The Saint Francis Animal Sanctuary in Vermilion, Ohio is trying to find loving homes for several special dogs.

Director Deb Parker says careless breeding at an Ohio puppy mill has left a litter of young doggies blind.

Parker explains the puppies were born with a condition called microphthalmia, which happens when two dachshunds with the dominant “dapple” gene, are breed together.

Parker stresses that even though these puppies are blind, they are normal in every other way, and are likely to have a normal life span, and provide great companionship for a caring and patient owner.

Parker says her sanctuary is one of the few in the United States that accepts pets regardless of their special needs or the expense involved to treat and care for them.

She blames puppy mills for breeding thousands upon thousands of dogs each year that are sold for inflated prices in pet shops. They often go unwanted and are later put to death.

Saint Francis Animal Sanctuary has many more pets that are in need of homes. The shelter can also use additional volunteers and monetary donations.

 Share now!

Nature’s Variety has expanded its voluntary recall of Chicken Formula Raw Frozen Diets for dogs and cats to include the “Best If Used By” dates of 10/29/10 and 11/9/10 because these products may be contaminated with Salmonella.  Salmonella can affect animals and there is risk to humans from handling contaminated pet products. People handling pet food can become infected with Salmonella, especially if they have not thoroughly washed their hands after having contact with the product 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 become lethargic and have diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, fever, or vomiting. Some pets may experience only a decreased appetite, fever, or abdominal pain. If your pet has consumed any of the affected products and is experiencing any of these symptoms, please contact your veterinarian.

The recall includes the following products with a “Best If Used By” date of 10/29/10 or 11/9/10:

• UPC#7 69949 60131 9 – Chicken Formula 0.75 lb trial sized medallions
• UPC#7 69949 60130 2 – Chicken Formula 3 lb medallions
• UPC#7 69949 60120 3 – Chicken Formula 6 lb patties
• UPC#7 69949 60121 0 – Chicken Formula 2 lb single chubs

In an abundance of caution, Nature’s Variety has also chosen to expand this voluntary recall to include all Chicken Formula and Organic Chicken Formula Raw Frozen Diets for dogs and cats with any “Best If Used By” date on or before 2/5/11.  Nature’s Variety has elected to clear the market of raw frozen chicken diets as it implements a state-of-the-art new food safety process called High Pressure Pasteurization for use on all Nature’s Variety Raw Frozen Diets.

The products included in the expanded recall are any Chicken Formula or Organic Chicken Formula Raw Frozen Diet with a “Best If Used By” date on or before 2/5/11, including:

• UPC#7 69949 60131 9 – Chicken Formula 0.75 lb trial sized medallions
• UPC#7 69949 60130 2 – Chicken Formula 3 lb medallions
• UPC#7 69949 60120 3 – Chicken Formula 6 lb patties
• UPC#7 69949 60121 0 – Chicken Formula 2 lb single chubs
• UPC#7 69949 50121 3 – Chicken Formula 12 lb case of chubs
• UPC#7 69949 60137 1 – Organic Chicken Formula 3 lb medallions
• UPC#7 69949 60127 2 – Organic Chicken Formula 6 lb patties

The “Best If Used By” date is located on the back of the package above the safe handling instructions.  The affected product was distributed through retail stores and internet sales in the United States and Canada.

No other Raw Frozen Diets are involved in this expansion other than chicken, and no other Nature’s Variety products are involved.

Nature’s Variety now uses High Pressure Pasteurization on their Raw Frozen Diets as a unique process to kill pathogenic bacteria through high-pressure, water-based technology.  Having incorporated this state-of-the-art technology on a portion of their raw product offerings in late 2009, Nature’s Variety was able to confidently implement the process universally on all Raw Frozen Diets after the 2/11/10 recall in order to enhance food safety.  Nature’s Variety also utilizes a test and hold protocol to ensure that all High Pressure Pasteurized Raw Frozen Diets test negative for harmful bacteria before being released for sale.

