I was contacted by someone at IAMS and their response can be found in the comments section. She explains the video. I’m glad that IAMS seems to be taking seriously the care of the dogs and cats that they test their food on. I still maintain that IAMS is not a high quality dog food, given that the first ingredient listed is “chicken by-product meal”. I also have to hold them accountable for their part in the massive pet food recall of 2007 that affected so many pets. I deleted the video that was featured in this article by Healthy Spot, as well as the paragraph relating to it, given that the issue has been resolved, but I feel the rest of the article is still of value.

Here is an important article from Healthy Spot about the state of dog food. This news came out a month ago and I still don’t think enough people know what’s going on, so please pass it on. I can’t express enough how important it is to feed your dogs high quality food. First of all, it’s important for their health. Dogs have a short life span and I know I want to do everything possible to stretch out that time. It is also important that we buy high quality dog food because if we don’t, we are supporting companies that not only don’t care about dogs but are also inhumane and cruel to dogs. If you are feeding your dog products specifically from Procter and Gamble (IAMS and Eukanuba), please consider changing to another brand. I’ll make sure to put up a list of great dog foods to choose from in the next week. Dogs deserve more.     -AG

IAM(S) Disappointed: A Recipe for Disaster

Wednesday, May 12, 2010 @ 09:05 PM
by: Andrew Kim

This past Wednesday, It was announced that Procter & Gamble is acquiring Natura Pet Products.  This is a very sad day for pet parents and a major shift in the pet industry.

Natura is the maker of great foods like EVO, Karma, Innova and California Natural.  It was a family run business since 1992.  Natura owns their own manufacturing plants and were never involved in any pet food recalls.  In order to keep the integrity of the company and free from undue influence, they refused to sell to big box retailers such as Petco, Petsmart and Walmart.  They were a shining example of success through the independent retailer channel with a high quality product.

Now compare Natura to Procter & Gamble.  P&G owns some of the largest names in pet food, IAMS and Eukanuba.   They are sold at all the big box retailers and even at some liquor stores and mini-marts.   Both brands were major offenders in the massive pet food recall of 2007.  The sourcing of cheap ingredients to make money led to the deaths of thousands of pets.

No big secret, Procter & Gamble’s sole motivation is an obligation to shareholders to make a profit.  I know this especially well from my years working at a hedge fund.  As investors, we only wanted to see the management grow the bottom line. The cost is quality.  The cost is our pets.

I am greatly disappointed in the news.  Not because we carry most of the Natura lines, but rather because we are about to see this great company and its products destroyed over time.   Leaving the consumers like us, even fewer options in the marketplace.   The owners, the Rademakers, leave 25 years of building a reputable brand and now have cashed out to “enjoy the rest of their life without the risk and worry associated with operating a large and complex business”.  Sadly, the Rademakers or the CEO Peter Atkins will not stay on in any capacity with the company after the deal closes. They will collect their checks and not look back.

I don’t anticipate any immediate changes by P&G because of the short term scrutiny they will be under to keep things running the same way Natura did.  However, given the history of P&G in pet foods, it really is just a matter of time.  It may not be as drastic as a change in the formula (though likely, in the not so distant future) but simple things that the consumer may never know and would make all the difference such as the sourcing of their ingredients and the integrity of the manufacturing process.

A lot of consumers also may not understand the pressures manufacturers will be placed under once they start to go into big box retailers.  There are many examples of this in the pet food industry.  Take for example Solid Gold.  They were a leader in the holistic pet foods and in the independent channel.  When they started selling into Petco, they ran into supply issues and had to change and move their manufacturing process.  This is why, at Healthy Spot we avoid names that you find at these big box stores.  The financial pressures to supply these stores often force the manufacturers to make cost cutting changes.

To make matters worse, Walmart recently announced a billion dollar initiative to move into the pet space which does not bode well for pet product manufacturers under the weight of the retail goliath.  Did you know the world’s best selling dog food is Walmart’s very own Ol’ Roy?  Other lines they carry included IAMS, Pedigree, Beneful & Purina.  Compare the list of the names sold at Walmart to the names found on the recall list in 2007.  Is it likely it is a major coincidence or rather a product of the financial pressure of the big box retailers?

