Any of you feed raw?

[claybuster_aa]

Some thoughts on raw:

I think it's very beneficial for the dog however there are some drawbacks. First major drawback would be it is not as simple as people make it out to be. You need to get your ingredients right, your ratios right. Most raw feeders probably are feeding improperly structured diets. Biggest culprit here is too much bone throwing calcium phosphorous ratios out of whack. Next major drawback would be coming from the commercial field. I see many commercial raw diets making the same mistakes as their kibble counterparts. These mistakes stem from ideological thought. Despite boasting carnivore themes, companies are incorporating vegetable and plant matter (large amounts) into the raw diets being sold. These mistakes put there overall supposed benefits into serious doubt. These types of mistakes are not innocent but on the contrary deliberate for it stems from that school of thought dogs are omnivores and it's okay to incorporate plant matter and vegetables into a carnivore diet. These omnivore style raw diets have focus problems, as in improperly focused. If you don't believe this, see for yourself what many commercial raw diets are including into the ration. Another problem I see selection of ingredients. If you're a raw shopper at a supermarket and your ingredients come with a Styrofoam packaging on the bottom, you may be getting more than your bargained for...steroid and hormone injected beef and some antibiotic feed chicken. Whole prey, NOT whole prey model is clearly a better option when it comes to selection, but not too many folks out there are letting there dogs hunt for food or scraping road kill off the highway. Next drawback would be IMO space concerns and that added cost of energy. To do it right you need to stock up on ingredients and that involves maybe an extra freezer unit in the basement and the extra cost in electricity to run that freezer. Next drawback concern would be safety. Talk to any emergency vet and they will probably say the same, most food related injuries come from something got lodged or stuck the wrong way, puncture wounds from a bone that shouldn't have been fed, like a weight bearing bones. These mistakes come from inexperienced raw feeders who jumped into something without doing their homework, but they thought it was okay because...well...they read about it on the internet. Now they're possibly several thousand dollar lighter in the wallet as well as feeling like a smacked a$$.

[walkos5]

LOL When I make spaghetti and meatballs I start with raw, too, but wouldn't end the prep there
str
Think about marketing. If raw was the best, wouldn't the big feed companies be marketing nice lovely no muss no fuss packages of nicely chopped raw meats? Of course they would! There's already one company doing it small scale and it doesn't seem to be going very well.

I don't agree. Big feed companies are all about profit. Packaging costs along with much shorter storage life and refrigerated storage and transportation costs would kill their profit margins. The price they would have to charge would not appeal to the average consumer.

[ezzy333]

LOL When I make spaghetti and meatballs I start with raw, too, but wouldn't end the prep there
str
Think about marketing. If raw was the best, wouldn't the big feed companies be marketing nice lovely no muss no fuss packages of nicely chopped raw meats? Of course they would! There's already one company doing it small scale and it doesn't seem to be going very well.

I don't agree. Big feed companies are all about profit. Packaging costs along with much shorter storage life and refrigerated storage and transportation costs would kill their profit margins. The price they would have to charge would not appeal to the average consumer.

Spoken like someone who has sat on the board of a big company but no understanding what you are asking for. You are right, big companies as well as little companies and even individuals need to have profit. That even includes you. If I ask you to send me some raw food every week for the next year I'll just bet my chances aren't good if I can't pay you for your time and effort plus the overhead and shipping might come into play. If I offer you a thousand a week chance are I might get the feed. But it will be from someone who is more interested in profit than providing a good feed. Of course if you are as smart as the average bear you might just consider how do I keep this business going and you will immediately consider the quality of what you are doing. Because it better be good enough to keep me coming back for more.

OK, do you see where your statement was right but to keep the business going there is only one way and that is to provide the quality and service that I as your customer has to have. But so many people have been educated to think the big bad company is only in business to steal from you the customer, and you spend most of your time worrying about how much some one else is making instead of worrying about what you are making. Much of this started with the labor unions when they convinced the workers they could get them more money for doing the same amount of work and the companies were just taking advantage of them.

Big companies are big companies because of one reason, they are providing a product and a service that more people want and need than other companies are doing. Companies grow old for one reason, they provide a service or product that people come back and buy again. Repeat business is the only way they survive.

I would suggest that all of you feeding raw get together and start a company that will provide a good product at a cost that people can afford see how long it will take the switch the dog food business over to the feed. I will guess that your top salesman will have to convince people that you are providing what you need in one of two areas. Either your product is better or their cost is way cheaper. Then come back so the rest of us can buy from you. Simple enough? And good luck!

Ezzy

[walkos5]

Some thoughts on raw:

