in meat inspection, except for assisting suppliers with export certifications if they are exporting to other countries.
Peter
March 1, 2017 at 6:10 am
No wonder it took the Shers a week to finalize the expanded recall: they needed time to craft their spin to diffuse responsibility. They should offer an anti-nausea drug to anyone expected to read it without becoming dizzy. I think that an effective in-store display for their products should make the cans whirl on the shelves.
The Shers scold whomever possible and insist that FDA inspectors are “unaware” of who does what with regulation of pet food manufacture. To defend their statements– and confuse consumers– they again mis-state that relationship: USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has no involvement in meat inspection, except for assisting suppliers with export certifications if they are exporting to other countries.
Lisa Hill
March 1, 2017 at 6:56 am
No more wet dog food for my dogs. Organic roasted chicken! This was a BIG eye opening experience for me.
Dr Amy
March 1, 2017 at 7:00 am
The whole Q and A reveals a lot of the problems with the pet food industry and the lack of regulation where it matters. Also, I would be really curious to know IF there ARE pentobarbital “test kits”. (Not sure why anyone would manufacture those). I don’t feed this food and once again I wonder why I get criticism from colleagues for feeding real food to my dogs (vs processed manufactured food) when over and over it is proven that manufactured food is NOT always safe.
Debi
March 1, 2017 at 7:17 am
Sure, we believe you.
maria goines
March 1, 2017 at 9:03 am
that’s why i only feed raw food from a company i trust
Julia Ramirez
March 1, 2017 at 9:48 am
Sickening, they shame their heritage. May God allow total devastating bankruptcy of ALL your stocks, for the lies, pain and deaths you have caused.
Brent
March 1, 2017 at 3:49 pm
Kinda harsh Julia. There are recalls on human food all the time. People get sick, that’s how it is discovered. Thankfully it was a couple of dogs rather a whole country full of them as in 2008. I may be alone in this but I think Evangers handled it well. They recalled after just ONE incident was reported.
Ian
March 1, 2017 at 5:06 pm
wow the Evangers apologists/shills are still trying to spin this story ! they didn’t recall after one incident was reported…. after one incident was reported they did everything possible to deny their food could be at fault until government testing determined they were in fact at fault despite all their previous denials and attempts to cast blame on the pet owner. Only THEN did they recall.
Jeanette Owen
March 1, 2017 at 7:31 pm
A freeze dried pet food company here in Az was telling me the 3 slaughter houses she went to & picked the best, said the others were horrid. I just hate to think what goes into pet food, I mean really. They all paint pretty pictures & people buy into it. Sad
Peter
March 2, 2017 at 1:09 pm
Its not that harsh, its realistic. “Thankfully it was a couple of dogs…” and that is something to take relief in? One of them is no longer living. Bringing the 2007 incident in as comparison is about as thick as it can get.
The statement is crafted to confuse. And to infer quality of supply that clearly is not present. The Sher’s once again insist that their suppliers are registered, but USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has no involvement in meat inspection, except for assisting suppliers with export certifications if they are exporting to other countries.
The incident is reflective of the culture of deception that the Sher’s have and continue to pursue. I am tempted to suggest that their store displays be changed so that the cans revolve to emulate the spin that the Sher’s work so hard at.
Reader
March 1, 2017 at 5:38 pm
Nobody’s “heritage” has anything to do with whatever. And melodrama fails to serve a purpose. Keep in mind, human food recalls also include undeclared allergens. True, Listeria is a serious pathogen. E.coli is less prevalent.
The point is, the assurance steps the Shers are “now” taking, were required in the first place. At the very least, strategic sampling. Exactly for the reasons in their own statement. Meaning an exceptional history of doing business with suppliers …. still doesn’t mean individual players aren’t going to shift their game. PFI Insiders know far more background than ever divulged to the public. So all the more reason to be consistently vigilant. As must be the human food industry. One fatally tainted jar of baby food killing a child is enough to put a company out of business. It’s all about trust. And perception.
Shell
March 1, 2017 at 10:50 am
This from a guy who stole electricity and gas. Now that’s someone to trust.
Darlene
March 1, 2017 at 11:44 am
”Sadly, this company was once one of our most trusted meat suppliers. But they are solely responsible for the pentobarbital-tainted meat found in some cans of Evanger’s Hunk of Beef and Against the Grain Pulled Beef.”
Uh, no, sorry Evangers…nice try. YOU are solely responsible because YOU manufactured and sold tainted products!!
Trying to point the finger elsewhere and absolve blame from yourself is a disgrace.
Terri Christenson Janson
March 1, 2017 at 12:24 pm
Excuse me…I live in Michigan where we get WINTER. WE get flies in the winter. Ive seen some in my house! If it warms up into the 50’s we get flies OUTSIDE too. Hummmmm……..
PJ
March 2, 2017 at 1:55 pm
So no horse dna?
Shannon Lafountain
September 12, 2017 at 1:42 am
I agree that they have no feeling for pets or their owners. Pets are like children would these people feed this food to their children or grand children.