There Is No Central Pet Food Recall System
In Australia, no government agency runs a pet food recall register, and none can force a manufacturer to pull a product from shelves on safety grounds alone. Pet food sits in a gap between regulators rather than under any one of them. Whether a product is recalled, quietly withdrawn, or left on sale is, in most cases, a decision made by the manufacturer.
This is the single most important thing to understand before reading any recall history, including the ones on this site. A short recall list does not prove a brand is safe. It often means only that no public record of a problem exists, and in Australia the public record is thin by design.
Who Regulates What
Three agencies that owners often assume cover pet food do not.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) sets standards for food intended for people. Its remit does not extend to pet food, and a 2020 review of the FSANZ Act left pet food out of scope.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) can order a mandatory recall under Australian Consumer Law, but in practice this power is used for products that injure people. It has not been used to compel a pet food recall.
The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry controls imported pet food only on biosecurity grounds, to keep diseases out of the country. It has stated that it does not have legal authority to regulate the safety of imported pet food.
That leaves responsibility for the manufacture and sale of pet food with state and territory governments, where it is covered mainly by a voluntary standard rather than by enforced law. The result is a system that is, in the words of both consumer group CHOICE and a 2018 Senate committee, largely self-regulated.
The Voluntary Standard and the Industry Body
The Australian Standard for the manufacturing and marketing of pet food, AS 5812, sets out expectations for ingredient sourcing, processing, labelling, storage, and recall planning. It applies to manufactured dog and cat food, but it is voluntary, and it sits behind a paywall on the Standards Australia store rather than being freely available to the public.
The standard is administered in practice through the Pet Food Industry Association of Australia (PFIAA), the industry body that most large manufacturers belong to. PFIAA encourages but does not require independent auditing of its members against the standard, and it has no power over companies that are not members. A manufacturer can choose not to join, or leave, with no penalty.
The Three Things That Can Happen to a Product
When a problem is suspected, an Australian product can take one of three paths, and the differences matter. Only the first reliably leaves a public trace, so much of what happens to problem products here is invisible to owners after the fact.
Formal recall
A documented withdrawal from the supply chain, usually published on the ACCC's Product Safety Australia website, with refunds or replacements offered. The most visible path, and the least common.
Voluntary withdrawal
A manufacturer pulling a product without formally classifying it as a recall. The practical effect can be similar, but there is often no public record, so it can pass unnoticed.
Removal for testing
A retailer or distributor taking a product off shelves while an investigation runs, sometimes before the manufacturer has decided anything. It may or may not become a formal recall.
How a Problem Gets Noticed: PetFAST
The main channel for spotting a pattern is PetFAST, a reporting system run jointly by the Australian Veterinary Association and PFIAA. It was set up after cat and dog illnesses in the late 2000s exposed how slowly food problems were being identified.
There is an important limit: only veterinarians can lodge a PetFAST report. Owners cannot report directly. An investigation is generally considered when three or more reports point to the same food. So the system depends on a vet recognising a possible food link, knowing to use PetFAST, and the manufacturer cooperating once contacted. PFIAA members are expected to respond to PetFAST queries. Non-members are not obliged to.
The 2018 Senate Inquiry
In 2018, a recall brought the weaknesses of this system to national attention. Mars Petcare Australia voluntarily recalled its Advance Dermocare dry dog food after a cluster of dogs developed megaoesophagus, a serious condition not previously linked to diet. A University of Melbourne investigation led by Associate Professor Caroline Mansfield (BVMS, PhD) found the association with the food to be extremely strong, with about a one in a million probability of it being coincidental. The cause was never definitively identified, and months passed between the first veterinary suspicion and the recall.
The case led to a Senate inquiry into the safety of pet food, which reported in October 2018 with seven recommendations. Among them: that the standard be made freely available, that the ACCC examine making it mandatory, that a public consumer reporting system be set up on the Product Safety Australia website, and that data capture in PetFAST be improved.
As of 2026, the picture has changed little. The government agreed to publish the standard freely and agreed only in part with the rest, citing the limits of Commonwealth power over domestically made products. The standard has been updated but remains voluntary and still sits behind a paywall. No mandatory recall law has been passed, and the ACCC's site still has no dedicated pet food reporting category.
