12 Pet Brand Crises and Recalls That Tested Owner Trust

Pet brand crises erode owner trust when owners cannot tell what went wrong, which products are affected or who is responsible. The twelve cases below run from the 2007 Menu Foods melamine recall, which dvm360 reported involved an estimated 1,000 products, to Freshpet's 2022 recall of a single lot. Each entry gives a sourced timeline and one lesson for pet brands.

Reviewed October 2026. Part of Everything-PR's pet industry coverage. Claims that rest on allegations are labeled as allegations, and company or agency figures are labeled as such. The Lesson lines are EPR's analysis, not findings by a regulator.

Which crises first showed how fragile owner trust is?

The three earliest cases, Menu Foods in 2007, China-sourced jerky treats from 2007 to 2014 and Diamond Pet Foods in 2012, each began with a contaminated ingredient or plant and each reached federal investigators.

1. Menu Foods, 2007: Melamine in Wheat Gluten

Menu Foods, a Canadian contract manufacturer, contacted the FDA on March 15, 2007 and issued the first recall of the melamine crisis the next day, according to JAVMA News. Petfood Industry reported that the cuts-in-gravy foods were thickened with an ingredient sold as wheat gluten that was actually wheat flour spiked with melamine and cyanuric acid, industrial chemicals that may make flour test as if it holds more protein. The FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations later alleged that more than 800 tons of adulterated wheat gluten entered the United States between November 6, 2006 and February 21, 2007.

JAVMA News reported that the FDA had never inspected Menu Foods' Kansas plant before the recall. Menu Foods said in May 2007 that the recall would cost the company at least $45 million, per the dvm360 timeline. Petfood Industry also reported that the crisis led to the FDA Amendments Act of 2007, which required the FDA to write its own pet food labeling regulations.

Lesson: A brand that cannot name its ingredient suppliers and test incoming shipments has no answer ready when owners ask what is in the bowl.

2. China-Sourced Jerky Treats, 2007 to 2014

The FDA's jerky treat investigation began with owner complaints in 2007 and had not identified a cause by 2016. In its May 2014 update, the FDA reported about 4,800 complaints involving more than 5,600 dogs, 24 cats and three people, including more than 1,000 canine deaths, according to Food Safety News. Most of the treats were chicken, duck or sweet potato products sourced from China.

AVMA's JAVMA News reported in 2016 that the FDA had received about 5,300 reports and still had not found a cause. About 1,600 of the 2013 reports arrived in the fourth quarter after the FDA asked veterinarians to report cases, and manufacturers are not required to list the origin of each ingredient.

Lesson: When a regulator cannot name a cause, owners fill the gap with brand names and countries of origin, so a brand needs to publish where each ingredient comes from.

3. Diamond Pet Foods, 2012: Salmonella at One Plant

Dry pet food made at Diamond Pet Foods' Gaston, South Carolina plant was linked to a Salmonella Infantis outbreak that infected 49 people, 47 in 20 U.S. states and two in Canada, according to the CDC's final count. The CDC said multiple brands made at the single plant were linked to illnesses, and called it the second documented outbreak of human salmonellosis linked to dry pet food in the United States.

The case began when the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development found Salmonella in an unopened bag of Diamond Naturals Lamb Meal and Rice collected in mid-March 2012 during routine retail testing, Food Safety News reported. Of the 24 patients with information available, 10 were hospitalized, Food Safety News reported in July 2012.

Lesson: A plant that makes many brands turns one contamination into several brand crises at once, so each brand needs its own test records from that plant.

When did advertising claims become the crisis?

Advertising claims became the crisis in 2014 and 2015, when Blue Buffalo and Purina's Beneful each faced lawsuits over what their marketing said about ingredients.

4. Blue Buffalo, 2014 to 2015: The True Blue Promise

Purina sued Blue Buffalo for false advertising on May 6, 2014, after testing found poultry by-product meal in some of Blue Buffalo's top-selling foods, Petfood Industry reported. Blue Buffalo countersued on May 14, 2014 for defamation, unfair competition and false advertising. On May 6, 2015, Blue Buffalo acknowledged in court that a significant share of the food it sold contained poultry by-product meal, despite advertising that said otherwise.

