Pet Food Recall Natura Pet’s PR release follows and states that of all Innova, California Natural, EVO, Healthwise, Mother Nature and Karma branded dry pet food and biscuit/bar/treat products with expiration dates prior to June 10, 2014 are being recalled. There is a refund form on their site. (All bolding is mine, Ed.)

For Immediate Release
Contact: Natura Pet Consumer Relations – 800-224-6123
June 18, 2013

Natura Pet Issues Voluntary Recall of Specialized Dry Pet Foods Due to Possible Health Risk

FREMONT, NEBRASKA, June 18, 2013 – Natura Pet Products is voluntarily recalling specific lots of dry pet food because it has the potential to be contaminated with 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. 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.

These products were packaged in a single production facility. During routine FDA testing, a single lot tested positive for the presence of Salmonella. There have been no reports of pet or human illness associated with this product. In an abundance of caution, Natura is voluntarily recalling all products with expiration dates prior to June 10, 2014.

The affected products are sold in bags through veterinary clinics, select pet specialty retailers, and online in the United States and Canada. No canned wet food is affected by this announcement.

The affected products are:

BRAND
LOT CODE/UPC/SIZES
EXPIRATION

Innova Dry dog and cat food and biscuits/bars/treats
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

EVO dry dog, cat and ferret food and biscuits/bars/treats
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

California Natural dry dog and cat foods and biscuits/bars/treats
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

Healthwise dry dog and cat foods
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

Karma dry dog foods
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

Mother Nature biscuits/bars/treats
All Lot Codes, All UPC’s, All package sizes
All expiration dates prior to 6-10-2014

Consumers who have purchased the specific dry pet foods listed should discard them. [Ed. If you have a sick dog or want a refund you might want to keep the product to test or return.]

For further information or a product replacement or refund call Natura toll-free at 800-224-6123. (Monday – Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM CST).
# # #
About Natura Pet Products
Natura Pet Products is recognized as a trusted name behind natural and holistic pet foods and treats. Founded more than 20 years ago by John and Ann Rademakers and Peter Atkins, Natura is dedicated to providing the best natural nutrition. Natura is committed to making premium pet foods and treats based on nutritional science and high-quality ingredients, combined with trusted manufacturing processes, for complete pet health. Lines include: Innova®, California Natural®, EVO®, HealthWise®, Mother Nature® and Karma®. To learn more about Natura Pet Products visit www.NaturaPet.com.

Media Contact: Jason Taylor 513-622-1111

Source: Natura Press Release pdf

A February puppy death at Petco on Long Island during a training session was in the news and I was shocked all over again. The update centered around policy — the dog’s family want Petco to change their training policies, providing more than the current 16 weeks of education, adding CPR training.

Petco has not made any changes to policy according to the CBS television report, though there is no trainer currently available at this store. I wondered how many people had heard about this, the circumstances surrounding the incident and what effect this might have on people’s process of choosing a trainer. Here’s what happened:

A six-month-old bulldog puppy, Sophia Belle, was in the ring with a Petco trainer who, according to the owner, pulled back hard enough on the leash to lift the puppy’s two front feet off the floor “and choking her,” pet parent Michael DiMaggio said. There was no mention of a choke chain, but what happened next, according to a vet quoted in the article, was Sophia Belle’s trachea collapsed and she died. What a nightmare for any pet parent to witness.

In an attempt to know what they don’t know, people need to wrap their heads around a significant number of choices — which vet, what food, where’s a good groomer that won’t hurt my dog, what does “good trainer” mean, how can I spot them?

While knowing how to make all these choices is second nature to many experienced with dogs, the important conformation and health particulars of a breed can be left undiscovered by the less experienced pet parent and insufficiently trained “trainer”. It is not up to the pet parent to know everything. It is incumbent on those offering their services as professional trainers to actually be a professional with expertise. Expertise is gathered over time.

Petco offered another dog and payment for the vet bill, but that is not all they can do. Petco can change their training time policy and have trainers certified in CPR as the pet parents requested, even take it a step further. Petco noted that their training is reward based. Perhaps forming a contractual relationship with a body of professionals such as the Association of Pet Dog Trainers for education might be part of a smart solution. Petco employees could have hands-on training and refresher courses throughout the year from a certified dog trainer employing humane methods, proper handling and equipment use.

We don’t know who is teaching what to whom in those 16 weeks and information on that point has not been forthcoming — does anyone fail or does everyone who attends classes get the title of “trainer”? Regardless of how many thousands have made it through their classes with no incident, any puppy death at Petco is one too many. Petco reported they had outside experts look at the video and nothing inappropriate occurred. The description given by the pet parents would not lead to that assessment.

What I do know is this: Lifting a puppy up by the leash so paws come off the ground is not training — no matter how many times you’ve seen it on TV.

*Update: From Eric Goebelbecker’s FB page, trainer Leah Roberts offers this link to the Pet Professional Guild, an association of force-free trainers.

(Photo:public domain bulldog example)

Shock collars became a topic of conversation on FB last night — I shared a post on a dog collar that was touted as a GPS system complete with an android app. It looked well-designed, even sleek (not pictured here). I shared it. Long story short, Hilary Lane also shared it, and got notified on her business page that the company had a shock application built into the collars for obedience and invisible fence use. That fact was not apparent in the third party review.