I think it's very beneficial for the dog however there are some drawbacks. First major drawback would be it is not as simple as people make it out to be. You need to get your ingredients right, your ratios right. Most raw feeders probably are feeding improperly structured diets. Biggest culprit here is too much bone throwing calcium phosphorous ratios out of whack. Next major drawback would be coming from the commercial field. I see many commercial raw diets making the same mistakes as their kibble counterparts. These mistakes stem from ideological thought. Despite boasting carnivore themes, companies are incorporating vegetable and plant matter (large amounts) into the raw diets being sold. These mistakes put there overall supposed benefits into serious doubt. These types of mistakes are not innocent but on the contrary deliberate for it stems from that school of thought dogs are omnivores and it's okay to incorporate plant matter and vegetables into a carnivore diet. These omnivore style raw diets have focus problems, as in improperly focused. If you don't believe this, see for yourself what many commercial raw diets are including into the ration. Another problem I see selection of ingredients. If you're a raw shopper at a supermarket and your ingredients come with a Styrofoam packaging on the bottom, you may be getting more than your bargained for...steroid and hormone injected beef and some antibiotic feed chicken. Whole prey, NOT whole prey model is clearly a better option when it comes to selection, but not too many folks out there are letting there dogs hunt for food or scraping road kill off the highway. Next drawback would be IMO space concerns and that added cost of energy. To do it right you need to stock up on ingredients and that involves maybe an extra freezer unit in the basement and the extra cost in electricity to run that freezer. Next drawback concern would be safety. Talk to any emergency vet and they will probably say the same, most food related injuries come from something got lodged or stuck the wrong way, puncture wounds from a bone that shouldn't have been fed, like a weight bearing bones. These mistakes come from inexperienced raw feeders who jumped into something without doing their homework, but they thought it was okay because...well...they read about it on the internet. Now they're possibly several thousand dollar lighter in the wallet as well as feeling like a smacked a$$.

Good advice here. I think every raw feeder owes it to their dog to get it right. And there is a sea of good information out there, some is even recommended by vets. In my opinion even a less than perfect raw diet beats a diet of kibble every day of the week. There is some good information on balancing calcium and phosphorous levels in your dog under (Dogs Naturally) on line. I'm not big on veggies and fruit in a my dogs diet either, but I do add a small amount two or 3 times per week. My motto is, a meaty bone a day helps keep the vet away.

[claybuster_aa]

Good advice here. I think every raw feeder owes it to their dog to get it right. And there is a sea of good information out there, some is even recommended by vets. In my opinion even a less than perfect raw diet beats a diet of kibble every day of the week. There is some good information on balancing calcium and phosphorous levels in your dog under (Dogs Naturally) on line. I'm not big on veggies and fruit in a my dogs diet either, but I do add a small amount two or 3 times per week. My motto is, a meaty bone a day helps keep the vet away.

Despite the drawbacks I have listed, I do not mean to infer I am anti-raw. I realize many folks have great success with raw diets and have many benefits (when done properly) for the animals. I couldn't do it for some of the reasons (drawbacks) I had listed. Main reason mostly would be I don't have room for an extra freezer and wouldn't want the added cost to run that freezer. Once you know the proper ratios in regards to organ meat vs muscle meat, fat and bone, etc. it's really not that difficult to feed once you locate sources for those ingredients. Me personally if I chose to do it would avoid the supermarkets and stick with butcher shops, wholesalers, farmers markets, etc., and try to locate animals that were fed 'free range' as opposed to animals fed from GM source feed.

Although some of you here are aware what I fed, I am not what one would consider an active poster here. All I can say is with certainty I will never switch my dogs diet; yes I feel it is that good. Robert Abady was the first to sell commercial raw food in the 1970's for dogs. When they developed the granular feeds as a convenient option to the raw products, I think that is when the company got a much stronger following. If you looking for a good option to a raw diet, than look no further than right here, you won't find anything out there that can match its strength and match its animal source protein core, the strongest in the industry:
http://therobertabadydogfoodcoltd.com/A ... ngredl.htm

[MonsterDad]

I have used the Abady Complete raw diets. I particularly like Abady All Star raw. Beef and beef organs, complete and balanced raw.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Gosh since I feed nothing but the cheapest kibble I need to tell my dogs they can't perform & should die at an early age instead of living to be 14 or 15 yrs old!! :roll:

[walkos5]

Despite the drawbacks I have listed, I do not mean to infer I am anti-raw. I realize many folks have great success with raw diets and have many benefits (when done properly) for the animals. I couldn't do it for some of the reasons (drawbacks) I had listed. Main reason mostly would be I don't have room for an extra freezer and wouldn't want the added cost to run that freezer. Once you know the proper ratios in regards to organ meat vs muscle meat, fat and bone, etc. it's really not that difficult to feed once you locate sources for those ingredients. Me personally if I chose to do it would avoid the supermarkets and stick with butcher shops, wholesalers, farmers markets, etc., and try to locate animals that were fed 'free range' as opposed to animals fed from GM source feed.Although some of you here are aware what I fed, I am not what one would consider an active poster here. All I can say is with certainty I will never switch my dogs diet; yes I feel it is that good. Robert Abady was the first to sell commercial raw food in the 1970's for dogs. When they developed the granular feeds as a convenient option to the raw products, I think that is when the company got a much stronger following. If you looking for a good option to a raw diet, than look no further than right here, you won't find anything out there that can match its strength and match its animal source protein core, the strongest in the industry:http://therobertabadydogfoodcoltd.com/A ... ngredl.htm

I appreciate your honesty, and I am pretty much a hard core raw feeder but if I said I never feed my Britt any kibble I'd be a liar. I know lots of people who feed commercial brand dog food and have healthy looking dogs. I hunt hard when the season is open, and I am usually alone in the woods and fields in January when all of the so called other hunters are home pressing the buttons on their TV remotes. Last season in December after about 3 hours of hard hunting and only one bird in the bag I noticed blood all over my dogs left side from a tear in his ear. I cleaned him up as best I could and the cold temp seemed to help as well. so we continued our hunt, and about an hour later I noticed something sticking out of his snout, seems he tangled with a young porcupine and had about a half dozen quills stuck in his lower jaw. That's when I said were done. I called him in and we made our way to a grass road and I put the leash on him. His head went down and he dug his heels in as to say I'm not done yet. So I looked him over and decided to allow him to hunt back to the truck. He busted another half mile of cover and provided two good shot opportunities and I bagged another bird. When I got him home and my kids saw him with dried blood all over his white spots, needles in his jaw and briars in the rest of him they had words for me. My point is when were afield he gives me everything he has so I do the best I can to feed him as his reward.