Blue Buffalo agreed to pay $32 million into a consumer settlement fund and denied wrongdoing, Petfood Industry reported. Purina and Blue Buffalo settled their own lawsuits on November 3, 2016 on confidential terms. In October 2019, the manager of the ingredient facility that supplied the adulterated product pleaded guilty in Missouri federal court.

Lesson: A brand that sells on an absolute promise, such as no by-product meal, carries that promise into court, so every supplier certificate behind it has to hold up to a competitor's lab.

5. Purina Beneful, 2015: Lawsuits Over Propylene Glycol

Dog owner Frank Lucido filed a proposed class action against Nestlé Purina in early February 2015, alleging that Beneful made his three dogs sick and that one died, according to Petfood Industry. The suit sought at least $5 million and pointed to propylene glycol, which the complaint linked to antifreeze, per Veterinary Practice News. These are allegations, and Purina denied them.

Purina called the lawsuit baseless and said propylene glycol is different from the ethylene glycol used in automotive antifreeze. NBC News reported Purina's statement that food-grade propylene glycol is approved as safe for use in human and dog food. EPR's Beneful trust recovery case covers how the lawsuits ended.

Lesson: A viral allegation spreads faster than a regulatory explanation, so a brand needs its ingredient facts published before an owner's lawsuit is filed.

How did contamination recalls play out after 2015?

Five contamination recalls between 2015 and 2022 show the same sequence of discovery, notice and aftermath, with very different levels of precision in the notice.

6. Stella & Chewy's, 2015: Listeria in Routine Testing

Stella & Chewy's recalled products from Lot 111-15 in early July 2015 after the Maryland Department of Agriculture found Listeria monocytogenes in Chewy's Chicken Freeze-Dried Dinner Patties for Dogs during routine surveillance testing, Food Safety News reported. The company said no pet or human illnesses had been reported and recalled every product from that lot nationwide. EPR's Stella & Chewy's recall history covers the company's two 2015 recalls.

Lesson: A recall found by a state's routine test and announced with a lot number gives owners something to check in seconds.

7. Evanger's, 2017: Pentobarbital in Canned Beef

Evanger's Dog and Cat Food Company recalled certain lots of Hunk of Beef canned dog food on February 3, 2017, after the FDA found pentobarbital, a barbiturate, in unopened cans, according to an FDA alert reproduced by Canine Chronicle. The FDA also found it in Against the Grain Pulled Beef cans made in the same facilities with beef from the same supplier, and that brand recalled one lot on February 9. Evanger's said its beef came from a USDA-approved supplier, while the FDA reviewed a bill of lading describing the beef as inedible and for pet food use only, per Food Poisoning Bulletin.

The FDA's warning letter was dated June 29, 2017, and five dogs got sick and one died after eating Hunk of Beef in Au Jus, Food Poisoning Bulletin reported. Food Safety News reported that the FDA rejected a proposal to donate recalled food, citing zero tolerance for pentobarbital in pet food.

Lesson: When a supplier's paperwork and a brand's public statement describe the same ingredient differently, the regulator's document becomes the story.

8. Hill's Pet Nutrition, 2019: Vitamin D Recall

Hill's Pet Nutrition recalled canned dog food in January 2019 over potentially toxic levels of vitamin D, and pet owners filed multiple class actions that February, Petfood Processing reported. Colgate-Palmolive, Hill's parent company, attributed the recall to a supplier error in its filings, as EPR's Hill's 2019 recall page documents.

On July 30, 2021, Chief Judge Julie A. Robinson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas approved a $12.5 million settlement, and the defendants denied the claims, according to plaintiffs' counsel Stueve Siegel Hanson.

Lesson: A supplier error does not move responsibility, because the owner who bought the can sees Hill's name, not the name of the premix maker.

9. Midwestern Pet Foods, 2020 to 2021: Aflatoxin

Midwestern Pet Foods recalled Sportmix dry pet food in late December 2020 for aflatoxin, a toxin produced by mold, and in January 2021 recalled all corn-containing foods made at its Chickasha, Oklahoma plant, according to the National Animal Supplement Council. In March 2021 the company also recalled several brands made at its Monmouth, Illinois plant after samples tested positive for Salmonella.

As of August 9, 2021, the FDA was aware of more than 130 pet deaths and more than 220 illnesses that may be linked to Midwestern brands, Petfood Industry reported. The FDA issued a corporate-wide warning letter that said violations were shared across multiple plants. NPR reported that FDA testing found aflatoxin at 558 parts per billion, against the 20 parts per billion level above which the FDA treats pet food as adulterated. EPR's Midwestern aflatoxin case has the full timeline.

