comparing two organic feeds: NCO vs locally milled

[zenstarling]

hi everyone,

my ladies are 30 weeks old and have been on New Country Organics feed since day 1: starter, grower, and now layer. we've been very happy with it. they're healthy, thriving, glossy beautiful feathers, eggs every day, happy birds. I would be reluctant to change anything because they're doing so well.

however, I found out recently that there's an organic feed mill local to me that also produces an organic soy-free 17% layer. local chicken keepers who use them are happy with it and fully recommend. price wise, the local feed is MUCH less expensive, taking the shipping-to-feedstore cost out of the equation. of course, anything local will be much fresher which is a HUGE advantage in quality and nutrition and would obviously be the ideal.

ingredients wise, they seem comparable, but there are definite differences, which is why I'm here. I would love to hop on a local source of organic, freshly milled feed, but wanted to run it by BYC and see what others' thoughts are on comparing these two, before I make any changes to the flock that is doing so well on the NCO. the local feed seems to have less variety in ingredients, if I'm reading it correctly. I did also notice the locally milled feed does not provide the full list of percentages that the typical feed tags do.

and to be clear -- this discussion is not to debate the pros and cons of organic or soy-free. I am only comparing these two products and would love to hear thoughts.

thank you very much!

 

[Auntiejessi3]

@U_Stormcrow could you please take a look at this

 

[HollowOfWisps]

Just comparing the two I would say stick to the one you are currently using. The fat content on the local mill option is much higher which I'm not a fan of since chickens are prone to fatty liver disease on high fat diets.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

So... Everything in both those feeds from the VItamin A Supplement to the Bacillus Subtilis - looks to be the same. I'm guessing they both use the same brand of feed supplement. Anything listed after those things is in such small quantity as to be largely immaterial.
Sadly, the second doesn't have a complete label, making it hard to compare beyond crude protein, fat, fiber.

5% fat is the higher edge for recommends, but still in the acceptable range. That's a number i expect to see in waterfowl blends and for Cx and other meaties. Of course, both those formulations have too much calcium for meaties (how much calcium in the second??? Who knows!). SO, on the basis of slightly higher fat, and who knows for calcium, I'm inclined against the second. I don't like that uncertainty. More because they don't list Lys or Met...

Now, if there were a big price difference between them, I'd start looking at the ingredients.

Lets look at the second, since the first has an acceptable guaranteed nutrition label. See the Aragonite? That's a form of Calcium Carbonate, same thing that makes up oyster shell. The monocalcium phosphate is source of more calcium and also not phytate phosphorus. Assuming that this is a roughly 4% calcium blend (BIG assumption), everything below that point is tiny numbers (Salt should be less than 1/2%, DL Methionine inclusion is limited by law to a fraction of a % as well).

That means the only things we really need to look at to find the backbone of the feed are corn, peas, sesame meal, crab meal.
Corn has lots of carbs, some fat, and is low (because its protein is very low) in Met, Lys, and Tryp. My guess is that its probably 50% +/- of the feed. Peas are routinely recommended not to exceed 10%, but inclusion rates of 20%-30% aren't unheard of. Peas are good for Ly and Thre, tolerable Tryp, again low Met. Sesame meal has similar protein (CP) to one the common soybean meals, but about 8x the fat content. Its actually better in Met and Tryp than Soybean meal, not nearly so good in Lysine or Thre. Crab meal is highly variable, but typically good sources of Met, Lys, Thre, and decent source of Tryp.

if we assume (because that's all we can do) a rate of 55% Corn, 15% Peas, 12% Sesame Meal, 5% Crab meal, and 8% everything else (over half of which is sodium, calcium, and phosphorus). the numbers for the aminos come out about the same to a little worse than the first feed (in Lys and Thre, particularly), but that's just a guess. Even small changes in the inclusion rates of crab meal and sesame meal (which I've probably underincluded here, based on fat levels) will make big difference, because those are where the majority of the protein are concentrated.

 

[centrarchid]

How much production per dollar if both formulations meet your criteria for organic? If local performs at least as well or even a little worse, then I would go local to support local economy.