[ezzy333]

My point is when were afield he gives me everything he has so I do the best I can to feed him as his reward.

I am not sure that is everyone's reason for feeding their dog but I am sure most feed their dog to provide the nutrition the dog needs to live, be healthy and satisfy their hunger. I have never used food for a reward but I think of that as more of a treat compared to feed for subsistence. Either way sounds OK to me. One of the things you will find is most dogs will hunt longer than they should when they suffer an injury. Dogs don't hunt so they can get fed, they hunt because they like to hunt.

[walkos5]

My point is when were afield he gives me everything he has so I do the best I can to feed him as his reward.

I am not sure that is everyone's reason for feeding their dog but I am sure most feed their dog to provide the nutrition the dog needs to live, be healthy and satisfy their hunger. I have never used food for a reward but I think of that as more of a treat compared to feed for subsistence. Either way sounds OK to me. One of the things you will find is most dogs will hunt longer than they should when they suffer an injury. Dogs don't hunt so they can get fed, they hunt because they like to hunt.

I agree, most gun dogs seem to have that energy and drive that's hard to stop. I guess what I meant to say is, by feeding him the best I can gives me peace of mind that I'm keeping him in top condition to endure our long days outdoors. He always seems to run into things were not looking for. One fear I do have is the coyotes in my area. There is a vol. fire company near my home that holds a coyote hunt in January and they take some 50+ lb. coyotes. I haven't heard of anyone having trouble with them but I know they will make a meal of cats and small dogs.

[displaced_texan]

If you spend some time studying nutrition with an open mind you will see where most of the arguments we hear expressed on the net are not based on fact but more on what each of us has been convinced is the only way to feed an nothing could be further from the truth than boxing yourself into concept that that doesn't allow you actually working to find a better way to supply the animals needs. We could get more specific but I am convinced it would make little difference to any of you who have yourself in that position.

Ezzy

Then supply us with a source of these facts you're always talking about.

Until you do that you're no more credible than anyone else that's saying you're wrong.

And don't tell me about what you did. Two reasons, science is constantly evolving, and for all I know you're a senile, confused old man.

I beg your pardon, I am not old. And since we don't talk sex on this forum, I won't comment on the man thing.

Sorry mam, I'd gathered that you were a man over 45, which is about the age me and my 54 year old mother have established as old. 60 is where we start calling people super old.

You are the one disputing conventional science. The science of dog feed rations has been well established. The emotional advertorials of feeding dogs is a new money maker. Where are your facts for the evolving science you speak of.

I'm not disputing anything in this thread. Or saying anything has changed with animal nutrition.

I'm saying I'm sick of him always referencing facts and studies I don't get to see and am expected to take his word for him.

Science that's changed? Earth was flat, earth was supported on an elephant, earth was the center of the universe, what's known is constantly evolving. If everything was known, they would quit researching and studying things. Even in my short life they can't decide if pork is a good, healthy source of protein or to fatty.

References to things that are known/proven/whatever don't mean squat. Sources do. Imagine turning in a research paper with no sources cited. That's what many on here do.

When I first started on this internet thing many years ago all of the Purina and Eukanuba research papers were available online as education. I read many of them - then the AR do-gooders got on their attack campaign, amped up and fueled by the raw-food evangelists and fear mongers who were only too happy to have an ally to fight "big business" (cause how else does small business get big?) and all of the "knowledge" disappeared. But the evidence of the results of that knowledge have not - it exists in the lives of all of the dogs that are cared for around the world. The latest round of dog food "fads" is not a result of any new breakthroughs in scientific knowledge regarding nutrition but rather a better understanding of the shaping of public opinions for the purpose of marketing. The science of marketing has undergone a metamorphisis and the implications this has reaches much further and deeper than how much time and money should we spend feeding our dogs.

Thanks, that interesting, telling and more of an answer than I've gotten in years of asking.

Then supply us with a source of these facts you're always talking about.

I'm not disputing anything in this thread. Or saying anything has changed with animal nutrition.

I'm saying I'm sick of him always referencing facts and studies I don't get to see and am expected to take his word for him.

Science that's changed? Earth was flat, earth was supported on an elephant, earth was the center of the universe, what's known is constantly evolving. If everything was known, they would quit researching and studying things. Even in my short life they can't decide if pork is a good, healthy source of protein or to fatty.

References to things that are known/proven/whatever don't mean squat. Sources do. Imagine turning in a research paper with no sources cited. That's what many on here do.

So where is your scientific "proof"?

I'm not arguing a position, so I don't have anything to prove. I want proof from the people who want me to believe them.

[displaced_texan]

To say that bagged dog food is equally nutritious to a balanced raw diet is equivalent to saying a mothers breast milk is no better then the formula that you buy at the grocery store.

Post your source.

How dare you ask for a source!

[walkos5]

Gosh since I feed nothing but the cheapest kibble I need to tell my dogs they can't perform & should die at an early age instead of living to be 14 or 15 yrs old!! :roll:

Ok. But I plan on hunting my dog until he's 16 so I'll keep him on his raw diet.

[Mountaineer]

...Ok. But I plan on hunting my dog until he's 16 so I'll keep him on his raw diet.