Veterinarians who gave evidence described the consequences plainly. Dr Richard Malik (DVSc, PhD) argued that the safe response to a suspected problem is to take a product off shelves first and investigate properly, rather than leave it on sale during months of dispute, by which point a recall can come too late to help. Dr Bronwyn Orr (BVSc, PhD), then with the RSPCA, has argued that voluntary self-regulation cannot control those who operate outside the system, and that mandatory minimum standards are needed.
Recalls and Withdrawals Affecting Cats in Australia
The Australian record for cat food specifically is short, and the entries below show the range of recall types as much as the incidents themselves. Where a global recall did not reach Australian cat products, that is noted, because it matters.
Champion Petfoods ran a voluntary precautionary recall of all Orijen cat food sold in Australia after cats developed neurological illness and several died. The cause was gamma irradiation applied to the food at the Australian border, a treatment the fresh-meat formula did not tolerate and that affected cats far more than dogs. Australia subsequently banned irradiation as a treatment for imported cat food. Orijen withdrew from the Australian market.
Distributor Petbarn removed all Best Feline Friend canned products from Australian shelves after hundreds of reports of cats becoming unwell. The manufacturer described it as a stop-sale rather than a formal recall. The affected batches, made at an overseas facility supplying the Australian market, were later linked to thiamine (vitamin B1) deficiency. No ACCC recall notice was published.
A global recall of Hill's canned food over toxic vitamin D levels reached Australia, but the Australian list of affected products covered prescription dog food only. Hill's stated that no cat foods, dry foods, or treats were affected in Australia. It is included here because it shows a global recall can reach Australia while leaving cat lines untouched.
A spike in a serious feline blood disorder in the United Kingdom led to a recall of UK-made dry cat foods, including some Applaws lines, with a contaminant later investigated as a probable cause. Australian distributors removed affected UK-manufactured stock in line with the global warning. Applaws cat food for the Australian market is largely made in Australia, and those locally made batches were not part of the UK recall.
For context on the formal-recall path, the clearest cat food example on the ACCC's Australian register is a 2013 recall of a Whiskas dry cat food over possible small foreign objects in the product. It remains the only Whiskas cat food recall on the Australian public record.
What to Do If You Suspect a Problem
Stop feeding the product and keep the packaging, including the batch number and best-before date.
See your vet. Beyond treating your cat, your vet is the only person who can lodge a PetFAST report, and several reports of the same food are what trigger an investigation. Your vet's records also matter if a brand later runs a compensation programme, as has happened after past recalls.
Contact the manufacturer directly. PFIAA points to this as the fastest practical route, and the manufacturer is the party that decides on a recall.
Report it to the ACCC at productsafety.gov.au. There is no pet-food-specific category, but the report adds to the public record and the site lists any active recall notices.
Tell the retailer. Large retailers have at times acted faster than manufacturers, including initiating customer alerts.
“Removed from sale” is not the same as “recalled.” A product can be quietly withdrawn, affected owners compensated, and the same product return later with no public record of why.
A Note on Sourcing
This guide draws on Australian sources: the 2018 Senate committee report and the government's response, the Department of Agriculture, PFIAA, the Australian Veterinary Association's PetFAST system, the ACCC's Product Safety Australia register, and Australian reporting. Where a recall originated overseas, we note whether and how it reached Australian product.
Australia has no public pet food recall database, so for many brands the most that can honestly be said is that no Australian recall could be found. That is a limit of the record, not a guarantee of safety.
Related Reading
- The Ownership Map. Who actually owns each brand on Australian shelves, and which multinationals sit behind them.
- How Cat Food Is Made. The manufacturing process behind each format, and what each process does to the ingredients.
- The Label Guide. How to read the ingredient list and what Australian manufacturers are not required to disclose.
Last reviewed July 2026. We review this guide at least twice a year, and sooner if the law changes.
Without limiting our Terms, ingredients and product information listed here require independent verification. Information on this page is sourced from publicly available sources and while we take reasonable care to verify accuracy, we do not warrant that it is complete, current, or error-free. Nothing on kibbleguide.com.au constitutes veterinary or nutritional advice. Consult a qualified veterinarian for guidance specific to your pet. See our Terms of Use for full details.