“Nature’s Variety believes replacing all raw frozen chicken products on the market with new raw frozen chicken products that use High Pressure Pasteurization is an important and responsible step in order to reinforce consumer confidence and trust,” stated Reed Howlett, CEO of Nature’s Variety.  ”By recalling all raw frozen chicken products with ‘Best If Used By’ dates on or before 2/5/11, we can provide our pet parents with new raw frozen chicken products that have been processed through High Pressure Pasteurization. Adopting High Pressure Pasteurization is an important step to ensure that our products meet the strictest quality and food safety standards.”

Howlett stated, “Our commitment to consumers in the future is the same as it’s been in the past – to offer Raw Frozen Diets made from the highest quality ingredients, made in our own plant in the Midwest, by people who care deeply about pet nutrition, health, and happiness.”

If you are a consumer and have purchased one of these products, please return the unopened product to your retailer for a full refund or replacement.  If your package has been opened, please dispose of the raw food in a safe manner by securing it in a covered trash receptacle.  Then, bring your receipt (or the empty package in a sealed bag) to your local retailer for a full refund or replacement.

Consumers with additional questions can call the Nature’s Variety dedicated Customer Care line 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at 800-374-3142.  For additional resources about High Pressure Pasteurization or other Nature’s Variety food safety protocols, visit www.naturesvariety.com.

About Nature’s Variety

Nature’s Variety specializes in natural, holistic dog and cat food.  The line of premium products was developed by families who have been practicing sustainable agriculture for more than 140 years, raising quality livestock and growing crops in America’s heartland.  Nature’s Variety offers the purest forms of pet nutrition – including a wide variety of protein choices in every pet food form (raw frozen diets, dry kibble diets, canned diets, and treats).  For more information about Nature’s Variety, visit www.naturesvariety.com.

 Share now!

A 72-year-old dog owner has won what may be a landmark decision against the country’s leading maker of pet care products and fueled the ongoing debate over the safety of topical flea and tick treatments.

A Texas jury awarded Frank Bowers $4,440.75 in the small claims court action he filed against Hartz Mountain Corporation. In this David-versus-Goliath court battle — believed to be the first small claims court action of its kind — Bowers alleged that Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops caused the death of his beloved Olde English Bulldog, Diesel.

The six-member jury deliberated less than 30 minutes before reaching a unanimous decision in favor of Bowers, who was widely considered the underdog in the case.

“When the bailiff walked in the courtroom and said we have a unanimous decision, I nearly passed out,” said Bowers, who represented himself in the court action. “The jury said ‘we find Mr. Bowers’ integrity outweighed what was presented by (Hartz) attorney. He lost an animal of value and all costs he’s out are awarded to him.’”

“I just literally went numb,” Bowers added. “I caught up with three jurors in the hallway after the hearing. All I said to them was: ‘thank you, thank you, thank you.’ And they just said: ‘we did our job.’”

Hartz told ConsumerAffairs.com that it believed the case was “without merit,” but did not appeal because of the time and cost involved.

Sense of justice

For Bowers, the jury’s decision brings closure and a sense of justice to an emotional issue that started at 8:30pm on August 7, 2008. On that warm summer night in Texas, Bowers applied Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops to the 14-month-old, 68-pound, Diesel.

“I nipped off the top of the tube and put it on his back,” Bowers recalled. “I precisely used it as directed – nothing more, nothing less than directed.” By early the next morning Diesel had become gravelly ill.

“I went to my garage to work and I smelled this odor from excretion,” Bowers said. “Diesel was laying on the floor. He was shaking and having spasms of some kind. And he was passing a horrible odor of diarrhea.” Bowers called his daughter, who told him to immediately take the ailing dog to the vet.

Diesel’s health continued its rapid decline during the ride to his vet’s office, Bowers said.

“He continued to have bowel movements on the way. When we got to the vet’s office, he couldn’t walk. They got one of those stainless steel tables and took him back to an exam room.”

The veterinarian asked Bowers a battery of questions about Diesel, including one that caught him off guard.

“The vet asked me if I’d put any flea treatment on him,” Bowers said. “And I said: ‘yes, last night.’ I told him what it was and went back to the store to get a tube to show him.”

The vet, he said, took one look at the Hartz Ultra Guard Pro Flea and Tick Drops and shook his head. “He said: ‘Oh, my God. He’s going to have kidney failure.’”