Is this your first dog?
I only ask as your optimism as to hunting years smacks of little experience with all that affects our dogs, especially our hunting dogs, and all that impacts their total years before the gun.
To believe that food fed will be the magic key that allows a 16 year-old dog to hunt in a manner recognizable to the past is more than a bit naïve....or brings into question how your pup hunts now.
Because, actually, not many birddogs will not want to go...at 12 or 14 or whatever age, regardless of whatever fills and filled their food dish.
Much more is involved than simply being ambulatory.

My hope is that your pup indeed lives to 16 years as they all deserve to, but my guess is that if pup does then the zealot in you will rationalize his "hunting" at that age to support what appears to be a rather shallow-rooted agenda.
You might want to consider the advantages that time and experience delivers and that some pretty dam(n) good dogs set some lofty daily performances on a regimen different than yours.....as many have done so for decades.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Some believe feeding Raw is like vampires drinking blood,it makes them immortal!! I have never said kibble was better then Raw or otherwise like the Raw fanatics say it's the best.
I feed kibble,cheap kibble at that & my dog perform,are healthy, live long lives & very seldom if ever go to the vet.NuFF said!

[Garrison]

Some believe feeding Raw is like vampires drinking blood,it makes them immortal!! I have never said kibble was better then Raw or otherwise like the Raw fanatics say it's the best.
I feed kibble,cheap kibble at that & my dog perform,are healthy, live long lives & very seldom if ever go to the vet.NuFF said!

But, can they take on a 50lb coyote!

This guy is 10 and he still has been known to dispatch a few, my scientific research shows it is the steady diet of kibble and cat crap or whatever else he can find around the property.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Maybe could handle a coyote but probably not a werewolf!

[slistoe]

That diet of kibble will make any dog mean. Feed him some raw for awhile and you will be having heeote pups in no time.

Make love, not war.

[ACooper]

That diet of kibble will make any dog mean. Feed him some raw for awhile and you will be having heeote pups in no time.

Make love, not war.

It's just the insecurity ...

[birddogger]

Some believe feeding Raw is like vampires drinking blood,it makes them immortal!! I have never said kibble was better then Raw or otherwise like the Raw fanatics say it's the best.
I feed kibble,cheap kibble at that & my dog perform,are healthy, live long lives & very seldom if ever go to the vet.NuFF said!

But, can they take on a 50lb coyote!

This guy is 10 and he still has been known to dispatch a few, my scientific research shows it is the steady diet of kibble and cat crap or whatever else he can find around the property.

Cool looking dog.

Charlie

[ACooper]

Some believe feeding Raw is like vampires drinking blood,it makes them immortal!! I have never said kibble was better then Raw or otherwise like the Raw fanatics say it's the best.
I feed kibble,cheap kibble at that & my dog perform,are healthy, live long lives & very seldom if ever go to the vet.NuFF said!

But, can they take on a 50lb coyote!

This guy is 10 and he still has been known to dispatch a few, my scientific research shows it is the steady diet of kibble and cat crap or whatever else he can find around the property.

Cool looking dog.

Charlie

Agreed I like heelers.

[displaced_texan]

Some believe feeding Raw is like vampires drinking blood,it makes them immortal!! I have never said kibble was better then Raw or otherwise like the Raw fanatics say it's the best.
I feed kibble,cheap kibble at that & my dog perform,are healthy, live long lives & very seldom if ever go to the vet.NuFF said!

But, can they take on a 50lb coyote!

This guy is 10 and he still has been known to dispatch a few, my scientific research shows it is the steady diet of kibble and cat crap or whatever else he can find around the property.

Based on my dogs reaction to it, it's actually the cat crap that gives them immortality...

[ezzy333]

Based on my dogs reaction to it, it's actually the cat crap that gives them immortality...

I think you are right. Wonder if all of the cats would die, what would happen to our dog population.

Ezzy

[walkos5]

Based on my dogs reaction to it, it's actually the cat crap that gives them immortality...

I think you are right. Wonder if all of the cats would die, what would happen to our dog population.

Ezzy

You make a good point Ezzy, because isn't cat crap the main ingredient in kibble. No worries though, the kibble scientists have the creativity to work around issues like that. I'm sure rat crap or bat crap won't change the outstanding nutritional quality of your kibble.

[ezzy333]

Based on my dogs reaction to it, it's actually the cat crap that gives them immortality...

I think you are right. Wonder if all of the cats would die, what would happen to our dog population.

Ezzy

You make a good point Ezzy, because isn't cat crap the main ingredient in kibble. No worries though, the kibble scientists have the creativity to work around issues like that. I'm sure rat crap or bat crap won't change the outstanding nutritional quality of your kibble.

And I didn't think you knew anything about dog food! You sure showed me up on that one. Did you know the difference between Human Grade and Animal Grade ingredients such as corn and other grains? Well, that is a silly question, Of course you do. Human Grade can only have 1/2 as many rat droppings in it as the Animal Grade can have. I think animal droppings would definitely improve the Kibble as it is animal based. And it would have a lot more maggots and other fresh raw ingredients.

[walkos5]

...Ok. But I plan on hunting my dog until he's 16 so I'll keep him on his raw diet.

Is this your first dog?
I only ask as your optimism as to hunting years smacks of little experience with all that affects our dogs, especially our hunting dogs, and all that impacts their total years before the gun.
To believe that food fed will be the magic key that allows a 16 year-old dog to hunt in a manner recognizable to the past is more than a bit naïve....or brings into question how your pup hunts now.
Because, actually, not many birddogs will not want to go...at 12 or 14 or whatever age, regardless of whatever fills and filled their food dish.
Much more is involved than simply being ambulatory.