Lesson: A value brand faces the same federal scrutiny as a premium brand when its written preventive controls fall short.

10. Freshpet, 2022: One Lot, Exact Scope

Freshpet announced on June 17, 2022 a voluntary recall of one lot of Freshpet Select Fresh From the Kitchen Home Cooked Chicken Recipe, 4.5 lb bags with a sell-by date of 10/29/22, for potential Salmonella contamination, Petfood Processing reported. The company said it had designated the lot for destruction, but a small portion was inadvertently shipped to retailers in limited markets in the previous two weeks. Freshpet and the FDA had received no reports of illnesses or injuries, and the company said no other products were affected. EPR's Freshpet recall history covers the case in full.

Lesson: A recall notice that names the lot, bag size, sell-by date and UPC lets an owner check a bag in seconds.

Which cases had no recall but still damaged trust?

Two cases, the FDA's grain-free diet inquiry and the Seresto flea collar controversy, damaged trust without a recall, because regulators and reporters raised questions about products that stayed on shelves.

11. FDA Grain-Free Diet Inquiry, 2018 to 2019

The FDA announced in July 2018 that it was investigating reports of canine dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), a heart disease, in dogs eating certain foods with peas, lentils, other legumes or potatoes as main ingredients, according to AAHA NEWStat. Between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2019 the FDA received 524 DCM reports.

On June 27, 2019, the FDA named 16 brands most often reported in DCM cases, led by Acana with 67 cases, Zignature with 64 and Taste of the Wild with 53, per Fox 7 Austin. The FDA said more than 90 percent of the reported products were labeled grain-free, Petfood Industry reported. The agency had not determined the nature of the potential link and did not advise owners to change diets.

Lesson: A regulator's list of brand names is read as a verdict even when the agency says it has found no cause, so a listed brand needs a plain statement of what is and is not established.

12. Seresto Collar, 2021 to 2023: EPA Incident Reports

USA TODAY and the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting reported in March 2021 that the EPA had received more than 75,000 incident reports linked to the Seresto flea and tick collar, including at least 1,698 pet deaths, per USA TODAY coverage on Yahoo News. Elanco, which sells the collar, said it had reviewed the death reports and found no link to the collar, and that incident reports show correlation, not causation.

A congressional subcommittee later cited at least 98,000 incidents and 2,500 pet deaths and urged the EPA to cancel the registration, USA TODAY reported. On July 13, 2023, the EPA said the collar would stay on the market after a multi-year review. It found that the only deaths it rated probable or definite involved strangulation or trauma from the collar, limited approval to five years and required new label warnings, according to AVMA News.

Lesson: When reporters build a story from a regulator's own incident data, the brand has to explain the difference between a report and a finding before the headline sets it.

What do these twelve pet brand cases share?

The twelve cases share three patterns: who surfaced the problem, where the ingredient came from, and how precisely the brand described the scope. This section is EPR's analysis of the cases above, not a finding by a regulator.

The cases split evenly by how they began: four with a company recall (Menu Foods, Hill's, Midwestern and Freshpet), four with a regulator's test or inquiry (Diamond, Stella & Chewy's, Evanger's and the grain-free inquiry), and four with owners, a competitor or a reporter (jerky treats, Blue Buffalo, Beneful and Seresto). A recall plan therefore covers only one of the three ways these crises started.

Four of the twelve trace to a supplier: Menu Foods' imported wheat gluten, Blue Buffalo's by-product meal, Hill's vitamin premix and Evanger's beef. The brand name, not the supplier's, appeared on every notice and in every lawsuit. Blue Buffalo's $32 million is the largest settlement figure among the cases above with a documented amount, and it followed an absolute advertising promise.

The two cases with the narrowest scope, Freshpet and Stella & Chewy's, both involved a single lot and no reported illnesses. The table below turns the patterns into preparation a pet brand can finish before a crisis starts.

The decision for a pet brand is to finish the supplier list, the lot-level test records and the recall notice template before a regulator, a competitor or a reporter asks for them. EPR's earlier analysis of pet product marketing fails covers the label claims that make these crises harder to answer. The full section is at Pets and the Pet Industry on Everything-PR, and the category reference is the 2026 pet industry trade guide.