By 4 o’clock the next morning, Diesel’s kidneys had shut down.

“He was in total renal failure,” Bowers said. “The vet wanted permission to euthanize him. I said you know what’s best and I don’t want any animal to suffer. “I picked Diesel up around 7am and took him out in the country and buried him on my daughter’s 10 acres.”

This painful chapter in Bowers’ life happened in less than 35 hours – from the night he applied the flea and tick drops to the morning of Diesel’s death.

He wanted answers

Bowers wanted answers. He wanted to know why Diesel’s health deteriorated so quickly.

The plain-spoken Texan went straight to the source. He called Hartz.

“But they did not care to discuss this with me,” Bowers said of the company’s customer service representatives. “They insinuated that I did something wrong. “At that point, I said my dog is dead and I need you pay. It’s about $4,000.”

Hartz balked at his suggestion, Bowers said.

“They said we won’t pay that, sir. It’s a risk you take when you use our products. I asked for this person’s supervisor, but she hung up on me.”

Bowers then sent the company a letter about Diesel’s death.

“I got no response,” he said. “This irritated me. They acted like I didn’t exist.

“About two months later, someone (from Hartz) called me and told me it was my fault (that Diesel died) or neglect that caused the death and they were not responsible.”

Bowers contacted a few attorneys to see if they’d take his case. “But none wished to be bothering Hartz as there was not enough money,” he said. The determined pet owner, however, didn’t give up or back down.

He took matters into his own hands and represented himself in court, specifically Small Claims Court, Precinct 3, in Travis County, Texas. Consumers in the Lone Star State can seek damages of up to $10,000 in their small claims court proceedings. Texas also allows jury trials in small claims court actions.

“I filed papers in small claims court,” said Bowers, who lives in Austin, Texas. “But the court called me a while later and said I needed to re-file my case because Hartz did not respond.”

Bowers filed his case again on July 28, 2009. “And this time, Hartz did respond to the court,” he said. “The court sent the company a registered and non-registered letter about my case. An attorney contacted the court and said she represented Hartz.”

The court wanted Bowers and Hartz to resolve the case through mediation. But that process wasn’t too productive, Bowers said.

“I looked at the girl (Hartz’ attorney) square in the eyes and said: ‘do you have a check for this amount — $4,400?’ She said no. I said ‘then this mediation is over. At this time, there is nothing to negotiate.’”

Bowers and Hartz’ attorney then went back and talked to the judge.

“The judge said we’ll have to reschedule for another appearance,” Bowers said. “But I told the judge that I wanted a trial by jury. She said that’s your privilege. The attorney (for Hartz) didn’t like it. She wanted to settle this between her and I.

“Here I am — 72-year-olds old. I have a high school education. I don’t have a law degree. But I still wanted a trial by jury. The judge asked me if I thought I could get a jury verdict in my favor and I said I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t.”

Day in court

Bowers’ day in court finally arrived on January 12, 2010.

Before the trial, each side had a chance to question a pool of potential jurors.

“I chose not to ask them any questions,” Bowers said. “But Hartz’ attorney kicked a few potential jurors off because they had pets. She also asked the jurors if they’d had any problems in the past with pet medications. She didn’t want any pet owners or people who had problems with pet medications on the jury. There were also no vets on the jury.”

In the end, a jury of three men and three women heard the case.

“The trial took less than two hours,” Bowers said. “I wasn’t able to tell the jury everything I wanted to.”

The judge, for example, wouldn’t allow Bowers to enter into evidence any of his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documents about the adverse reactions dogs and cats have experienced from topical flea and tick products. The vets he wanted to call as witnesses also couldn’t make it to court that day.

“I had no witnesses,” Bowers said. “I was riding the brass rail by myself.” And he was up against Hartz’ savvy attorney, who he learned had taken a special course on flea and tick products to prepare her for the case.

“Hartz had all kinds of statements about flea and tick products and they had everything notarized so it could be entered into evidence,” Bowers said. “I didn’t know I needed to do that (get documents notarized). Hartz had statements from their vets, too.”

During the trial, Hartz also cross-examined Bowers about Diesel’s death. He’s glad they did.

