The schedule for the upcoming (August 2013) Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) showed something very unusual; the AAFCO agenda showed meetings for industry groups Pet Food Institute and American Feed Industry Association. This confusing meeting schedule led to a phone call to AAFCO. You are not going to believe what they told us.
The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) is a an independent organization (listed as a not for profit corporation). Members of AAFCO are employees of State Department of Agriculture (though not all states participate). FDA representatives participate at all AAFCO meetings, and three FDA employees sit on the Board of Directors of AAFCO. AAFCO is responsible for pet food (and all animal food) ingredient definitions, pet food (and all animal food) label requirements, pet food (and all animal food) nutrient requirements. The AAFCO Mission statement (quoted from the 2013 Official Publication) states “To provide an open forum for the discussion of regulatory sciences in which regulators, the industry and consumers alike can enhance the assurances of feed safety, quality and effectiveness.”
Again, AAFCO members are state and federal employees. While wearing their ‘AAFCO hat’, these state and federal employees have no regulatory authority (they make the rules, they don’t enforce them). However, in their day job as a state or federal employee they do have regulatory powers; both FDA and State Department of Agriculture can force a recall or pull products from store shelves.
On June 13, 2013 the AAFCO website provided the 2013 Annual AAFCO Meeting Draft Agenda showing the following meetings listed on the schedule…
“Sunday August 11th 8:30 am – 4:30 pm PFI RAC Meeting”
“Sunday August 11th 1:30 pm – 7:30 pm AFIA Feed Regulatory Committee”
“Tuesday August 13th 8:00 am – 12:00 pm AFIA Ingredient Approval and Definitions Committee”
“Wednesday August 14th 1:00 pm – 5 pm PFI Working Group”
AAFCO – state and federal employees. PFI stands for Pet Food Institute – the lobby organization that represents Big Pet Food – industry. AFIA stands for American Feed Industry Association – the lobby organization representing all animal feed businesses and it’s ingredient suppliers – industry. In other words, the agenda for pet food regulatory meetings – meetings where state and federal employees decide the future of pet food regulations – also listed meetings of industry; separate meetings that were for industry members only.
Why? Why did the AAFCO meeting schedule list these industry group meetings – as part of the 2013 AAFCO Annual Meeting agenda? Mollie Morrissette and I called AAFCO and asked. Jennifer (of Federation of Animal Science Societies – the group AAFCO hired to manage the organization) spoke with us. After introductions I asked her about the Wednesday afternoon meeting – specifically I asked “what does PFI stand for?” (I thought I knew what PFI stood for – Pet Food Institute, but surely AAFCO wouldn’t host an industry meeting – so I thought there certainly must be some other explanation. Nope, there wasn’t.) Jennifer responded “Pet Food Institute”. To which I replied “why would a PFI meeting be listed on the agenda for the AAFCO meeting?”
And then Jennifer told us…“The (AAFCO) Board of Directors instructed me to contact three of the groups and offer them our extra meeting space.”
Jennifer told Mollie (in a follow up conversation) that the hotel provided AAFCO with various meeting rooms. AAFCO did not need all this meeting space, so in turn they – at no charge – provided the meeting space to industry groups (and only industry groups).
The meeting space provided to industry groups listed on the AAFCO Draft Agenda were removed from their website within 2 hours of our conversation with Jennifer at AAFCO offices (afternoon of June 13, 2013). However I took screen shot images of the document (providing a date and time stamp) and Mollie and I both saved the original Draft Agenda document.
View original document Here.
View updated Draft Agenda document (after our conversation with AAFCO) Here.
Again, here is the meeting space AAFCO gave to industry that was listed on the original agenda…
Sunday August 11th 8:30 am – 4:30 pm PFI RAC Meeting (8 hours free meeting space)
Sunday August 11th 1:30 pm – 7:30 pm AFIA Feed Regulatory Committee (6 hours free meeting space)
Tuesday August 13th 8:00 am – 12:00 pm AFIA Ingredient Approval and Definitions Committee (4 hours free meeting space)
Wednesday August 14th 1:00 pm – 5 pm PFI Working Group (4 hours free meeting space)
The AAFCO Board of Directors voted to gift the Pet Food Institute 12 hours worth of free meeting space and voted to gift the American Feed Industry Association 10 hours worth of free meeting space.
On the AAFCO website – on the Whistle Blower Policy page it defines “Fraudulent or Dishonest Conduct” as…
“Misappropriation or misuse of AAFCO resources, such as funds, supplies, or other assets.”
Did AAFCO Board of Directors misappropriate resources? Would extra meeting space provided to AAFCO via the hotel be considered an AAFCO ‘resource’ and in turn, would gifting that meeting space to industry groups be considered misappropriation?
If pet food consumers were provided a vote on the above questions, I’m confident the majority would feel the AAFCO Board of Directors did indeed misappropriate resources by gifting industry groups free meeting space.