My hope is that your pup indeed lives to 16 years as they all deserve to, but my guess is that if pup does then the zealot in you will rationalize his "hunting" at that age to support what appears to be a rather shallow-rooted agenda.
You might want to consider the advantages that time and experience delivers and that some pretty dam(n) good dogs set some lofty daily performances on a regimen different than yours.....as many have done so for decades.

I appreciate your opinion but I never said I expect my dog to live to 16, I only said I plan on hunting him until he is 16. To say I plan leaves room for common sense. It is the kibble comedy club who has an agenda and its focused on dismissing the science and nature behind the discussion. I am also more then sure there are also some top contenders with years of experience that will disagree with your regimen. If you want to talk about performance, talk to the sled dog owners in Alaska. How many do you think won the 1100 mile race across that gentle wilderness on a strict diet of just kibble. I have nothing against those who feed a commercial diet but don't promote it as equal to a natural diet, because you know its not true.

[Mountaineer]

....I appreciate your opinion but I never said I expect my dog to live to 16, I only said I plan on hunting him until he is 16.
To say I plan leaves room for common sense. It is the kibble comedy club who has an agenda and its focused on dismissing the science and nature behind the discussion. I am also more then sure there are also some top contenders with years of experience that will disagree with your regimen. If you want to talk about performance, talk to the sled dog owners in Alaska. How many do you think won the 1100 mile race across that gentle wilderness on a strict diet of just kibble. I have nothing against those who feed a commercial diet but don't promote it as equal to a natural diet, because you know its not true.

Again, first dog?
Photo?

When I look to a food regimen for my birddogs...I look to a birddog regimen that has been proven both sufficient and successful with birddogs...the operative word being..."birddog".
I reckon much the same as I do not eat like an Olympic power lifter...normally.
As well and oddly enough, my three setters are not required to pull sleds across Alaska in a competition or even sleep curled in the snow.
Plus, whitefish and salmon are noticeably in short supply hereabouts....seal and muktuk, well, don't even ask the guy at either Kroger or Tractor Supply.
Not sure(well, yes I am) that your comparison re sled dogs is a good one and so the leap to equating sled dog needs/Alaskan supplies with my setters/dry food is simply not of a level of Hoyle.

My point is that feed is not going to be the driver of yours or anyone's birddog reaching the age of 16 to answer the call to "kennel up" or gramps making it to 95 on cigs and fried eggs in the morning for that matter.
By the way, are sled dogs performing at 16 and what is the lifespan of a sled dog...or what are the economic realities of finding feed and of feeding a string or two of sled dogs in Alaska? I simply stop at a store for food, lucky me.
Everything from genetics and health/weight control to conditions they faced along the road and good old luck will play that age tune, as but a start.
The feed that most feed, ie. kibble of one sort or another, can supply sufficient oomph and nutrients and supplements so that no birddog owner needs to fret that they are making a tragic mistake.
To say differently and imply a tragic mistake, is a bit irresponsible and replaces experience and success with zealotry and poor comparables.
Bad juju that.

"because you know it is not true."....Adopting that attitude is the first step to many stumbles in Life.

[Bounty_Hunter]

Raw is much better than dog kibble by far,raw provides more nutrients and vitamins than dry dog kibble. Kibble is based mostly off corn meal which is just a filler with empty carbs. Corn is not digestable and will only lead your dog to being hungrier and gain more weight.

[walkos5]

Again, first dog?
Photo?

When I look to a food regimen for my birddogs...I look to a birddog regimen that has been proven both sufficient and successful with birddogs...the operative word being..."birddog".
I reckon much the same as I do not eat like an Olympic power lifter...normally.
As well and oddly enough, my three setters are not required to pull sleds across Alaska in a competition or even sleep curled in the snow.
Plus, whitefish and salmon are noticeably in short supply hereabouts....seal and muktuk, well, don't even ask the guy at either Kroger or Tractor Supply.
Not sure(well, yes I am) that your comparison re sled dogs is a good one and so the leap to equating sled dog needs/Alaskan supplies with my setters/dry food is simply not of a level of Hoyle.

My point is that feed is not going to be the driver of yours or anyone's birddog reaching the age of 16 to answer the call to "kennel up" or gramps making it to 95 on cigs and fried eggs in the morning for that matter.
By the way, are sled dogs performing at 16 and what is the lifespan of a sled dog...or what are the economic realities of finding feed and of feeding a string or two of sled dogs in Alaska? I simply stop at a store for food, lucky me.
Everything from genetics and health/weight control to conditions they faced along the road and good old luck will play that age tune, as but a start.
The feed that most feed, ie. kibble of one sort or another, can supply sufficient oomph and nutrients and supplements so that no birddog owner needs to fret that they are making a tragic mistake.
To say differently and imply a tragic mistake, is a bit irresponsible and replaces experience and success with zealotry and poor comparables.
Bad juju that.

"because you know it is not true."....Adopting that attitude is the first step to many stumbles in Life. [/quote]

My comparison is not about dogs but nutrition. To say kibble alone cannot supply the nutritional needs for sled dogs to compete at such a level speaks for itself. So why should anyone doubt that a raw or natural fed dog would not survive longer or perform at a higher level if the need were there, then a kibble fed dog assuming good genetics are there for both dogs. This is the position the kibble club refuses to accept. And that's what I have a problem with. Can a dog survive long on kibble and hunt well, I certainly believe so. Is it the best diet for him. No, I believe not. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

[shags]

Raw is much better than dog kibble by far,raw provides more nutrients and vitamins than dry dog kibble. Kibble is based mostly off corn meal which is just a filler with empty carbs. Corn is not digestable and will only lead your dog to being hungrier and gain more weight.

