Pet Food Labeling: Page 19

AFIA joins coalition to push for federal GMO labeling solution

The American Feed Industry Association (AFIA) has announced its membership in the newly formed Coalition for Safe Affordable Food (CFSAF), joining a national effort to urge Congress to quickly seek a federal solution and establish standards for the safety and labeling of animal feed, petfood and human food and beverage products made with genetically modified ingredients. “AFIA firmly believes there should be a federal GMO labeling solution protecting consumers by ensuring the safety of both food and feed ingredients produced through the use of modern agricultural biotechnology,” said Leah Wilkinson, AFIA director of ingredients, petfood and state affairs.

Pet Food Labeling

Primera Technology LX900 inkjet color label printer

Pet Food Market

New European petfood legislation: Mind the language

While the impact of the new European regulations on what must be declared on a petfood label is easy to see, it may not be so obvious that their approval has also led to the establishment of a specific compliant terminology to be used in some of the label sections. Using other terms will result in wrong labeling, which can have consequences in terms of both time (negotiation with national authorities) and money (fines) (Meyer, 2013).

The new regulations have established not only a different legislative framework, but also a whole set of specific terminology that must be meticulously applied in order to avoid time-consuming negotiations and potential fines.

Pet Food Market

Study: How petfood purchasing decisions are influenced by packaging, retail channel

A study of US pet owners on how and where they shop for petfood offers some interesting insights for professionals in charge of petfood marketing and packaging design, perhaps even for large companies that have the resources to conduct their own consumer research.

Pet Food Market

Petfood not a factor after all in latest non-GMO legislative failure

A ballot initiative to require many foods and beverages that contain genetically modified ingredients sold in the state of Washington to carry labels failed to pass during November 5 elections, with 55% of voters opposed to the measure. Though earlier news reports claimed petfood was being used as an example by both supporters and opponents of the initiative, petfood-related debates seemed to fade down the stretch, replaced by arguments over cost, health benefits and labeling of human foods. And unlike with a similar proposed law in California last year that was also defeated, petfood industry organizations appeared not to engage in the Washington battle with either words or money.

Confusion on petfood coverage in proposal to label genetically modified foods

Advertisements for a proposal to label genetically modified foods in Washington, USA, are causing confusion over whether or not the initiative would cover petfood and meats for human consumption. The fight over the wording of the proposal comes after a measure known as Proposition 37 was defeated in California, USA, in 2012, which had similar wording and major companies funding both sides of the proposal.

Pet Food Market

Petfood and GMO legislation cross paths again

While the US federal government shutdown may threaten legislative-related activity, such as the pending release of the preventive control rule for feed (including petfood) under the Food Safety Modernization Act, plenty of things are still happening at the state and local level. For example, a proposed law on the ballot for November 5 elections in Washington state that would require labeling of genetically modified foods is causing a war of words that has ensnared petfood.

Pet Food Labeling

‘Made in USA’ claims: What’s required for petfood products?

To appeal to the concerns of many petfood purchasers in the US, the claim "Made in USA" or similar verbiage, often accompanied by a depiction of the American flag, is not uncommon on petfood labels these days. Neither the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) has any regulations or expressed policies regarding use of the claim.

National Animal Supplement Council updates Corporate Partner Seal

The National Animal Supplement Council has completed its campaign to improve the brand of the NASC Quality Seal, which included an updated image and new NASC Corporate Partner Seal to be used by approved third-party suppliers. NASC’s Quality Seal program ensures that companies displaying the seal have passed a facility audit, have a written quality control manual, utilize an adverse event reporting system, and follow proper label guidelines including warnings and caution statements suggested by regulatory agencies.

Market Trends and Reports

Human food trends offer insights for petfood

These days, petfood product development follows human food trends by only “half a step,” according to David Sprinkle, publisher and research director for Packaged Facts, who spoke at Petfood Forum 2013. He referred to a regular report from his company, Culinary Trends Mapping, that covers restaurant trends in addition to product ones and said large petfood manufacturers often buy it.

US Senate rejects bioengineered food labeling amendment

On May 23, the US Senate rejected an amendment proposed by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont that would have allowed states to require labels on food or beverages made with bioengineered ingredients. The amendment, which was rejected during a debate on the farm bill, would have made clear that states have the authority to require the labeling of foods produced through bioengineering.

Market Trends and Reports

Calorie content declarations on petfood labels: What’s the best method?

As previously reported, recent amendments to the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) Model Regulations for Pet Food and Specialty Pet Food will require calorie content statements on all dog and cat food labels within the next few years (the exact time frame for compliance is still to be determined). There currently are two AAFCO-accepted methods upon which to determine and report metabolizable energy (ME).

Page 19 of 24