Pellet vs Free Range/Foraging

[Perris]

All I was trying to find out is if I'm harming my flock inadvertently by letting them forage, since many, many folks report that not feeding solely balanced commercial feed is contributing to the problems and losses my flock is experiencing. I don't even care about egg production at the moment. I just want my chickens and ducks to stop dying.

I am sure you are not hurting your flock by letting them free range and forage. Whatever the fauna and flora that grows in your area, it will have nutrients that they can use, and their instincts will tell them what they need and in what quantities. Trust them to know what's good for them, especially if you feel you don't know it.

 

[Perris]

which is fine if you want scrawny, slow growing, poorly producing, birds with greater vulnerability to coccidosis, worms, and a host of other ills, and you happen to be keeping your flock on a decent peice of land

with respect, this is just nonsense.

My (heritage and rare breed) chickens are not as you describe in any respect except slow growing (which I think is a good thing health wise; ask a 42 day old modern meat bird). My 5 year old hens laid over 100 eggs last year (and obviously laid more when they were younger), and the shells are still strong, and 5 out of 6 of her eggs hatched a month ago, so fertility is still good too. Here they are busy gleaning a mealworm drawer. They are unmedicated. And they eat real food, not commercial feed.

 

[saysfaa]

Just wondering what breed Spice is.

Brown Leghorn
Nutmeg is also a brown leghorn, came from the same place at the same time, and has none of Spice's drive. Nutmeg hangs out with the australorps.

 

[Shadrach]

The giant pink elephant in the room called reality.

First I would like to apologise to @Aunt Angus for my part in the thread drift. There is no satisfactory answer to your question. I would always choose ranging with commercial feed as backup for any chickens I cared for provided I had chosen the breed of chicken suitable for the circumstances in which they would live.

I’ve read with incredulity on this thread and others extreme views on what should and shouldn’t be fed to what is an omnivorous creature. I’ve read about how much healthier modern chickens are compared to those kept by our grandparents. I’ve read how the science applied to chicken feeding has increased the productivity of the hen and improved the hens health. I’ve read that by ranging chickens where they may eat less than optimal foodstuffs that this may harm there overall health. Then there is the debate based on the safety of the chicken when ranging. For some it is irresponsible to range chickens because of the risk of predation and it is recommended to keep the chickens confined in a secure coop and run.

In the picture below are two hens on their first day out that are the product of these wonderful advances in chicken keeping and chicken health. They’ve eaten nothing but commercial feed, never been exposed to the dangers of free ranging. They’ve been carefully bred with the aid of some of the best genetic science available. They’ve been kept in well ventilated and pest free environment providing clean water and constant access to commercial feed. If they are lucky they might just struggle to 4 years old, finally succumbing to one of the cancers common to high production hens.

On the other hand here is a pair of dirt scrabbling mutts who have eaten everything from mice to Orkney mature cheddar cheese. Every day they risk predation by free ranging. Given a choice they’ll drink from a muddy puddle. No scientist has improved their health with careful breeding, special diets and ideal keeping conditions. If they can dodge the predators and keep out of fights they may live to ten, or twelve years old.

How you keep your chickens is your choice; unfortunately for the chicken.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Re: 1, you missed the point. I didn't say their needs vary by type of bird, e.g. layer. I said

So, picking up your example, layer feed is formulated for the average layer. My point was that a specific layer will metabolize their food differently from another specific layer.

and those differences are almost immaterial. Even scientifically measured differences between prime commercial laying breeds average out to quite small differences. You are straining at gnats. It is impractical to formulate different feeds for every bird every week over differences that are almost immeasurable. Costs well exceed benefits under any reasonable standard.

The alternative - let them feed themselves from the great unknown - offers no guarantee of superior outcome, and likely, worse, given that the minimum nutritional values found in typical feeds exceed that which can be readily, reliably, consistently obtained in nature. Nor does reliance on the great unknown offer reduced risks of waste/excess in some nutritional elements. It is much less consistent, as well. In many cases it is adequate to survival of some portion of the flock, yes, but that's not the standard being argued for.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

The giant pink elephant in the room called reality.

First I would like to apologise to @Aunt Angus for my part in the thread drift. There is no satisfactory answer to your question. I would always choose ranging with commercial feed as backup for any chickens I cared for provided I had chosen the breed of chicken suitable for the circumstances in which they would live.