Gosh, and only less than a month ago you had "no idea" what to feed your new dog.

Gotta love it :roll:

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

Amazing how fast the newbies become experts isn't it? I love it!

[MonsterDad]

One of the better reasons to feed raw is that you have some control over what they eat. There are no genetically modified animals at this point, but most dog foods are filled will genetically modified corn, yeast products and soy.

The cheap ones are at least 50% ground corn and Bt & Round Up Ready corn at that.

http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

Say No to Gmo!!!

[ACooper]

Say No to Gmo!!!

On this we can agree.

[ACooper]

No, I believe not. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

"you believe not" Now we are making progress. No one has a problem with what you feed, or cares. What you have failed to grasp to this point was that you were stating your opinion as fact, facts that you've not been able to support with anything more than your opinion.

It's great to have strong opinions, I have plenty, but I also expect to be called on them.

[walkos5]

[quote="MonsterDad"]One of the better reasons to feed raw is that you have some control over what they eat. There are no genetically modified animals at this point, but most dog foods are filled will genetically modified corn, yeast products and soy.

The cheap ones are at least 50% ground corn and Bt & Round Up Ready corn at that.

Now don't be so hard on those kibble makers, everyone's out nowadays to make a quick buck.. Besides at least they have nice pictures on their bags.

[walkos5]

No, I believe not. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

"you believe not" Now we are making progress. No one has a problem with what you feed, or cares. What you have failed to grasp to this point was that you were stating your opinion as fact, facts that you've not been able to support with anything more than your opinion.

It's great to have strong opinions, I have plenty, but I also expect to be called on them.

The facts you guys are looking for don't exist. To state things like a natural diet can provide the best nutrition for most any living thing is common sense stated through an opinion, so If your group lacks common sense then all the facts in the world won't change their opinion.

[Mountaineer]

My comparison is not about dogs but nutrition.

You mentioned sled dogs.

.... Can a dog survive long on kibble and hunt well, I certainly believe so.

Is it the best diet for him. No, I believe not. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

Not a point, at best, it is an opinion...especially as it relates to birddogs.
My "opinion" is that sled doggers often feed raw for purposes apart from supplying performance, ie. practicality perhaps.



Treasure your first dog, lad...we never forget them.

[walkos5]

Not a point, at best, it is an opinion as it relates to birddogs.My "opinion" is that sled doggers often feed raw for reasons and purposes apart from supplying performance, ie. practicality perhaps.Treasure your first dog, lad...we never forget them.

I must respectfully disagree with your last opinion in that stamina is greatly effected by nutritional intake. And it would be my opinion that sled dogs owners would want foods proven to produce such. I will treasure my first hunting dog as I have other dogs I have cared for. I must say that I appreciate your manner of discussion in comparison to some others who have chosen to be difficult.

[birddogger]

I appreciate your opinion but I never said I expect my dog to live to 16, I only said I plan on hunting him until he is 16. To say I plan leaves room for common sense. It is the kibble comedy club who has an agenda and its focused on dismissing the science and nature behind the discussion. I am also more then sure there are also some top contenders with years of experience that will disagree with your regimen. If you want to talk about performance, talk to the sled dog owners in Alaska. How many do you think won the 1100 mile race across that gentle wilderness on a strict diet of just kibble. I have nothing against those who feed a commercial diet but don't promote it as equal to a natural diet, because you know its not true.

I don't remember reading where anybody said kibble was equal to or better than raw. The only ones arguing that one is better than the other and has an agenda is you and a couple of others. :roll:

Charlie

[ezzy333]

Raw is much better than dog kibble by far,raw provides more nutrients and vitamins than dry dog kibble. Kibble is based mostly off corn meal which is just a filler with empty carbs. Corn is not digestable and will only lead your dog to being hungrier and gain more weight.

Interestingly that you will hear people tell you a certain ingredient is indigestible and will cause your dog to be hungry and gain weight. We need to bottle that. Explain how indigestible causes weight gain. When and where did you all learn all of this?

We also have found what a sled dog needs is quite different than our mutts. But it is interesting that one of the vets on this board is trying to make a living selling dry food formulated for sled dogs. The last actual information I have is that Lloyal was still the leader of the pack but that may have changed. During the race they ship the feed ahead so there is enough at each check point to feed the dogs. They can't haul enough with them for the whole race but they do carry some raw meat and a cooker so they can cook it before feeding it. But those dogs that are working 10,12, or more hours a day in below zero temps and little shelter have considerable differences in nutrition than our dogs that sleep 15 hours or more in a nice kennel most days. And the kicker to all of this is they feed a lot of indigestible grain that is full of empty calories along with a lot of raw or cooked meat.

I can just hear the powers that be sitting down in their conference room and discussing how they can make a dog food that is full of filler and is indigestible calories that will make the customers come back for more over and over. Sounds like a recipe to success to you?

Ezzy

[walkos5]

I appreciate your opinion but I never said I expect my dog to live to 16, I only said I plan on hunting him until he is 16. To say I plan leaves room for common sense. It is the kibble comedy club who has an agenda and its focused on dismissing the science and nature behind the discussion. I am also more then sure there are also some top contenders with years of experience that will disagree with your regimen. If you want to talk about performance, talk to the sled dog owners in Alaska. How many do you think won the 1100 mile race across that gentle wilderness on a strict diet of just kibble. I have nothing against those who feed a commercial diet but don't promote it as equal to a natural diet, because you know its not true.