There was some consternation and commenting on the marketing practices of this company when a Vet friend of mine, Jackie Imai, made a case for the use of shock collars as long as they were handled in an appropriate way, and related her experience, having tested them on herself first. Oddly enough, this is what I did back in the 80s when I believed such devices were legitimate training tools. My response ended up being 300 words, so I decided not to publish it there, but bring it here to see what your thoughts are:

I never bank on appropriate use.

First consider I come from the perspective of someone who has seen permanent damage people do to animals from misuse/abuse of training tools, often out of impatience and sometimes out of belief in strict obedience, sometimes out of cruelty – and I agree with you regarding the dangers of improper use of choke collars.

People as a group are not all that into taking the time and effort to figure out what is and what is not appropriate use. Yes, a pretty broad statement, but not unfair. Impatience is a real issue when these devices are in use, and punishment can be meted out for the slightest infraction. Regretting it later does nothing to heal the break in the human-animal bond.

Victoria Stilwell wrote that these collars are unnecessary and cruel, and while I used to think they were not so bad years ago, having done just what you did — shocked myself before putting it on my dog — as we have learned more about dogs’ intelligence and psychology thanks to scientists like Dr. Brian Hare, trainers like Ian Dunbar and clinical psychologists like Dr. Rise VanFleet, my thinking has changed.

Being shocked – well, think of it – you’re noodling along and suddenly out of nowhere, bam, this electric surge hits you. That’s confusing, spooky, and while dogs eventually understand they can’t go beyond the invisible fence without paying the price of pain, or need to stop barking to stop the pain, they still dash through the electrical field or bark when particularly distressed. What are they really learning?

The larger issue to me is how do you want your dog to respond to you, through fear of pain remembered for not responding as expected or through the joy of a cooperative partnership? The more we understand about our dogs’ psychology and the level of cooperation that can be consistently reached through positive training that respects the intelligence of the animal, the less these types of devices will be used — that’s my hope.

And speaking of larger issues and psychology – how are we making our choices? Are we simply taking the easy road, continuing to use and do what we have always used and done? Are we making conscious and conscientious decisions for our dogs given all the new knowledge in the field of dog behavior and training?

I think people will usually choose a short-cut like shock collars over proper training, seen as a longer process. (It’s ironic given that the shock collars will create a need for further training.) One process respects the dog’s ability to learn and his emotional state, while the other is a quick fix that works while the collar is on the dog. Do you disagree?

Real learning or a trick of electronics, what do you think? Have you changed your mind about this type of training method? Have you ever used it? What did your dog’s body language tell you?

When is Lyme disease not Lyme? Good question – there’s been some head-scratching in the medical community in cases where blood tested negative for Lyme, while all the other symptoms were evidenced. Can you still have Lyme if you flunk the test for Lyme? Tufts new tick discovery could be the answer to that.

Since it’s the season in many areas when dog owners get more active, going for outings in the woods and tall grass fields, this news is timely: Tufts tick discovery is a new disease brought to you by the deer tick that can be shared between humans and animals (zoonotic). It’s so new there’s no name yet. It acts like Lyme, but is a different bacteria. It can be treated with the same antibiotic.

Deer ticks wreck some havoc in the zoonotic disease department, and this new one brings the total to five you can get from them: Lyme, babesiosis, ehrlichiosis and deer tick virus plus this new disease. Sam Telford, an expert on tick-borne diseases and a professor in the Department of Infectious Diseases and Global Health at the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine was responsible for Tufts new tick discovery when he found the new bacteria in an 80-year-old woman. It’s been seen in animals in the Northeast, but this was the first US case confirmed in humans (January 2013).

It’s good to note that not all deer tick carry this bacteria, or Lyme, but the fact that you can pick up all these listed diseases from your dog might get you to the pet store for tick prevention if you haven’t protected your dog — and yourself — already.

(Photo: Kelvin Ma)

Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) was recently banned in Connecticut, thanks to all members of the House who, having more sense than most, voted down breed bans 142/0. There had been legislation moving through the General Assembly that would allow cities to enact bans. This unanimous vote wiped those attempts off the schedule. Now the Senate must weigh in. We may have good news in Connecticut for these much-maligned dogs. I have to ask, and you’ll see why at the end, how much difference will it make?

On another front there’s Broward Country, Florida, toying with the idea of breed bans, see-sawing for and against, testing how much public support such a bill would get. One day vice-mayor Sharief proposes a prohibition on pit bull ownership, the next wording is changed to ensure people don’t get any more pit bulls, but their current dogs won’t be taken from them. Another Florida town, Hollywood, was going to the State to ask to have the power to enact a ban should they feel it necessary.

