Fourteen US states have legal guidelines that instantly battle with AAFCO pet meals ingredient definitions. The truth is, if challenged in a court docket, it’s doubtless many generally used pet meals components can be deemed invalid by the court docket. This might end in many pet meals components having no definition in these 14 states, probably ensuing within the components not being allowed in pet meals offered in these states.
We despatched AAFCO the next message (which explains the issue):
Fourteen US states (Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, and North Dakota) have state legal guidelines that battle with AAFCO ingredient definitions generally utilized in pet meals.
Such because the state of Missouri. State law: “266.180. Adulterated feed, what constitutes. — A industrial feed shall be deemed to be adulterated: (i) Whether it is, in complete or partly, the product of a diseased animal or of an animal which dies apart from by slaughter which is unsafe inside the which means of part 402(a)(5) of the Federal Meals, Drug, and Beauty Act;”
The AAFCO definitions of the next components don’t maintain the requirement to be sourced from a slaughtered animal, instantly in battle with Missouri state legislation: Poultry by-product meal, Poultry by-products, Meat meal, Meat and bone meal, Animal by-product meal, Animal Digest. With out the requirement within the AAFCO definition to be sourced from slaughtered animals (as Missouri legislation requires), ingredient producers are free to supply non-slaughtered useless animals of their components.
All AAFCO Animal Product definitions generally utilized in pet meals embrace the sentence “It shall be appropriate to be used in animal meals.” Appropriate to be used in animal meals is outlined as (partly) “conforms to the Federal Meals, Drug and Beauty Act until in any other case expressly permitted by the suitable state or federal company.” Which implies that diseased animals – instantly in battle with Missouri state legislation – may very well be “permitted” to be included in Animal Product components.
Missouri legislation states a industrial feed can be thought of adulterated “If it consists in complete or in a part of any filthy, putrid, or decomposed substance, or whether it is in any other case unfit for feed.” But no AAFCO Animal Product definition makes this requirement as a part of the authorized definition (permitting filth and decomposition in components instantly in battle of state legislation).
Once more utilizing Missouri as the instance state, Missouri state law: “536.014. Guidelines invalid, when. — No division, company, fee or board rule shall be legitimate within the occasion that: (2) The rule is in battle with state legislation.”
If challenged, a Missouri court docket may simply rule that many AAFCO ingredient definitions are “in battle with state legislation” and can be dominated as invalid.
All 14 states have related legal guidelines. If challenged in any of the 14 states, courts would greater than doubtless rule many AAFCO ingredient definitions battle with state legislation and would invalidate the definitions.
It’s regarding that many people from these 14 states voted to approve these ingredient definitions, participated on the Pet Meals and Ingredient Definitions committees and even held excessive positions inside AAFCO realizing their state legal guidelines conflicted with the AAFCO definitions – but nobody ever spoke up.
Once more, if challenged, many generally used pet meals components may very well be deemed invalid leading to these components being prohibited to be used in pet meals (resulting from lack of authorized definition).
We’re asking AAFCO to right away tackle this subject, earlier than a significant issue for pet meals shoppers and trade happens. AAFCO’s Animal Product ingredient definitions SHOULD be aligned with state legal guidelines. On the very least, the Animal Product ingredient definitions for the states Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, and North Dakota should be revised to completely align with state legal guidelines; embrace the necessities to be sourced from a slaughtered animal, a disease-free animal, and free from filth and decomposition. Please present us a response to how AAFCO intends to proceed.
If/when AAFCO responds, will probably be shared with pet homeowners.
Susan Thixton
Pet Meals Shopper Advocate
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Discover Wholesome Pet Meals in Your Space Click Here
The 2026 Record
Our trusted ‘checklist’ of pet meals. Click Here to study extra.
The 2026/27 Deal with Record
Susan’s Record of trusted pet deal with producers. Click Here to study extra.
Affiliation for Fact in Pet Meals is a stakeholder group representing pet meals shoppers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend conferences and voice shopper issues with regulatory authorities. Click Here to study extra.