With the independent retailers and pet parents shocked at the deal, Natura and P&G will attempt to persuade us all that they will be the same company with better resources.  Consumers are smarter, we know better.  It holds the same amount of weight of saying that a slow conservative driver passing over the keys to a driver with history of reckless endangerment will have the same results.  After all, it is the same car.  But again we know that the car is not the issue.  It is the driver.   With the changing of the ownership at Natura, in time you will see different results.  Count on it.

At Healthy Spot, we will be proactively seeking new brands that remain independent to insure that we continue to provide the highest quality products made with the highest level of integrity.  Since the deal doesn’t close until end of June and we anticipate little change immediately, we view this as an excellent opportunity to identify newer and better products that meet our strict standards.  Also we still hope that, by some luck, the deal does not close.  However if it does, we will not remain idle and will be ready for action.

We are saddened because we know that we may lose some customers as a result of our new strategy to replace the Natura lines out with comparable alternatives. For us, it is more important that we don’t lose our soul.   We will remain true to who we are, our standards and what our role is.  We are here to serve as a partner with the customer, not the manufacturer, to provide the best products available.  P&G pet products have and will fall short of our measures.

As a consumer, we have the ability to make changes.  It is critical for us to stay informed and make educated choices.  What we buy, is our vote and our voice to these companies.  Ask yourself the question, why would you want to continue feed your dogs brands that sell out for profit and may have questionable integrity? Why continue to give your dog the brands that have been involved in recalls and killed thousands of pets?  Purchasing these brands is telling these companies that we are okay with their business practices. Doesn’t Spot deserve better?

At Healthy Spot, we understand that our dogs are more than just pets; they are family.   They do deserve better and we are here to help.

Related posts:

1. High-Quality Dog Food Where Art Thou??
2. Taste of the Wild Dog Food
3. List of High Quality Dog Foods

Related posts:

1. Omaha: Reward Set for Tips on Dog Fighting
2. The Unexpected Pit Bull
3. Help Find Roxy the Catahoula Leopard Dog a Home!

By Kevin Cole
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITER

Nebraska Humane Society officials are offering a $1,000 reward for anyone with information about a dog fighting ring they believe is operating in the Omaha area.

Authorities on Wednesday seized 13 pit bulls from a rural Douglas County home. The seizure came after a 33-year-old man was sentenced in Douglas County Court to 10 days in jail for animal cruelty and keeping animals without a kennel license.

Mark Langan, the Nebraska Humane Society vice president of field operations, said the dogs were housed in filthy conditions.
He said the presence of the dogs and other information leads investigators to believe that a dog fighting ring is operating in the metropolitan area.

“We have developed information over the past four years that this operation sells dogs to dog fighters,” Langan said. “We want to find those people. That’s why we are offering the reward money.”

Langan said the dogs that were seized “are in relatively good shape,” and he did not believe any of them would have to be put to sleep. Humane Society veterinarians found only minor illnesses among the dogs, he said.

Pit bulls have been confiscated twice before from the Douglas County property based on conditions of cruelty, Langan said.
It’s a felony in Nebraska to promote dog fights, train dogs for fighting, sell dogs with the knowledge they will be used to fight or to watch dog fights. The penalty is up to five years in prison.

Anyone with information about dog fighting is asked to call the Humane Society at 402-444-7800, ext. 1.

Related posts:

1. Momba the Pit Bull Goes Home
2. Big Omaha 2010
3. April is Prevent Animal Cruelty Month

I don’t get the appeal of wearing fur. I’m not a die hard vegan or a member of PETA  and I didn’t care when President Obama killed that fly… but people wearing fur really bugs the heck out of me. I’m guessing that my dogs would feel the same way. That’s why I love this clever “Auntie-Fur” shirt by Orangegreens. Now we can both express our disgust for fur.

Related posts:

1. Ever Since I Can Remember I’ve Been Poppin My Collar
2. Eagle Fan Turned Away For Wearing Anti-Vick Shirt
3. Adopt, Don’t Buy

Watch this short video by the Stray Animal Foundation. Profound, right? Pass it on.

