[Spicy1_VV]

So I started a thread about feeding.

I was told to feed by kcals. I do understand the concept but at the same time it doesn't seem so reliable to go strictly by kcals? The calculators never really help me but that is a different subject. What I mean is for example

Blue Buffalo has 462.8 kcals per cup

Blue Wilderness has 586 kcals per cup

Yet the feeding guidelines (which I know certainly are not accurate for every dog) are

BB
16-30lbs 1 1/4 - 1 1/2 cups
70lbs 3 1/4 cups
100lbs 4 1/4 cups

BW
16-25lbs 1 - 1 1/2 cups
75lbs 4 1/4 cups
100lbs 6 cups

I used this as an example since they are made by the same company. Wouldn't it make sense that a higher calorie should be fed lesser amounts.

Those are just guidelines so I know I should adjust for my dogs.

But following the guidelines and looking at the kcals for 100lbs dog they recommend 2966.9 kcals a day of Blue Buffalo and 3516 kcals a day of Blue Wilderness.

I've also fed the same amount of one food with less kcals vs another with higher kcals and the dog never dropped weight.

[Labsnothers]

I never try to calculate how much food. Long ago, I was taught to go by the ribs. It is now illustrated at http://www.longliveyourdog.com/twoplus/RateYourDog.aspx

Using the ribs, I have had young Labs eating anywhere from 3 to 6 cups of Pro Plan a day. Peggy came to us at 7 months with her ribs showing. The dog guide school hadn't seen her and threw a fit when they heard I was feeding her 7 cups a day. She wasn't gaining on 6. Her daddy was a field Lab and she was very high energy.

Now if you are changing from one food to another, the best starting point would be the amount calculated from the calories. Complicating things is some dogs don't digest some foods as efficiently. At a year old Peggy was maintaining good body condition on 5 cups a day. I think she was just burning off that much calories. Lucky was much lower energy and took 6 cups. Pro Plan chicken and rice may not have been the best food for him. Named him right. The last I heard, he was working on the Rivera.

[Spicy1_VV]

Hmmmm do you actually read my post? You will get a similar reply at the last thread. Once again I've no need for an illustration and was not asking what body condition my dogs should be in. I keep my dogs how I like them and how they show/perform well which is lean, muscular, couple ribs visible and nice tuck. I will continue to do so. I don't need anyone to recommend a body condition to me. I know my dogs are in fabulous condition.

I'm not trying to get my dogs to gain or loose weight. There is an easy way to do that. Adjust the intake.

The main question was why if kcals matter would a food that is more kcals per cup recommend feeding more vs their product that has less kcals per cup?

I possibly see an answer buried in your reply. Which is digestibility. But that would mean you're saying it is less digestible. Are you saying that? That the low carb, high protein, "better ingredient" food is not digested as efficiently therefore requiring you to feed more of it. If so that is a rip off. I don't know if you are right or wrong on that one, so I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, not even sure if you are saying that so I'm trying to figure out if that is your answer to the issue.

Blue Wilderness cost me like $3-4 more per bag and it is 4lbs less then Blue Buffalo. You'd think it'd be more efficiently digested having "better ingredients" and you'd need to feed less with more kcals, protein, ect.

[pugmom]

Originally Posted by Spicy1_VV

Hmmmm do you actually read my post? You will get a similar reply at the last thread. Once again I've no need for an illustration and was not asking what body condition my dogs should be in. I keep my dogs how I like them and how they show/perform well which is lean, muscular, couple ribs visible and nice tuck. I will continue to do so. I don't need anyone to recommend a body condition to me. I know my dogs are in fabulous condition.

I'm not trying to get my dogs to gain or loose weight. There is an easy way to do that. Adjust the intake.

The main question was why if kcals matter would a food that is more kcals per cup recommend feeding more vs their product that has less kcals per cup?

I possibly see an answer buried in your reply. Which is digestibility. But that would mean you're saying it is less digestible. Are you saying that? That the low carb, high protein, "better ingredient" food is not digested as efficiently therefore requiring you to feed more of it. If so that is a rip off. I don't know if you are right or wrong on that one, so I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, not even sure if you are saying that so I'm trying to figure out if that is your answer to the issue.

Blue Wilderness cost me like $3-4 more per bag and it is 4lbs less then Blue Buffalo. You'd think it'd be more efficiently digested having "better ingredients" and you'd need to feed less with more kcals, protein, ect.

This could be one of those "depends on the dog" issues......some brands maybe more digestible to different dogs?....I really have no idea..just throwing it out there

[DobManiac]

That doesn't make any sense to me. Have you noticed this with other companies that have similar brands? And on a side note, doesn't 6 cups a day for a 100 lb dog seem to be a lot of food? I don't think most people are feeding near that much of EVO, but I could be wrong.

Personally, that makes me worry about the food.

ETA: I looked by Nature's Variety and compared their Prairie formula to the Instinct chicken for a 50lb dog.

Instinct Chicken: 1 3/4 cups 490 kcal per cup
Prairie Chicken and Brown Rice: 2 1/8 cups 391 kcal per cup

So maybe blue wilderness is out of the norm. I tried to check out Innova, but they don't offer feeding guidelines on the website.

[dieterherzog]

I think that it doesn't really address the dog activity level issue - it's just a single number. I'm not sure why some companies only publish one number as opposed to that for "active" and "less active".

