When we buy food or treats for our dogs, we assume everything is on the up-and-up. But a new document obtained via the California Public Records Act tells a different story. A story where a surprising number of brands appear to be operating without a CA Department of Public Health license. We’re releasing the licensee list publicly, so now you can check for yourself.
Posted by noseofjustice
3 Comments
Some context:
Every dog food and treat sold in California is supposed to be licensed by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) under California law. This is required by the CA Pure Pet Food Act, for both in-state and out-of-state manufacturers, and it’s to ensure products meet the state’s health and safety standards. But in practice, this does not always appear to be followed or enforced.
We know this because of our experience starting a dog treat brand and searching for treat manufacturing partners. Conversations with prospective collaborators would go really well – until we asked about their CA license. Then they’d go radio silent. We noticed this scenario playing out again and again. Spoiler alert: they didn’t have a license.
So we asked the CDPH for a list of licensed companies. They told us no. They don’t publicly share that information. But we found a workaround: the CA Public Records Act, which gives Californians the right to review most documents across CA government departments.
With a Public Records Request, they were legally obligated to give us a copy of the list of licensed companies. And finally, we got it. It was only by meticulously going through this list that we were able to find our own supply chain partners, get licensed, and get our own treat brand off the ground.
But something didn’t sit right about the whole experience. The records didn’t include many of the brands or manufacturers you might expect to see. That couldn’t be right, right? So we requested the list again. And again. A third time. Just to make sure.
Then we went to some pet stores and cross-checked the manufacturers we saw against the records the department provided. Our research revealed as many as 80% of dog food and treats on shelves were seemingly unlicensed. Including everything from smaller brands to big brands you see everywhere.
So what does it all mean? Well, either the records provided by the Department of Health, all three times, are wildly inaccurate, OR there are an awful lot of unlicensed dog foods and treats being sold unlawfully in California, without transparency or enforcement. Neither option is good for dogs.
We reached out to the department for comment, sharing our research and asking: Is there a mistake? Are they licensed? No response.
I reached out to the makers of my dog’s food (who also didn’t appear on the list 😳) with the same question. And got back several paragraphs about how they care about quality, but not a simple yes or no answer about whether they are licensed by CDPH. After pressing some more and sending them links to CA regulations, they claim to be licensed but say they’re unable to provide a copy.
Which seems pretty weird, because it’s not a hard thing to do if you have one.
Whatever’s going on, something doesn’t smell right. And we think this is an important issue to bring to light, not only because it is against California law, but no license means no oversight as to whether manufacturers are following CA health and safety standards or any standards at all.
So we published the previously unreleased licensee data into a public spreadsheet, where pet parents can easily check to see if their dog’s food or treats are actually licensed in the state of California.
We call it Treat Leaks.
(The “leak” is a public record, so there’s nothing inappropriate or confidential here. But the state doesn’t provide a way to access it and most people would never know to ask in the first place.)
Check out the list. See if you can find your dog’s food/treat manufacturer. And if they don’t appear, ask: “why not?” We hope this helps bring more transparency and accountability to California Pet Food, and maybe helps put pressure on companies and regulators to do better with looking out for our pups.
Because after everything dogs do for us, following health regulations seems like the bare minimum we should be doing for them.
hey ima send you a DM
Interesting
So, if companies are skirting the licence process…
There’s something to that process that is expensive.
You got your license. What’s the most expensive part?
You said food and treats.
They are different, but is there a common denominator?
And, could it be that they have 49 licenses, but California was too onerous?