“That’s when I got in the information that they wouldn’t let me enter,” Bowers said. “I entered it by blurting it from the witness box. The attorney asked me a question like ‘how did I know it was Hartz that killed my animal?’ And I said Hartz has killed many other animals.

“The attorney was screaming to get me to shut up and I just kept talking,” Bowers added. “The judge then told me to shut up. At that point, I looked at the judge and said ‘I’m sorry.’ And then I looked at the jury and smiled.”

Used as directed?

Hartz’ attorney also suggested that Bowers didn’t apply the flea and tick drops as directed.

“They screamed that over and over,” Bowers said. “But I precisely used it as directed.”

Hartz and other makers of fleas and tick products often cite the misuse of these treatments for adverse reactions. Pet owners, they say, may put a flea and tick product intended for a dog on a cat. Or they may apply too much flea and tick product on their pets.

Last summer, the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center also studied its data on topical flea and tick products. That study revealed the likelihood of severe adverse reactions was significantly less when dogs and cats were treated according to directions.

“From the data we have collected, the adverse reactions tend to be mild, like skin sensations and stomach upset,” the ASPCA’s Dr. Steven Hansen said after the organization released its study. “We don’t have very many cases of true neurological issues when these products are properly used.”

Bowers, however, repeatedly told ConsumerAffairs.com that he used the Hartz flea and ticks drops as directed when he applied them to Diesel. He also told us the court didn’t give him the chance to cross-examine any of Hartz’ witnesses during the trial. “I wasn’t asked to,” he said. “I asked the judge why I could ask any questions and she said ‘that’s procedure.’”

The jury, however, wasn’t swayed by the witnesses or documents Hartz used in its defense.

After deliberating for less than 30 minutes, the jurors ruled in Bowers favor.

“I didn’t know what to think when I heard that,” he said, adding the $4,440 he won covers the cost of Diesel and the dog’s vet bills. “I was dumbfounded.”

Bowers is convinced the jury sided with him because of one issue that surfaced during the trial: whether the chemical Phenothrin, which is in Hartz Ultra Guard Flea and Tick Drops, is the same or similar to the chemical Permethrin. Bowers said he argued that, according to his “carnal knowledge,” those two are the same chemical compound.

“I kid you not, that is the thing that saved my case,” he said.

Hartz vehemently disputes that contention, saying those are completely different ingredients.

“The trade name for Phenothrin is Sumithrin,” the company’s spokeswoman, Anne Isenhower, told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Permethrin is a completely different ingredient that Hartz does not use in any of our on-animal products in the United States.”

Hartz also downplayed Bowers’ allegations and the jury’s decision. “This case was without merit and the allegations weren’t supported by evidence (presented in the trial),” said Isenhower, senior vice president, with GolinHarris, Hartz’ public relations firm. Hartz, however, did not appeal the jury’s decision because of the time and cost involved to pursue such action, Isenhower said.

Asked if Bowers’ case marked the first time a consumer has successfully sued Hartz over one of its topical flea and tick products, Isenhower said: “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”

She had an identical comment when asked if Bowers’ case was the first small claims court victory against Hartz. “Yes, we believe so. We are not aware of any verdict against Hartz flea & tick drops.”

Safety defended

In spite of the jury’s decision, Isenhower defended the safety of Hartz flea and tick products.

“We’ve conducted extensive analysis of the adverse event reporting on our products as well as all topic treatments in the market,” she said. “Although Hartz is the leader in flea and tick retail sales, we are less than three percent of all adverse effects reported to the EPA in 2008 for topical dog flea and tick treatments.”

The safety of topical or “spot-on” flea and tick products has come under “intensified” scrutiny by the EPA for the past 11 months.

The agency started that probe last April, saying it had received more than 44,000 reports of adverse reactions associated with spot-on flea and tick products.

“Adverse reactions reported range from mild effects such as skin irritation to more serious effects such as seizures and, in some cases, the death of the pet,” the EPA said.

Data delayed

The agency told ConsumerAffairs.com that it planned to release its findings last fall. The EPA, however, has since delayed that release date.

“Due to the large amount of data and the complex technical issues associated with the review of the data, our report is not ready for public release,” the agency’s spokesman, Dale Kemery, told us in December 2009. “We anticipate publicly releasing the document in early 2010.”