This is bad – however what’s really bad is that apparently the AAFCO Board of Directors did not realize this was a huge mistake (that is until a couple hours after we pointed it out to them how bad it was – when they promptly removed the meetings from the website). Pet food regulators and industry groups have been such pals and buddies for so long – they don’t even recognize when a line is crossed. Regulatory authorities gifting meeting space to industry (or vice versa) is not ethical. But they don’t see it that way. They think…we’re all friends, why wouldn’t we offer our friends some free meeting space? And there’s the problem.
How can AAFCO, State Department of Agriculture, and FDA properly regulate their friends? How can a proper inspection take place at the ‘home’ of a friend?
Think about this…
There has only been one recall over the last couple of years (to my knowledge) that the contaminant in the pet food/treat was found by the Department of Agriculture in the same state as the manufacturer. One.
As example…in 2012 a Diamond pet food manufacturing plant in Gaston, South Carolina experienced a large recall. Every variety of pet food made at the plant was eventually recalled. It wasn’t the South Carolina Department of Agriculture that found Salmonella in the pet food (same state as the plant), it was Michigan and Ohio. FDA follow up (after the recall) inspection of the plant found equipment held together with duct tape and cardboard. Why didn’t the South Carolina Department of Agriculture find the plant failed to maintain equipment prior to this recall? Do states not inspect (or properly inspect) manufacturing facilities located within their borders?
I’ve been told by insiders of pet food manufacturing that when inspectors come to many of these pet food plants, management is given days if not weeks advanced notice. Inspectors are led around the plant to areas management wants them to see (not to areas they don’t want them to see). Once ‘inspection’ is complete, everyone goes to lunch together – management and regulatory.
It’s hard to properly regulate your friends.
Here’s some potential friends of AAFCO’s (which includes FDA too)…(from the AAFCO website Committee Advisors webpage)…
Pet Food Institute, American Feed Industry Association, Pet Food Industry, Hills Pet Nutrition, National Grain and Feed Association, National Oilseed Processors Association, National Renderers Association, American Feed Industry Association, The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company, Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Lilly Research, Mosaic, Pfizer Animal Health.
Each of the above industry groups or corporations have been provided one or more advisory positions to AAFCO committees. Now guess how many consumer advocate advisors there are?
One. Dr. Jean Hofve.
Mollie Morrissette and I (through our consumer association) asked for two advisory positions to the pet food related committees in February 2013 (five months ago). AAFCO President Tim Darden continues to tell us he is discussing this with AAFCO attorneys. Makes you wonder if such conversations took place (with AAFCO attorneys lasting five months) when Cargill or Pfizer or Hills Pet Nutrition representatives were welcomed on board.
They don’t see it is unethical for regulatory authorities to have friendships with those they regulate. They don’t see it as unethical to gift meeting space to those they regulate. They don’t see it as unethical to continue to refuse to give consumers a voice.
And they wonder why we don’t trust them.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
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 2500 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
2013 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking for pets made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Angela
June 17, 2013 at 11:57 am
Not only is it unethical /conflict of interest and a misappropriation of funds, it’s tax payers dollars!
Susan, thank you for being so astute!
Lori S.
June 17, 2013 at 12:06 pm
Excellent investigative article. Thank you for this. And you are right: what erodes is public trust in the entities designed to protect the public (and paid for by the public).
Pamela Sherman
June 17, 2013 at 12:16 pm
As I was reading this information, I remembered some research I was doing last week reference GMOs in animal feed (wanted to know what grains were fed to “naturally raised”, humanely treated animals). I found this website: http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/processed_foods/153.animal_feed_genetic_engineering.html
I was dumbfounded as to how invasive these GMO crops and their derivatives are in the human and animal food supply! Of course, I started thinking about my dog’s food and how contaminated it might be particularly through use of GM derived additives, vitamins, amino acids and enzymes…the things I didn’t think I had to worry about. I imagine this type of concern will not be covered in the AAFCO meetings. Thank you the important work you do.
Susan Thixton
June 17, 2013 at 12:20 pm
Actually Pamela – at the January 2013 AAFCO meeting, two industry groups were provided with 45 minutes during the meeting to tell attendees how good GM ingredients are and how bad it would be to require foods that contain GM ingredients to be labeled as such.
Rajeanne
June 17, 2013 at 1:04 pm
Thank you sooo much for showing us this gmo website!!! It is amazing info to read, and I thank you again!!!
Sincerely,
Lilly
June 17, 2013 at 12:18 pm
Way to go Susan and Mollie. It is a shame that you guys had to point out the obvious to the AAFCO board members. But maybe this will encourage them to wise up and see the flaws in their methods. Your efforts are so very appreciated! Many Thanks!