The number means that for a 100lbs dog, you can feed anywhere from 4.5 cups to 6 cups - it doesn't mean that a 75lb dog gets 4.5 cups and a 100lb dog gets 6 cups. Also, for high protein kibble, I think the manufacturer usually assumes that the dog highly active (or a working dog) since those are the kinds of dog that would most likely need a high protein diet. That's why they always have a disclaimer that says: Individual dog’s requirements may vary from this chart due to age, breed, environment and activity level. Adjust food as required to maintain optimal body condition.

[Spicy1_VV]

Originally Posted by pugmom

This could be one of those "depends on the dog" issues......some brands maybe more digestible to different dogs?....I really have no idea..just throwing it out there

I certainly agree there. Some dogs do better on some foods. I was trying to get at that being their answer or what - if dogs in general won't digest as much Wilderness. Also for these 2 foods that is their general guideline, so it seems a bit weird.

Originally Posted by DobManiac

That doesn't make any sense to me. Have you noticed this with other companies that have similar brands? And on a side note, doesn't 6 cups a day for a 100 lb dog seem to be a lot of food? I don't think most people are feeding near that much of EVO, but I could be wrong.

Personally, that makes me worry about the food.

ETA: I looked by Nature's Variety and compared their Prairie formula to the Instinct chicken for a 50lb dog.



So maybe blue wilderness is out of the norm. I tried to check out Innova, but they don't offer feeding guidelines on the website.

I just threw my Evo bag out too, so SOL there.

I don't know if 6 cups is a lot or not. I feed my 80 some lbs dog 8 cups a day. On Evo some of mine seem to eat quite a bit and others are eating less compared to other foods, but on some they are eating raw + Evo and they are eating more than suggested to maintain body weight. In the other thread I mentioned it was pertaining to two of my dogs one is 35lbs the other is 60lbs give or take and they are both eating 4 cups. So I think it depends on the dog.

I've noticed similar with Wellness. Of course the feeding guidelines are never exactly the same, but it does seem they recommend feeding a little more of the Core.

Wellness 407 kcals per cup
46-65 2 - 2 ½
86-105 3 - 3 ½
106-125 3 ½ - 4

Wellness Core 430 kcals per cup
35-50 1 1/4 - 1 3/4
50-65 2 1/4 - 2 3/4
95-115 3 3/4 - 4 1/4

ETA I used the calculator on Natura's Website.

For adult dog maintenance Evo 2 cups
For adult dog moderately active Innova 1 3/4 cups

Lg Breed Puppy 8-12 months Evo 2 1/8
Sm Breed Puppy 8-12 months Evo 2 cups
Puppy 8-12 months Innova 1 7/8 cups

Seems a similar trend. I had the weight of all calculations set to 40lbs.

Originally Posted by dieterherzog

I think that it doesn't really address the dog activity level issue - it's just a single number. I'm not sure why some companies only publish one number as opposed to that for "active" and "less active".

Yes I agree. The point is more so not that we should rely on this. It is just odd that brands would recommend that more be fed of their foods with higher calories compared to their foods with less.

Some do have differing suggestions or that disclaimer you mentioned. Eagle Pack also has a chart on the bag that recommends which foods to feed like for a less active dog, pregnant dog, working dog, older dog, puppy, ect.

The number means that for a 100lbs dog, you can feed anywhere from 4.5 cups to 6 cups - it doesn't mean that a 75lb dog gets 4.5 cups and a 100lb dog gets 6 cups. Also, for high protein kibble, I think the manufacturer usually assumes that the dog highly active (or a working dog) since those are the kinds of dog that would most likely need a high protein diet. That's why they always have a disclaimer that says: Individual dog’s requirements may vary from this chart due to age, breed, environment and activity level. Adjust food as required to maintain optimal body condition.

Even if so, that it should be read in that manner
Dogs 75lbs to 100lbs can be fed 4.5 - 6 cups it is still recommending to feed more Wilderness than Blue Buffalo. As BB recommends that dogs which are 71 to 100lbs eat anywhere from 3.25 - 4.25 cups. The starting range for BW is higher than the max recommendation of BB.

I also see that a lot of people feed their pets this kind of food so I don't know on the working dog thing. There are a lot of working people which are feeding the crappier sorts of foods too. I understand the disclaimer. I understand these are only guidelines. That is why my two are eating 4 cups each, I don't follow what they say to feed. I follow what works for them. It is that I don't understand why you should or would need to feed more of higher kcal foods. I'd seem logically you'd need to feed less and that would sort of be the point in feeding more calories in the same amount of food. At least that is usually what I see being said.

[DobManiac]

I don't know if 6 cups is a lot or not. I feed my 80 some lbs dog 8 cups a day. On Evo some of mine seem to eat quite a bit and others are eating less compared to other foods, but on some they are eating raw + Evo and they are eating more than suggested to maintain body weight. In the other thread I mentioned it was pertaining to two of my dogs one is 35lbs the other is 60lbs give or take and they are both eating 4 cups. So I think it depends on the dog.

I know most of your dogs are intact? The feeding guidelines seem to usually apply to neutered dogs. So I would think you would have to feed more no matter what food it is.

[Spicy1_VV]

Originally Posted by DobManiac

I know most of your dogs are intact? The feeding guidelines seem to usually apply to neutered dogs. So I would think you would have to feed more no matter what food it is.

Yes most are. I never thought about the guidelines being meant for broke dogs. Some that are similar size do eat differing amounts too. I know that has to do with metabolism and activity level.