register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 06:25 AM
Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I think it's disgraceful that some rescues I've seen make it a policy that you have to feed a dog you adopt from them a raw diet. Surely a good home is what is needed not what diet the dog is on unless it's for medical reasons?
Becky

So if they were a business with shareholders, what would they have to say on the subject?

Surely their primary goal is to rehome dogs, if they are not meeting this objective setting rehoming criteria too high, then they are not doing the dogs any favours are they, and of course if they were a charity I for one would not suppor them.

Charities are actually businesses and it sounds as though this centres are failing in their duty of care to dogs and not meeting their key peformance indicators.
Reply With Quote
muttzrule
Dogsey Veteran
muttzrule is offline  
Location: Texas, USA
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,620
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 07:09 AM
I have fed commercial complete, Raw and home cooked diets at various points over the years and have come to a few conclusions, the most important being this:

The best diet for your dog is the diet your dog does best on. And that is probably a bit different for every dog and dog owner out there.

Moxie ate a high quality kibble for years (Solid Gold). When we moved to Mexico, I could no longer source good kibble, the only thing I could get was the mexican equivalent of Bakers. Raw feeding was the natural alternative. We grew our own meat, or sourced from friends/family farms. It was trial and error, but I have to say my girl did very well on that diet. For my situation in Mexico, Raw was practical and beneficial for my dog.

Back in the states, not so much. Meat here is expensive and the meats that she did well on in Mexico (Goat, Rabbit, Quail etc) I couldn't get here unless I ordered online and had it shipped in bulk. Not room in the budget or the freezer for that. We quickly found she was intollerant of beef, chicken and pork which are readily available here.

We did home cooked for a while trying all manner of different protein sources and recipes. It was costly and time consuming to prepare her meals daily, but at the end of the day, she just was not thriving on that diet.

So now we are back to kibble (canned and dry complete food) She is thriving once again. So like I said, there is no right or wrong answer, its what works for you and your dog.
Reply With Quote
DvnBiker
Dogsey Junior
DvnBiker is offline  
Location: Devon, England
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 102
 
19-06-2011, 08:14 AM
I do feed raw but never think about pushing what I feed my dogs onto others. I quite often get asked about it when i am seen feeding chicken carcusses at an agility show and I am happy to talk about it but that is it. For me and my dogs on the whole it has been the best thing.

As to kibble being linked to cancer - there isnt enough studies or information out there to make that determination to be honest.

I swopped to raw cold turkey style and actually had no side effects like you would normally get if you swopped to a different kibble.

I dont find raw anymore time consuming than kibble and it is certainly alot cheaper, costing me about £50 per month whereas their previous food was costing me £90.
Reply With Quote
Mahooli
Dogsey Veteran
Mahooli is offline  
Location: Poodle Heaven!
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,297
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 09:34 AM
Another reason I don't feed raw is the risk of causing fights amongst my dogs at feeding time. I love to be able to free feed so my dogs can eat when they feel like it rather than having set meals. I find their energy levels are far more stable using this method of feeding which would not be possible if I fed any type of wet food.
Becky
Reply With Quote
Kerryowner
Dogsey Veteran
Kerryowner is offline  
Location: Norwich UK
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,795
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 09:37 AM
Originally Posted by Velvetboxers View Post
If you feed the dogs like this, how do you feed guests - can i come stay ????
Of course-you're very welcome!

Originally Posted by Tass View Post
It looks pretty tasty doesn't it ?