Gitta
June 17, 2013 at 12:24 pm
I do believe they know that they are crossing lines. What they are not used to (yet): somebody is watching and not laughing. That is new. That is something catching them off guard. Up until now their cozy, if not to say crony, relationships were their dirty little secrets. No wonder they posted it on their website. Who else but their buddies would read these things?
Welcome to the new world: pesky little sisters are watching!
If it was easy to deny access, they would have done so in a heartbeat. Maybe they are hoping the pesky little sisters will go away if ignored long enough. Or will not be able to make last minute travel arrangements. I’m sure the invitation is in the mail!
Now, it would be very interesting, if these meetings still take place. Removing them from the public view doesn’t mean the whole idea has been dumped. Poor puppies. It was such a perfect way to scratch backs. All the buddies in one convenient location. You just gotta feel sorry for them. The pesky little sisters peed in the sandbox :>)
Dragon77
June 17, 2013 at 1:14 pm
Same situation the FAA had a few years ago (and probably still does) – which was why we had a whole bunch of mechanical failures on aircraft.
Clearly another “clean sweep” is in order. There are CLEAR conflicts of interest in play here.
But then, this entire Administration is a conflict of interest.
Rose Studdard
June 17, 2013 at 1:32 pm
It is becoming increasingly clear that more and more employees in a majority of the workplace are just waiting on their paycheck. It is really a sad shame. It makes the ones that want to improve life for humans and creatures so much harder. Thank you for fighting the good fight and inspiring others to do the same.
Gina Landovsky
June 17, 2013 at 3:09 pm
Unethical is right. This is a case for Erin Brokovich!
Laurie Matson
June 17, 2013 at 3:36 pm
Susan and Mollie ARE our Erin Brockovich!!!
Susan Thixton
June 17, 2013 at 3:46 pm
Thank you – big shoes to fill there.
Anyes
June 17, 2013 at 6:04 pm
Indeed. Thank you for all the work you do for all of consumers.
Chris
June 17, 2013 at 3:38 pm
Susan…I assume you’re going to this event correct(or have someone that can)? I’m curious to see if they just took it down from their website but in fact still give the space to those organizations.
Susan Thixton
June 17, 2013 at 3:45 pm
Yes – Mollie and I are both going.
Chris
June 17, 2013 at 3:50 pm
Excellent! I think many of us will look forward to see what actually happens. Video and pics might be great if they end up giving those spaces to them anyway…gives them no room to breathe if they want to claim otherwise.
Susan Thixton
June 17, 2013 at 4:11 pm
And they will not allow any video or photographs taken during meetings…they try to cover all the bases.
Betty Burkett
June 17, 2013 at 4:59 pm
But what can we consumers do about this? should we be writing letters-and to whom? This is like the proverbial fox watching the hen house. Where is the meeting being held?
Thank you Susan and Mollie for what you do.
Susan Thixton
June 17, 2013 at 5:05 pm
The meeting is in St. Petersburg Florida August 12 – 14th. Here’s the link: http://www.aafco.org/Meetings/AnnualMeetings/2013.aspx. It would be great if more pet food consumers/advocates could attend on a regular basis – we need more voices.
Donnie
June 17, 2013 at 6:03 pm
Our government is bought and paid for by industry. They serve their masters, not the American citizens who pay taxes. More people are starting to realize just what is going on. And, they are voters. So, we can only hope that eventually, we can vote the corrupt ones out, and decent people in.
SJC
June 18, 2013 at 12:35 am
I was thinking that this couldn’t happen at a better time. I would take this to your senator/congress-person. Or whomever you felt would be most sympathetic in congress. With what is happening at IRS and other govt groups, this is just one more thing. I think you might just get more attention and help… Because you can back it up by pointing to what is going on all around us at other agencies. Just an idea. And of course it would take time. But a multi-pronged approach would certainly be tactically sound. Then we can start petitions to committee heads to put pressure on them to investigate the incestuous relationship, etc. Besides, if it’s known you’ve gotten a meeting and possible investigations might occur, they might start being a bit more “hospitable” to you. Just an idea. :o)
Peter
June 18, 2013 at 6:36 am
The state of the industry and your understanding of that, is revealed very clearly, in the fact that you copied the information and took screen shots, with the expectation that the agenda documents would be altered.
Jane Eagle
June 18, 2013 at 2:59 pm
No ethics in sight anywhere…
It never fails to amaze me that such blatant conflicts of interest are legal.
stephen
July 1, 2013 at 5:36 pm
I think all these commentors missed the basics. You even quoted their mission statement, yet complain when they follow it. Aren’t they supposed to be bringing the industry and consumers into a forum about regulatory science? Then you complain that the industry is there? Also, this is not a government agency, so the comparisons to the IRS and faa are just wrong. This is a non profit that is full filling its goals. It just isn’t doing what you want.