BSL and Dog Aggression

This fear-based approach to public policy and scourge on critical thinking was not swayed by the existence of a 2008 study published in a peer-reviewed journal on applied animal behavior science, which abstract begins:

“Canine aggression poses serious public health and animal welfare concerns. Most of what is understood
about breed differences in aggression comes from reports based on bite statistics, behavior clinic caseloads,
and experts’ opinions. Information on breed-specific aggressiveness derived from such sources may be
misleading due to biases attributable to a disproportionate risk of injury associated with larger and/or more
physically powerful breeds and the existence of breed stereotypes.” (Duffy, D.L., et al., Breed differences in canine                      aggression, Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. (2008), doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.04.006)”

This report goes on to say “some breeds scored higher than average for aggression directed toward both humans and dogs (e.g., Chihuahuas and Dachshunds) while other breeds scored high only for specific targets(e.g., dog-directed aggression among Akitas and Pit Bull Terriers).”

Vice-Mayor Sharif said she did not agree with the science in that report and had conducted her own research (!!) finding pit bulls to be more aggressive than other breeds. Well, what hope can we have with this kind of thinking going on in positions of power?

Breed Specific Legislation Doesn’t Get Results

I don’t know of a major agency, HSUS, Best Friends, ASPCA, without an official stance on BSL as an ineffective, unreliable, expensive policy approach that does nothing to solve the issue of dangerous dogs. Yet a flurry of articles on which town is trying to enact this policy next seems to cycle through on a regular basis. I keep hoping the public discussion will get smarter. Actually, the general public is getting smarter (anecdotal observation), it’s more often the politicians and reporters that are the weak link.

I had the unhappy experience of watching a Huffington Post video discussion recorded in regard to the attack on an 84-year-old woman by two pit bulls who escaped their yard in Jurupa Valley, CA. I am sorry to say  it did nothing to advance this important discussion.

Damning Pit Bulls

It is one thing to do the job Animal Control is, in part, meant to do–guard the public health and safety by keeping stray dogs off the streets, capture and kill dogs who attack people. It’s something else entirely to have dogs so damned by public opinion — shaped by a media unable or unwilling to wait for proper identification of dogs before reporting an attack or incident — filling up the kennels at Animal Control facilities across the US. With a reputation that unfairly precedes them, pit bull type dogs are often not welcomed by landlords or neighbors. You can see what that does to these dogs. They are suddenly not adoptable and are left with no prospects. People move and can’t keep their dog — it becomes a death sentence.

So when someone asks you why, if there is nothing “wrong” with pit bulls, they constitute a good percentage of the population of animal control you have your answer.

Can someone tell me when the breed or look of a dog became a target for eradication? How did we go from the very sane policy of  ’if a dog attacks a human, he will be destroyed by animal control’  to this folly?

Amending the Humane Act to work against itself is the new popular pursuit of a particular group of Republicans. This is not a political statement, merely a factual one. These Ag-Gag laws (ag = agricultural) criminalize gathering proof of animal abuse in the only way available to build a case, and that is going under cover as an employee in a factory farm or puppy mill. Without the use of this strategy, you cannot gather enough evidence of repeated abuse to warrant a court case.

This 1st Amendment assault is meant as a companion to the Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act, designed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to shut down pursuit of proof of animal abuse by threat of being charged with Terrorism. It smacks of the same dishonest tactics used to win elections when a party is unelectable…gerrymandering and excluding voters from voting.

A similar concept was applied by Big Agriculture to squash criticism of crops and, something Oprah will probably never forget, meat, husbandry, slaughter, and packaging, calling comments like “I’ll never touch another hamburger” defamatory. Apparently the concept of being defamatory trumps truth-telling. What was said about meat were facts. Make no mistake, these laws are intended to close the doors on free speech, the press, forgoing any notion of transparency. They are the final step in unraveling animal protection laws mentioned here in a April 2011 post.

The likes of ALEC and their ilk want to ensure consumers know little about the food they feed their families as evidenced by their legislative demands to Congress. Slaughtering practices that lead to e coli and salmonella outbreaks will be kept private, and in the case of puppy factory farms, if ALEC successfully seals their agenda in law, mills will be able to operate with impunity. Animal welfare will not be a consideration because the only agents in charge of protecting animals will be the USDA. How has that worked out for animals so far?

Many dairy, cattle, pork, poultry, soy and corn farmers not practicing sustainable and/or organic farming models are aligned with ALEC, as is Monsanto according to Huffington Post’s Aly Miller. This is not a new issue. It started in Kansas in 2000 which made undercover videotaping and photographing at farms a crime. If you look, you’ll see a history of these bills being brought up for vote, voted down, enacted then immediately rescinded in several States. Seven States have enacted Ag-Gag laws, six are pending and three have withdrawn according to the Huffington Post article.

Illinois has a proposed Ag-Gag law in the House. Republican State Senator Chapin Rose has sponsored SB1532 to amend the Illinois Humane Care for Animals Act to gift the Department of Agriculture with the power to refer any complaint it determines as not valid to the State’s Attorney for criminal charges. This is the same Senator who co-sponsored a bill to bring back horse slaughter to Illinois, restrict certain types of horse meat from regulation and repeal restrictions on horse meat for human consumption. (IL residents, Rose can be reached through is website, just in case you had something you want to share with him.)

Do you have similar bills pending in your State? If you have experience fighting this legislation – please share.

Further Reading:

NYTimes Taping of Farm Cruelty