Hat tip to The Dog Files

Related posts:

1. ‘Last Chance Highway’ Takes the South’s Stray Dogs to New Homes
2. Found My Animal
3. The Search Dog Foundation

By Sharon L. Peters Special for, USA TODAY

.
A long-practiced custom — chaining up a dog outside, where it spends most of its life — seems to be inching its way toward unacceptability.
Passionate arguments by grass-roots groups, animal welfare organizations and animal lovers have reached the ears and altered the habits of many dog owners in recent years, and now lawmakers are responding.

“Stabbing into a long-standing societal practice is never easy,” says animal behaviorist Stephen Zawistowski of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which, like many welfare groups, has been steering dog owners away from chaining.

Thirteen states, including California, Vermont, Texas and Maryland, have passed laws restricting tethering or chaining, according to the Animal Law Coalition, and bills are being considered now in seven more states. Most of the state laws restrict the manner in which dogs are chained (requiring shelter, for example, and minimum tether lengths); most proposed new bills set similar restrictions and limit the hours a dog is chained.

A bill proposed in Illinois, however, would be the strictest state-level law if it passed — the first requiring that any time a dog is tethered, it be visible to its owner.

Scores of communities also have passed their own laws. A few, including Miami/Dade County, Fla.; Asheville, N.C.; and Fort Worth, have passed laws banning all unattended tethering. Some, like Little Rock, ban unattended tethering to stationary objects such as trees, but not to cables and pulley systems. And some ban tethering during certain hours or for long periods.

‘It’s easy to forget them’

Having a chained-up “outside dog” was common in earlier decades. But constantly tethered dogs are at far greater risk of strangling or injuring themselves; illness or painful conditions are rarely discovered early; dogs grow frustrated from isolation, insufficient exercise and inability to flee from ill-intentioned people or animals; and they’re more apt to bite or kill than untethered dogs, studies show. Moreover, says Adam Goldfarb of the Humane Society of the United States, “When they’re out there, it’s easy to forget them.” They’re often underfed and parasite-ridden, and lack water and shelter.

The surge in anti-tethering laws occurred quietly and quickly. Six or eight years ago, only a few were on the books, but in “2005 to 2006,” says ALC founder Laura Allen, “several suddenly emerged” — though, she points out, the trend has been to pass tethering laws with few restrictions first, then move to more restrictive ones.

Indeed, says Goldfarb, “some of the laws are very modest.” And proponents say much remains to be done to change long-held ideas.

Anti-chaining group takes action

“There are still thousands and thousands of dogs leading isolated lives on chains,” says Tamira Thayne, who founded the non-profit anti-chaining group Dogs Deserve Better in Pennsylvania and is regarded by some as the godmother of anti-tethering public awareness. She has twice been convicted of breaking the law while checking out calls about chained dogs, including last week, when she was convicted of defiant trespass for taking food, water and bedding straw to what she described as two “very underfed” dogs chained to doghouses when the wind chill was minus-11 degrees.

Dogs Deserve Better has grown to 121 area reps in several states, and the group receives almost 900 e-mails a week from people seeking advice on how to drum up support for local anti-tethering laws or asking how to get animal control to respond to chained-dog complaints.

Many imagine tethering to be mostly a rural practice, but that isn’t the case, Zawistowski says. Urban dogs are often chained to fire escapes and porches; some country dogs are chained, “but I see it primarily as a suburban practice.” And owners, he says, usually offer the same explanation: “My family always tethered their dogs, I’ve always tethered my dogs and they’ve been fine.”

But today, “our understanding of animal behavior and care has advanced,” Zawistowski says.

Laws won’t completely abolish tethering, partly because enforcement requires manpower, experts say.

But another reality is the “chasm between those who view dogs as part of the family and those who have a more utilitarian view of them,” Goldfarb says.

Still, many believe, as Zawistowski does, that when laws are proposed, important conversations take place: “Key questions surrounding tethering laws are starting to bring out what we need to bring out.”

Related posts:

1. Animal Abuser Online Registry Proposed in California
2. April is Prevent Animal Cruelty Month
3. 9 Signs of Animal Neglect & Cruelty

9 SIGNS OF NEGLECT, CRUELTY

• Tick/infestation Such a condition,if left untreated by a veterinarian, can lead to an animal’s death.

• Wounds on the animal’s body.

• Inadequate grooming, such as matted hair, which is painful and leads to serious injuries.

