Dog Food Recall Expanded Over Salmonella Concerns
An expanded recall covers about 639 bags of Woof Complete Canine Chicken Recipe dog food due to possible salmonella contamination.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 15, 2026, 8:25 p.m. ET
This recall is open. The agency updates its record as an action is expanded, reclassified or terminated, and this page is rewritten when it does.
Earlier reports
Aug 15, 2026, 8:25 p.m. ETFirst report
Dog Food Recalled Over Possible Salmonella Contamination
In a developing situation, about 639 bags of one lot of Woof Complete Canine Chicken Recipe in 6-pound bags have been recalled due to possible salmonella contamination, according to reporting from kwtx.com, kwch.com, and kmvt.com citing the FDA. The affected product carries the identifying code BB012729 and brand names Woof Complete, Oma’s Pride, and Oma's Pride. Distribution occurred in Arizona, California, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Reports differ on the punctuation of the firm name and remedy contact: kmvt.com and kwtx.com name the firm as Oma’s Pride, while kwch.com names it as Oma's Pride. Regarding the remedy, kwtx.com and kwch.com report that customers should stop feeding its contents to their dog and contact Oma's Pride for a refund, whereas kmvt.com reports that customers should stop feeding its contents to their dog and contact Oma’s Pride for a refund.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- Hundreds of dog food bags recalled over salmonella concerns. Check to see if yours is includedkmvt.com
- Hundreds of dog food bags recalled over salmonella concerns. Check to see if yours is includedkwch.com
- Hundreds of dog food bags recalled over salmonella concerns. Check to see if yours is includedkwtx.com
Revision history
- Version 116 Aug 2026, 00:55current
First published.
- Version 116 Aug 2026, 00:25current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.