I can understand how this is a very emotional topic for everyone, but I've been reading and re-reading some of the posts and I think we just have examples of two sides of the issue. Obviously, this thread is about the injustices that the Australian cat parent have endured, but because of the particular information found by many of the people involved in this thread, it is difficult to discern what is real and what is hearsay. I don't think anyone discredits any of the quoted information provided by any of the Australian people here. I think what is in question, for some, is the new papers (from another thread) that have come to light. I have not read them myself and won't comment on them.

I do know that people do not react the same way to situations. We are all human and it doesn't mean that one person cares less about what is happening to these poor cats than another, but, the emotional reaction will never be the same from one person to the next.

I re-read Babysweet's comments and took them to mean that perhaps many of us had been classified as "crazy cat people" on sites such as Twitter, and perhaps others, where Nutro had been discrediting all efforts.I don't think she meant that those affected in Australia are zealots. I have met people who have perused this forum and find it a little on the "extreme" side for them -- I get it. Not everyone thinks the same way. I respect them so long as they do the best they can for their pets.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if some people reading this are choosing to continue feeding Orijen in spite of what has happened in Australia, that is their informed choice. It doesn't mean they don't care, it just may mean that their pet won't eat anything else, or that this is the food that has kept them healthy for many years. I don't know.

What I do know is that everyone here wants the best for their pets. Until one has been affected by a food-related recall, they'd never know what it was like to have bought the "best" and suffered the worst. My nightmare was Menu, but I still use their foods -- as do most of us. Some will continue to buy Champion's products. Some have given up and homecook.

I know this is a tireless battle for the Australian people, I wouldn't want to walk an inch in their shoes, but I hate to see fights here (that's what I'm seeing). Can we all just respect each-others' opinions and choices, even if it means biting our tongues? I don't think anyone is being intentionally malicious here. We're all praying for the recovery of these little ones and for the cessation of all irradiation to pet foods.

I hope I haven't gone too off-topic. Sorry mods.

I have just received advice that the Australian contact for the compassion fund has been advised that they are to close their file on this matter and all correspondence should be sent directly to Champion foods. This I imagine means anyone that has directed correspondence through him to Champion re: claims in excess of $2000/cat and ongoing expenses will need to contact Champion directly about these matters even if documentation has already been submitted through him.

Jo

That is interesting.

However, the other possibility is that the company is "self-insured", which you don't see all that often, but I have seen it, particularly with municipalities.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_insurance

I surmise that they do not have insurance for this type of thing. We have this kind of mode of thought here that we just don't sue people for things. There are very few lawsuits that make the papers and most of those involve the government. We are not a litigious society for some reason and I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a contingency for this. I don't know it for a fact, just thinking out loud. Champion is a small company and I don't think they would have thought that something like this could happen to them. I would imagine that anything that they are paying out is coming from their profits. It's a possibility.

Just to show you why we don't really think about suing much: Here in my province, you can't sue someone if they hit your car and cause an accident, even if they cause you physical damage. There is something here called "no-fault" insurance because our insurer is the provincial government. Essentially, you are entitled to a certain amount of benefits and if your needs exceed that, you are SOL -- you can't sure for more. Ever.

I would suggest calling Champion if they haven't replied to your email. They always answer their phone and they don't have this huge customer service department -- most of the administration has been available anytime I have called.

Interesting that among all those wholesome fresh ingredients listed in the blurb there is no mention of the product from the rendering plant, Griffin Industries, that processes condemned animals bakery and greasetrap waste into a sludge incorporated into pet food among other things.

And for the 20+ owners each seeking recompense of between $1000-$3000 above the $2000 cap on their Fund, the amount owing is not a lot in comparison with the size of their business. I wrote to them:
"We are not talking hundreds of people and hundreds of thousands of dollars. ......It seems the height of cold-heartedness and meanness to be quibbling over such sums when your company has a multi-million dollar business spanning the globe"

I had used this brand exclusively in the past and was never deceived by their non-disclosure of the use of Griffin Industries. Any food that contains "meals" would have had to have come from a rendering plant. They are using fresh, regional ingredients when it comes to their meat, fish, poultry, eggs and plant material. Meat meals can never be fresh delivered to their door because of the nature of meat meals. Is it really that important in the grand scheme of things?

Was anyone under the assumption that they produced their own meals? Does anyone know if there are any specifications regarding what is provided to them by Griffin industries? Is Griffin the only supplier of meals for that company? Do we actually know what the processes are in manufacturing meals by Griffin industries? They have removed the "No BHA/BHT" from their bags -- that's another clue-in.

OK. I don't like the way Griffin makes it sound like "Disneyland" at their plant and maybe I don't like the idea of meals being used in a food. Maybe I think it's just fine. I'm pretty sure that any of the other pet food companies use plants such as this for their meat meals. They can be avoided by buying canned food or feeding homemade. If that's not an option because of food preference, then, your other option is to buy food with plant-based proteins instead of meals and well, we know what happened with that.

If every ugly truth was told about the tricks of the trade, no one would buy pet food. Or would they? How about people who are just trying to make ends meet and have to feed what we call "cr*p" but their cat lives to be 22?

All I'm trying to say is we have to quit jumping on every little tidbit of information as if it was a horrible injustice and dissect it to death. Orijen's bag says it is made with fresh, regional ingredients. It is. That isn't a lie. It doesn't say, selectively, as anyone in this and other industries would do to be successful in marketing their product, that the meals come from a rendering plant. That's not a surprise to me.

People here are angry and rightfully so, their companions have been taken from them. But take a look at the millions of people buying pet food from conglomerates like P & G. Now, count the number of people that access this forum and read about the ins and outs of pet food. Guess who's ahead in the game? It's the PFCs and for all the lobbying that has taken place since 2007, nothing and I mean nothing has changed. Doesn't mean we should give up, but if anyone thinks any of these companies are going to be buried, I'm pretty sure history has shown us they will change their stripes and live on.

My goal in participating in these forums is to help people with pets AND to maybe help the pet food industry make changes because they are needed, but, I don't think carving them up here is a good way to incite change. All they're going to do is tell everyone else that they did their best and the people here are out of control.


THIS, I totally agree with. All expenses should be paid and if they want to, they can seek compensation from the Aus gov't and the importer in the form of a lawsuit. Champion needs to pay up, take this as a HUGE lesson learned and make sure they don't do something this stupid again.

OK, I'm not sure if I'm on the same website as you, but I couldn't find that statement. Instead, in the FAQ (http://www.championpetfoods.com/faq/), it asks:

Q | FRESH MEAT QUALITY - Are ORIJEN ingredients human grade?

Yes. All ORIJEN fresh meats (chicken, fish, turkey, eggs) are of table quality. Chicken, fish and turkey meals are produced exclusively from animals that are certified as fit for human consumption by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA).

Just putting it out there, but, do you think it's possible that Champion sends CFIA inspected and passed fresh poultry to the Griffin rendering plant which makes their meal for them? Could the statement not still be true?

ETA: Found this further down:

Our chicken meals and fats are produced from human-grade chicken ingredients in Alberta, Canada.

So, when was this Griffin thing from -- what year? Could be they now have it all done locally?