I don't remember reading where anybody said kibble was equal to or better than raw. The only ones arguing that one is better than the other and has an agenda is you and a couple of others. :roll:

Charlie

All I can suggest is that you go back and read all of the posts from this subject and then let me know if you feel the same and I will explain why I have made any statements that you don't approve of.

[walkos5]

Say No to Gmo!!!

On this we can agree.

Yes we can..

[birddog1968]

You mention common sense.....you know what rules over SUPPOSED common sense. decades of real world experience with 1000's and
1000's of dogs as evidence. High performance barn burning birddogs. There have been literally 100's of thousands of dogs on kibble that your dog couldn't hold a candle for in the dark. What you spout as common sense is quite literally BS and you just don't have enough real world experience to realize it.

Those 100's of thousands of dogs don't need scientific studies to prove raws got no real advantage over kibble, those dogs are the scientific evidence, proof in the pudding no argument against which holds an ounce of water.


Now let's see a picture of your hound that can out do and out perform and outlive 100's of thousands of dogs with real world miles under their feet.....

[displaced_texan]

The facts you guys are looking for don't exist. To state things like a natural diet can provide the best nutrition for most any living thing is common sense stated through an opinion, so If your group lacks common sense then all the facts in the world won't change their opinion.

So do the facts exist, or is it your opinion?

Anyone who has read my interchanges with Ezzy knows I believe in facts and proof, your opinions are neither of those things, yet you are holding them above all other opinions, and experiences.

[walkos5]

The facts you guys are looking for don't exist. To state things like a natural diet can provide the best nutrition for most any living thing is common sense stated through an opinion, so If your group lacks common sense then all the facts in the world won't change their opinion.

So do the facts exist, or is it your opinion?

Anyone who has read my interchanges with Ezzy knows I believe in facts and proof, your opinions are neither of those things, yet you are holding them above all other opinions, and experiences.

I'm holding them to nothing, I am defending my stance based on what I believe because of my own experiences and what I have found out through countless hours of research that anyone can find if they look for it. There are also a few others that also believe as I do. The kibble feeders jumped on my case from the from get go, and what facts have they provided. I provided the 10 year study by pottinger that proves cooked meat provides much less nutrition then raw meat. And that study was supervised by a well established university, and the meat in dog food is fully cooked. I have also provided the names of vet's that provided information that supports a raw diet as better diet then commercial food. Now what facts or proof have they provided. I'll tell you, none and I don't care how many years experience they have or how many millions of dogs eat kibble, they can't prove that it is even equal to a raw fed diet. How about at least the name of a vet that opposes a raw diet because they haven't even provided that. They have even agreed that GMO is not a good thing and its part of the ingredients in commercial dog food so what more do you want from me.

[MonsterDad]

Raw is much better than dog kibble by far,raw provides more nutrients and vitamins than dry dog kibble. Kibble is based mostly off corn meal which is just a filler with empty carbs. Corn is not digestable and will only lead your dog to being hungrier and gain more weight.

Interestingly that you will hear people tell you a certain ingredient is indigestible and will cause your dog to be hungry and gain weight. We need to bottle that. Explain how indigestible causes weight gain. When and where did you all learn all of this?

We also have found what a sled dog needs is quite different than our mutts. But it is interesting that one of the vets on this board is trying to make a living selling dry food formulated for sled dogs. The last actual information I have is that Lloyal was still the leader of the pack but that may have changed. During the race they ship the feed ahead so there is enough at each check point to feed the dogs. They can't haul enough with them for the whole race but they do carry some raw meat and a cooker so they can cook it before feeding it. But those dogs that are working 10,12, or more hours a day in below zero temps and little shelter have considerable differences in nutrition than our dogs that sleep 15 hours or more in a nice kennel most days. And the kicker to all of this is they feed a lot of indigestible grain that is full of empty calories along with a lot of raw or cooked meat.

I can just hear the powers that be sitting down in their conference room and discussing how they can make a dog food that is full of filler and is indigestible calories that will make the customers come back for more over and over. Sounds like a recipe to success to you?

Ezzy

Loyall is the leader of what pack? Sledding? You are joking right?

[Mountaineer]

Not a point, at best, it is an opinion as it relates to birddogs.My "opinion" is that sled doggers often feed raw for reasons and purposes apart from supplying performance, ie. practicality perhaps.Treasure your first dog, lad...we never forget them.

I must respectfully disagree with your last opinion in that stamina is greatly effected by nutritional intake. And it would be my opinion that sled dogs owners would want foods proven to produce such. I will treasure my first hunting dog as I have other dogs I have cared for. I must say that I appreciate your manner of discussion in comparison to some others who have chosen to be difficult.

First, I reckon sleddoggers want stamina, of course, but I also reckon that sledoggers live 365 under requirements for raising and training their niche dogs that would find them applying their billfold, practicality, ease, tradition and more to all the decisions re those dogs.
Looking at sleddoggers only thru the lens of competition day yields a shallow conclusion, to me, and one with little application to my setters.
I do doubt, as I earlier implied, that many sled dogs will be hitched up on the Big Day at 16 years of age...or 14....I know why that is and that does apply to birddogs.
I would admit that if the marketing of any food can be tied to sled dogs or with a dog team on the package, can or bushel basket then new folks will seek it out for the photo connection alone.
One finds that with any product that carries an endorsement that trips some emotional trigger...as Job #1.