The EPA will post its findings about topical flea and tick products, and any regulatory action it may take, on its Web site.

In the meantime, animal experts recommend pet owners consult their veterinarians about which flea and tick product to use on their dogs or cats.

Beware

Back in Texas, Bowers warns pet owners to be “earthly” aware of any topical flea and tick products they put on their animals.

“I think I’ll utilize just plain soap and water,” he said. “I use Head and Shoulders shampoo on my dogs now. I bathe them every time I see them scratching. “We used to get Myrtle Bush when I was a child growing up in Louisiana,” he added. “It was a natural killer of fleas.”

Bowers is also keenly aware that his legal victory could have ripple effects in courtrooms across the country. He suspects his case may serve as a rallying call for other pet owners who’ve seen their dogs or cats suffer burns, blisters, seizures, neurological problems, or even die after using topical flea and tick products.

His case, he said, may open the floodgates for similar lawsuits nationwide.

“I think this case will make pet owners wonder why they have not gone forward with their cases in small claims court,” Bowers said. “And if they do, my advice to them if get a trial by jury; I would never accept a non-jury trial.”

The amount of money consumers can recover in small claims court varies by state. And some states do not allow trials by jury in small claims court. ConsumerAffairs.com has a comprehensive small claims court guide.

 Share now!

Dynamite Marketing will deliver more than 2,000 pounds of its Super Premium natural dog food to the Idaho Humane Society on March 10 at 10:30 a.m. The donation is valued at $3,000 and is enough to feed the approximately 200 dogs for 125 days.

The gift is the result of Dynamite’s Facebook contest, in which Dynamite pledged to donate a pound of natural dog food for every Facebook fan who has signed up since Jan. 1.

In addition, Dynamite will enter the names of all Facebook fans into a drawing, and will donate 200 pounds of natural dog food to the shelter of the winner’s choice.

The gift is in keeping with Dynamite’s tradition of making charitable donations to motivate sales. Last year, the company offered its top distributors a choice of a personal prize such as a trip to Maui or double the value as a donation to charity. The result was $22,000 in charitable donations.

“People who buy our products are passionate about their animals and about making the world a better place,” said Callie Novak, Dynamite vice president. “We attract people who are driven by projects that help animals, improve soil, save lives and make the world a better place. We knew that for many of them, giving to a charity actually would be more of a motivation than a personal prize or special offer.”

“We are extremely grateful for the donation, as well as the visibility that the competition has brought to the humane society,” said Chris Wiersema, development director at the Idaho Humane Society.

A family-owned business that has specialized in animal nutrition for four generations, Dynamite Marketing makes products for virtually every member of the animal kingdom. It has long developed natural dog food and nutritional supplements for prize-winning working dogs and show dogs across the country.

Dynamite uses only natural ingredients, made in the United States for better quality control. Throughout its history, it has always looked at alternatives to animal by-products, antibiotics, chemical preservatives, fumigants, artificial coloring and other additives that have later caused health problems.

Dynamite products are available through more than 4,000 individual distributors across the country.

Additional information is available at www.DynamiteMarketing.com or by calling 1-800-697-7434. The company is based in Meridian, Idaho.

 Share now!

A Queens woman was caught on video beating her 11-month-old English bull dog with a snow shovel.

Maria Aguilar, 36, allegedly crippled the dog with her months of abuse. She was arrested and charged with animal cruelty and criminal possession of a weapon.

The dog, named Spike, suffered a hip fracture, a broken leg, three broken teeth and injuries to his ears. Doctors also say he’s virtually blind in his right eye as a result of his injuries.

The ASPCA visited Aguilar’s home last month after reports of a dog continuously crying. One neighborhood used a camera phone to tape the abuse.

Aguilar initially denied the abuse, but once the ASPCA showed her the video, she confessed to throwing Spike to the ground and then slamming him with a snow shovel.

According to reports, Aguilar’s husband had taken Spike to the vet 12 times in the last seven months.

ASPCA officials say Spike will likely suffer pain and lameness for the rest of his life in light of his injuries.

 Share now!