I think we should volunteer Kerryowner for Come Dine with Me
Now that would be funny! I love that man who does the voice-over. he is so cutting!
Reply With Quote
krlyr
Dogsey Veteran
krlyr is offline  
Location: Surrey
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,420
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 09:55 AM
Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I think it's disgraceful that some rescues I've seen make it a policy that you have to feed a dog you adopt from them a raw diet. Surely a good home is what is needed not what diet the dog is on unless it's for medical reasons?
Becky
I've seen this happen in cases where the dog has food intolerances or health issues and can totally understand it. Applying it to every dog may be a little stricter but is it any different to other rescue rules?
Limiting the age of children in the household can rule out lots of good homes, that may be able to work the children/dog situation out brilliantly.
Not homing to households with entire dogs is another that rules out a few good homes, often because the rescue doesn't want to be seen to approve of entire dogs (not an opinion I share but can kind of see the reasoning)
Not rehoming to fulltime-work families, to students, to eldery people, etc. Ruling out flats, town locations, people looking to relocate abroad (who plan to take the dog with them) and so on.
I don't think a rescues absolute priority should be getting the dogs into homes, but getting them into good, lifetime homes with owners who are on the same page in regards to ethics etc. There's a rescue on here constantly picking up the pieces with Staffies with just days to live because they've been dumped or the owner is threatening euthanasia because they're so overbred, so although I don't agree with the rule, I can see why they're not keen to rehome to someone who hasn't neutered/spayed their current dogs. Rescues who will get the flak if their rehomed dog hurts a child may well err on the side of caution and turn down a great home just because of the age of the children.
If a rescue can decide to insist that you neuter a dog at 6 months, that you return the dog even if you've owned it longer than they cared for it, that it doesn't go off-lead for the first month (the adoption contract I signed for Casper had a clause like this) and so on, insisting on a specific diet is just an extension of them wanting the dog to thrive in its new home, health and behavioural-wise.
Reply With Quote
Tass
Almost a Veteran
Tass is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,096
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 10:05 AM
Originally Posted by Kerryowner View Post

Now that would be funny! I love that man who does the voice-over. he is so cutting!
Dave Lamb . I don't know if he writes the script too but the comedy factor of his voice-over is the reason I watch
Reply With Quote
Tass
Almost a Veteran
Tass is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,096
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 10:06 AM
Originally Posted by muttzrule View Post
<snip>

The best diet for your dog is the diet your dog does best on. And that is probably a bit different for every dog and dog owner out there.
<snip>

So like I said, there is no right or wrong answer, its what works for you and your dog.
Absolutely
Reply With Quote
lozzibear
Dogsey Veteran
lozzibear is offline  
Location: Motherwell, UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 17,088
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 03:44 PM
Originally Posted by Velvetboxers View Post
I have never yet heard a vet being against kibble, they always recommend kibble, in fact the head vet in the practice we used to go to was not very approving at all when I said I was changing to raw

I hadnt heard that either about changing diets cold turkey to raw. The raw diet forum I joined said to do a slow change over.
Oops, 'kibble' was meant to say 'raw' Tass said the vet was for raw, and against kibble... and i was trying to say that most vets i hear about are the other way, and are for kibble and against raw.
Reply With Quote
lozzibear
Dogsey Veteran
lozzibear is offline  
Location: Motherwell, UK
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 17,088
Female 
 
19-06-2011, 03:56 PM
Originally Posted by Tass View Post
Do you recall what type of cancer was associated with the kibble and which kibble and what the controls were in terms of dogs selected and diets provided?

I would be interested to see the research if you have the link. If the dogs were related to each other, or of a particular breed, or if the sample size was too small those factors could all affect the results, as can other variables.
I will try to dig out the link but i think it was something to do with the preservatives that go into kibble. I don't think it is a solid fact though, and there is so much we don't know about cancer anyway...

Originally Posted by Tass View Post
That surprised me as I have always understood any dietary changes should be made gradually, say ~5-7 days for a complete change over, with anything new being initially introduced a little at a time

Do you know what the rationale is behind that approach?

Or is it just that the more militant proponents don't think dogs should be on anything other than raw for a second longer?
I had always heard that too, until reading about raw. I'm not sure what the rationale is, but kibble and raw shouldn't be fed within the same meal as they digest at different rates, so i'm not sure if it is to do with that or something else...
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 7 of 56 « First < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 17 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top