• Extremely thin or starving animals.

• A collar so tight that it eats into an animal’s neck.

• An owner striking or otherwise physically abusing an animal.

• Pets repeatedly left alone without food and water, often chained up in a yard.

• Pets that have been hit by cars, or are showing any of the signs listed above, and have not been taken to a veterinarian.

• Pets kept in small cages or outside without shelter in extreme weather conditions.

Related posts:

1. April is Prevent Animal Cruelty Month
2. Animal Abuser Online Registry Proposed in California
3. Grieving Chihuahua Becomes Mom to 9 Kittens

.
.

Photo: Ramon Muniz of the LAPD Animal Cruelty Task Force walks with fellow task force officer Kim Lormans through the North Central Animal Shelter kennels, looking for animals that may have been abused by their owners. Credit: Brian Vander Brug / Los Angeles Times

Animal abusers may soon be on same level as sex offenders by getting listed in an online registry, complete with their addresses and where they are employed, if one California senator has his way.

Friday, state Sen. Dean Florez (D) announced a bill for a statewide registry in California. If passed it would create the nation’s first criminal registry for animal abusers.

Written with the aid of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, the proposed bill would require any person convicted of a felony involving animal cruelty to register with the police and provide an array of personal information along with a current photograph, much like sex offenders. The information, along with the registrants’ specific offense, would then be posted online, much like Petabuse.com, which offers limited listings.

The registry would list people convicted of a range of crimes from acts of violence (torture, mutilation, intentional killings, etc.), sexual abuse and animal fighting as well as neglect, including hoarding. Such registries would help protect animals, pet guardians and communities by preventing repeat offenses from anyone with an established history of abusing animals.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund has even launched a campaign, Expose Animal Abusers, to help states establish public animal abuser registries. The website enables the public to contact their state lawmakers and urge them to propose legislation for the creation of state registries.

They pointed to a number of instances in which a registry would be beneficial to prevent future abuse of animals. One of those was Shon Rahrig. While living in Ohio in 1999, Rahrig allegedly adopted several cats and a puppy from local shelters and tortured them sadistically. He poked out the eyes of a cat named Misty, broke her legs and jaw, cut off her paws, and left her bleeding in a laundry basket. His girlfriend turned him in, and he took a plea bargain that admitted abuse of only one animal. Rahrig was forbidden to own an animal for five years, but he was subsequently seen at an adoption event in California./p>

Florez said he is confident that he has the votes needed to move the bill forward and estimates that the registry would cost less than $1 million to produce.

“I think people think, well, if Dean is supporting it,” he said, “it can’t be that off the wall.”

Related posts:

1. April is Prevent Animal Cruelty Month
2. Rolling Dog Ranch Animal Sanctuary
3. Yay, Iowa!

• Purchased pit bulls for dog fighting
• Trained & bred pit bulls for dog fighting
• Provided funding for dog fighting competitions
• Used innocent family dogs as “bait” dogs
• Electrocuted, hung, drowned and shot dogs to death
• Fought dogs to the death

.

I haven’t really said much on this site about the whole Michael Vick situation because it just makes me so angry, but this is ridiculous.  This man killed dogs with his own bare hands-he hung them, he electrocuted them, he drowned them…and not just once, but over YEARS.  The Eagles organization should be ashamed of themselves for employing someone who would do such atrocious things over many years to innocent animals.  To add insult to injury, they should be ashamed of turning away a fan who just wanted to make a statement and try to educate people so that the deaths/beatings of all those dogs would not be in vain.

.

This is hard to look at, but THIS is what dog fighting looks like:

Think of this picture before you start to talk to me about second chances.

.

To learn more about Kori Martin’s experience, check out Megan Drake’s article from the Philadelphia Dog Advocate Examiner.  If this story ticks you off as much as it does me, make sure to read Megan Drake’s article and then tell the Philadelphia Eagle’s management what you think.

Related posts:

1. Omaha: Reward Set for Tips on Dog Fighting
2. Kids Bulldog Shirt
3. My Baby Needs This Shirt!

Related posts:

1. Adopt-A-Pet: Helping People Rescue Dogs
2. Don’t Lick The Dog
3. Happy Mother’s Day!