As to the "manner of discussion", thank you but I have slipped often in that regard and have found that my slips are most dependent upon what I believe is important.
It may be so with others.
Kibble vs. raw feeding does not strike me as important re birddogs.
It does strike me that kibble vs. raw can be very appealing to new birddog folks wanting some "best" for their dogs and best or better or good is always in the details that apply directly to a birddog being a birddog.
Any best, better or good, of a practical and real-world value from food to dog collars, will be most reliably found thru experience and in personal needs...not thru Internet surfing.

But, Internet surfing for the finding of supportable material for absolutely any belief will yield exactly what the searcher wants, from studies to experts to the popular and over-used anecdotal "ah-ha" moment...the Internet never lets any surfer down if they ride the wave long enough.
Learn to read your birddog and do less reading on the Internet for agenda support.
This issue of which food is best really is small taters.
Birddogs and the hunting of them may appear to a new guy as being under one umbrella of need but a more realistic view would look like a NY City sidewalk from a high-rise window on a rainy day.

[RoostersMom]

As an opinion, I believe a balanced raw diet is superior to a kibble based diet. I also believe that my vegetables from my garden are superior to that which I could buy at the local Piggly Wiggly. To me, it's common sense that unprocessed foods have more nutrients that are easier to digest - but that's just an opinion.

Arguments about raw vs. kibble aren't going to get you very far on this site because so many of the proponents of kibble have never tried (or are never likely to) a raw diet. They don't want the expense or the trouble because they don't believe it's that much better. The only way to change that opinion would be proving to them that the diet is better - the only way (IMO) to do that effectively is to convince them to try raw for a period of several months.

I recently read a blog about a vet who tried switching her dogs to raw diet....it was an interesting series of tests she conducted on them. I *think* the result was that raw improved the blood panel scores on all but one dog and body condition scores improved throughout the raw trial (she had an independent vet do the scoring).

I tried raw for a period of time, but with our travel and hunting schedule as well as our number of dogs, I discontinued using raw for my own convenience. It was just too difficult for me to keep up with it. But I wouldn't ever make the argument that kibble was nutritionally superior - just that it's more convenient. My dogs did very well on raw.

[walkos5]

I must respectfully disagree with your last opinion in that stamina is greatly effected by nutritional intake. And it would be my opinion that sled dogs owners would want foods proven to produce such. I will treasure my first hunting dog as I have other dogs I have cared for. I must say that I appreciate your manner of discussion in comparison to some others who have chosen to be difficult.[/quote]

First, I reckon sleddoggers want stamina, of course, but I also reckon that sledoggers live 365 under requirements for raising and training their niche dogs that would find them applying their billfold, practicality, ease, tradition and more to all the decisions re those dogs.
Looking at sleddoggers only thru the lens of competition day yields a shallow conclusion, to me, and one with little application to my setters.
I do doubt, as I earlier implied, that many sled dogs will be hitched up on the Big Day at 16 years of age...or 14....I know why that is and that does apply to birddogs.
I would admit that if the marketing of any food can be tied to sled dogs or with a dog team on the package, can or bushel basket then new folks will seek it out for the photo connection alone.
One finds that with any product that carries an endorsement that trips some emotional trigger...as Job #1.

As to the "manner of discussion", thank you but I have slipped often in that regard and have found that my slips are most dependent upon what I believe is important.
It may be so with others.
Kibble vs. raw feeding does not strike me as important re birddogs.
It does strike me that kibble vs. raw can be very appealing to new birddog folks wanting some "best" for their dogs and best or better or good is always in the details that apply directly to a birddog being a birddog.
Any best, better or good, of a practical and real-world value from food to dog collars, will be most reliably found thru experience and in personal needs...not thru Internet surfing.

But, Internet surfing for the finding of supportable material for absolutely any belief will yield exactly what the searcher wants, from studies to experts to the popular and over-used anecdotal "ah-ha" moment...the Internet never lets any surfer down if they ride the wave long enough.
Learn to read your birddog and do less reading on the Internet for agenda support.
This issue of which food is best really is small taters.
Birddogs and the hunting of them may appear to a new guy as being under one umbrella of need but a more realistic view would look like a NY City sidewalk from a high-rise window on a rainy day.[/quote]

I don't mean to discredit anyone's experience if I did it was out of anger from their responses which have been more than unreasonable. I agree with many of their opinions, and I agree that experience can sometimes be the best teacher. It is when they refuse to accept the views of others even when presented with evidence through science that I have a problem. An example of that would be to comparing the nutritional content of a piece of raw meat with bone and fat on it, to a handful of dry kibble. Science will tell us that the raw meat would provide the highest quality of nutrients in comparison to any commercial dry dog food. But they don't seem to like that kind of information and keep referring back to balance and ratios and measurements. And lets not forget the study that no one wants to do regarding raw vs commercial dog food. So in reality this argument is not about who knows more about training dogs or who has more proven experience or even whose dogs will live longer or out perform someone else's, but about nutritional value and that alone. I also agree that the internet can be a cure all for those who look long enough but there is also a sea of useful information backed by science with the endorsements of professionals as well as well known universities and institutions. What I believe important is standing up for what you believe in and it seems like both sides have already agreed with that one. Again, you are providing a meaningful discussion!

[frontline]

Natural whole foods are always better nutritionally than processed. The problem is most raw feeders don't feed correctly and a lot of them don't feed enough food.