 

[zenstarling]

So... Everything in both those feeds from the VItamin A Supplement to the Bacillus Subtilis - looks to be the same. I'm guessing they both use the same brand of feed supplement. Anything listed after those things is in such small quantity as to be largely immaterial.
Sadly, the second doesn't have a complete label, making it hard to compare beyond crude protein, fat, fiber.

5% fat is the higher edge for recommends, but still in the acceptable range. That's a number i expect to see in waterfowl blends and for Cx and other meaties. Of course, both those formulations have too much calcium for meaties (how much calcium in the second??? Who knows!). SO, on the basis of slightly higher fat, and who knows for calcium, I'm inclined against the second. I don't like that uncertainty. More because they don't list Lys or Met...

Now, if there were a big price difference between them, I'd start looking at the ingredients.

Lets look at the second, since the first has an acceptable guaranteed nutrition label. See the Aragonite? That's a form of Calcium Carbonate, same thing that makes up oyster shell. The monocalcium phosphate is source of more calcium and also not phytate phosphorus. Assuming that this is a roughly 4% calcium blend (BIG assumption), everything below that point is tiny numbers (Salt should be less than 1/2%, DL Methionine inclusion is limited by law to a fraction of a % as well).

That means the only things we really need to look at to find the backbone of the feed are corn, peas, sesame meal, crab meal.
Corn has lots of carbs, some fat, and is low (because its protein is very low) in Met, Lys, and Tryp. My guess is that its probably 50% +/- of the feed. Peas are routinely recommended not to exceed 10%, but inclusion rates of 20%-30% aren't unheard of. Peas are good for Ly and Thre, tolerable Tryp, again low Met. Sesame meal has similar protein (CP) to one the common soybean meals, but about 8x the fat content. Its actually better in Met and Tryp than Soybean meal, not nearly so good in Lysine or Thre. Crab meal is highly variable, but typically good sources of Met, Lys, Thre, and decent source of Tryp.

if we assume (because that's all we can do) a rate of 55% Corn, 15% Peas, 12% Sesame Meal, 5% Crab meal, and 8% everything else (over half of which is sodium, calcium, and phosphorus). the numbers for the aminos come out about the same to a little worse than the first feed (in Lys and Thre, particularly), but that's just a guess. Even small changes in the inclusion rates of crab meal and sesame meal (which I've probably underincluded here, based on fat levels) will make big difference, because those are where the majority of the protein are concentrated.

hi @U_Stormcrow, thank you so much for this very detailed reply and for diving into the comparison for me! (I’m sorry this took me SO long to get back to you, I just had to post this during the busiest week of the year )

this helps me to understand reading what’s on the feed tags and getting a sense for percentages using your methods of detective work. thank you! I wish I had the full list of percentages from the local feed. I will ask them if they can give me any more info. I really appreciate your in depth analysis and breaking it down for me. both feeds are actually the same price straight from each mill — I just haven’t found a way to get the NCO feed near me that doesn’t have the extra shipping costs from Virginia built in. so, for me the local feed is cheaper.

that said… I’m understanding your general conclusion as: it sounds like the local feed is mostly corn, the fat is a little high, and there are too many other unknowns without the other percentages — overall sounding inferior nutritionally to the NCO?

 

[U_Stormcrow]

that said… I’m understanding your general conclusion as: it sounds like the local feed is mostly corn, the fat is a little high, and there are too many other unknowns without the other percentages — overall sounding inferior nutritionally to the NCO?

I took a longer route to get there, but, yes, that's my best guess.

 

[zenstarling]

I took a longer route to get there, but, yes, that's my best guess.

the longer route was helpful — the road map through your thinking helps us learn how to apply the same scrutiny. thank you for taking the time to do that.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Is what BYC is for. I'm no expert, just a guy whose read some things

 

[zenstarling]

Is what BYC is for. I'm no expert, just a guy whose read some things

@U_Stormcrow, I was able to get the local feed company to send me some more information. does this add to any of the gaps in the analysis? thanks!