This invention relates to an improved crawling insect-proof pet bowl for preventing crawling insects, such as ants, from reaching the contents of a pet bowl.
The problem of preventing ants and other crawling insects from entering pet food bowls has been addressed in a variety of manners. Typically, however, prior art solutions have focused on surrounding the bowl with a "moat" of water. U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,191,811; 2,584,301; 4,007,711; 4,128,080; and 4,357,905 all utilize this old "moat" mechanism in order to accomplish the same objective.
Trampier, U.S. Pat. No. 2,191,811, utilizes a single piece divided bowl with a lower, outer moat to be filled with water. Trampier also provides for the maintenance of water in the outer moat by access from the water bowl portion of the divided dish into the moat.
Sinclair, U.S. Pat. No. 2,584,301, describes a "moated dog feeder" wherein ordinary bowls are suspended above moats filled with water in a fabricated stand which is itself supported off the ground.
Michael, U.S. Pat. No. 4,007,711, discloses an "anti-pest pet dish" that utilizes the moat principal in combination with a support system to elevate the bowl to the desired height either through telescopic legs or tapered sectional pedestals. Michael provides a top for his pet dish.
Haney, U.S. Pat. No. 4,128,080, discloses a two section water dish above one section of which has been suspended a food dish.
Carpenter, U.S. Pat. No. 4,357,905, discloses a "moated pet feeder" which combines a two section water bowl filled with water, into one section of which an ordinary food dish is placed so that water surrounds the food dish.
Each of the above described patents are awkward in that in order to function properly they must be "armed" with adequate amounts of water to achieve their stated purpose. If these bowls are kicked or bumped for some reason, water spills out and the stated purpose is diminished or defeated altogether. Additionally, if these bowls are to be used in the outdoors, there is the natural problem of constant "rearming" with water lost due to evaporation. Further, each of these prior bowls are awkward to transport once they have been filled with water and messy to deal with as a result.
A still further drawback to these prior art devices is that none of them prevent access to the water or pet food sections if they are placed in contact with a wall, dog house, or support of any type such as a fence, tree or shrub. That is, when these devices are placed, or accidentally come in contact with such objects, a direct path to the water and/or food bowl is provided that avoids the water "moat".
Thus, there is a need in the art for providing a crawling insect-proof pet bowl which does not require intricate loading or "arming" in order to function and which does not require constant reloading and arming in order to continue to function. Further, there is a need in the art for providing a crawling insect-proof pet bowl that prevents the introduction of crawling insects to the food and water areas should the device come into contact with a wall or some other object which provides a passage way for insects.