I’ve read with incredulity on this thread and others extreme views on what should and shouldn’t be fed to what is an omnivorous creature. I’ve read about how much healthier modern chickens are compared to those kept by our grandparents. I’ve read how the science applied to chicken feeding has increased the productivity of the hen and improved the hens health. I’ve read that by ranging chickens where they may eat less than optimal foodstuffs that this may harm there overall health. Then there is the debate based on the safety of the chicken when ranging. For some it is irresponsible to range chickens because of the risk of predation and it is recommended to keep the chickens confined in a secure coop and run.

In the picture below are two hens on their first day out that are the product of these wonderful advances in chicken keeping and chicken health. They’ve eaten nothing but commercial feed, never been exposed to the dangers of free ranging. They’ve been carefully bred with the aid of some of the best genetic science available. They’ve been kept in well ventilated and pest free environment providing clean water and constant access to commercial feed. If they are lucky they might just struggle to 4 years old, finally succumbing to one of the cancers common to high production hens.

View attachment 3202599


On the other hand here is a pair of dirt scrabbling mutts who have eaten everything from mice to Orkney mature cheddar cheese. Every day they risk predation by free ranging. Given a choice they’ll drink from a muddy puddle. No scientist has improved their health with careful breeding, special diets and ideal keeping conditions. If they can dodge the predators and keep out of fights they may live to ten, or twelve years old.

View attachment 3202600


How you keep your chickens is your choice; unfortunately for the chicken.

More than a little disingenuous to compare battery hens rescued from commercial farming ops which have been bred for high production at the expense of longevity, and then deliberately fed on a diet intended to be as absolutely cheap as possible before the replacement costs of wholesale hens and reduced productivity exceed feed cost savings, managed in conditions that require humans to use respirators and powered ventilation systems while working inside against birds not raised under those extreme conditions.

None of us here are advocating for treating our backyard flocks in such fashion. Most of us recommend against use of Layer formulations in part because of the original design intent, which we don't believe to be suited to typical backyard management.

Last I read, mortality in commercial ops over the productive lifespan (less than two years, sometimes as short as 18 months) was still about 1 bird in 16 under some conditions (though as low as about 1 in 50 under others). I think the US average is still around 1 in 32. (see, for instance) and that includes additional efforts such as beak filing to further reduce injury - another thing you won't find most of us recommending.

 

[Geena]

It's unfortunate how these sorts of threads go, with people retreating even further into their own opposing corners and drawing arbitrary lines here and there.
It seems to me in regard to feeding there is a huge, happy, healthy medium in the middle, where chickens have access to a variety of foodstuffs from whatever they can scratch up to formulated pellets and everything in between.

Our chickens are as varied as we, our environments and our ancestors are and were, and it's erroneous to try to make any defined comparisons between them. How wild game fowl type chickens or battery hens live and eat has exactly nothing to do with how I need to raise my jumbo meat mutts on my farm.
It's like trying to compare a Chihuahua in Mexico to a sight hound in the Middle East to a Husky in Alaska.

 

[Shadrach]

It seems to me in regard to feeding there is a huge, happy, healthy medium in the middle, where chickens have access to a variety of foodstuffs from whatever they can scratch up to formulated pellets and everything in between.

Completely agree. This is exactly what I'm advocating, variety, access to it, natural behaviour including foraging. Sitting and hatching etc etc.

 

[Perris]

It is impractical to formulate different feeds for every bird every week

do you really think this is what I'm advocating? If so, you've not understood my argument at all.

let them feed themselves from the great unknown

from one extreme to the other, as usual in your style of argument. I am reminded of the axiom that a mind all logic is like a knife all blade; it cuts the hand that holds it.

 

[NatJ]

Even scientifically measured differences between prime commercial laying breeds average out to quite small differences.

I would expect that.

They are strongly selecting the birds, and tweaking the feed, to get a combination that gives the most eggs for the least cost. But that means any hens who need extra nutrients are going to perform poorly and get culled.

If you want to find differences among individual layers, you would probably have to look at the various breeds that are not as strongly selected.

It is impractical to formulate different feeds for every bird every week over differences that are almost immeasurable. Costs well exceed benefits under any reasonable standard.

I definitely agree with that.

The alternative - let them feed themselves from the great unknown

What about the alternative you use yourself?
You provide some commercial feed, that is meant to be balanced enough to cover most needs of most chickens, and you also let them forage for some of their feed.

As far as I can tell, most of the people in this discussion are providing some commercial feed and some amount of foraging time for their chickens, even while they argue about 100% commercial feed vs. 0% commercial feed.