"Treats" definition, and amounts

[FrannyNZooey]

Hi,

Apologies if this had been addressed, I just didn't find the information that I was looking for in my search. My question is about the amounts of stuff given beyond their standard feed that's readily available. Of course this may not apply to everyone, but even those that it doesn't apply to, I'd be curious to hear chime-ins for knowledge.

While BSLV would be considered a treat, would a cucumber be at that same treat level? Tomoato? Watermelon rind? Are treats gauged on their sugar or protein content?

Like where do greens and herbs come into play?
Thanks!

 

[Brooks_]

General recommendation is to not exceed 10 percent daily intake with treats. Basic thought is anything other than complete feed is a treat.

Exceptions are usually things that chickens would naturally find foraging. Grasses/weeds, bugs (not handfuls of dried bsfl/mealworms), Vegi scraps.

 

[saysfaa]

I agree with Brooks with modification that such exceptions are exceptions only when the chicken does the foraging or, maybe, if they are available all the time.

This is partly because people will give grass (usually all one species and all at the same stage of growth). Or give bugs (usually all one species and all one stage of growth). Or give veggie scraps (sometimes more than one kind but still rarely many types of plants and rarely many types of parts - heavy on skins and seeds, light on shoots and so on). Vs the chicken who will eat some grass, a grasshopper, some clover, pull up a worm, take some dandelion, dig up some grubs, strip the seeds off the top of a clump of grass, pick the shoot out of a clump of grass, eat the pinkies from a mouse nest, demolish the young leaves out of a patch of cosmos seedlings, take the seeds out of a burst cucumber, pick the squash bugs off a zucchini... while walking, running, sometimes flying back and forth across the range. Sometimes she eats a lot of one thing (like berries that just ripened) but for a day or a few days rather than for many days. When she does the foraging, she gets much more variety, much more selection, and much more exercise.

And it is partly because it is impossible to measure how much she forages.

If something is available all the time, there is a chance she will balance her diet herself if it is possible with the options she has. If something is brought out occasionally, then novelty or social motivations can be more important than what her body is telling her about how much of what to eat.

 

[Perris]

The 10% recommendation has never yet been backed up on BYC with any sort of proper reference to explain why anybody believes this; it is, in other words, just hearsay: people hear it and repeat it without question - so citing a thread or blog or other unrefereed source where it was said without support is just repeating it again.

The word treat means whatever the user wants it to mean on BYC. It is used by most posters who respond to such questions to describe anything other than commercial ultra processed feed - to describe real foods in other words. Thus it is doublespeak, the ultimate distortion of the truth by meaning the opposite of what it actually is. Real food is not a treat. Real food is essential for nourishment and health.

 

[Callender Girl]

Good thread! I have always "heard" the 10 percent treat recommendation but watch my birds spend their days eating all kinds of non-commercial feed. They happily forage what I'm sure is much more than 10 percent of their all-flock or layer intake and are perfectly fine. Plus, their eggs have beautiful, deep-colored yolks.

 

[Shadrach]

Unfortunately the term treat has no proper definition bar it isn't the chickens regular feed.
There is also the complication of keeping circumstances. If for example one ranges the chickens for part of the day then the often quoted 10% "treats" rule is bust before one offers the chickens anything.
Proper food is fine for an omniverous creature. Part of the problem is we are not very good at knowing what is proper food for ourselves, let alone chickens.
Many chicken keepers around the world have never fed their chickens commercial feed and the chickens have thrived.
Nutrition is a complicated subject and the 10% rule has probably saved many chickens health just by the fact that commercial feed will provide the correct minimum balanced diet for the common high production hen without the keeper having to aquire the knowledge to understand what their chickens need.
Interestingly, there is evidence that the chicken is able to balance it's own diet given sufficient choice and access to those choices.
If you have niether the interest nor the time to study chicken nutrition; I don't mean some fad on Utube for example, then a commercially produced feed with the 10% guidline will provide in most cases the correct nutrition to keep your hens laying eggs.
If one the other hand you are interested then some research and a change in diet from commercial feed to a homemade wholesome feed may provide long term health benefits for your chickens.
One can feed any foodstuff that will provide a complete protein such as meat and fish with fresh vegetables and whole grains without restriction. What one does have to be mindfull of is high production hens need more calcium than is easily found through foraging and wholefoods.
A rough and ready understanding can be had by reading the analysis of a commercial feed and ensuring that the percentages quoted are met by whatever one chooses to feed the chickens.

 

[Perris]

Many chicken keepers around the world have never fed their chickens commercial feed and the chickens have thrived.

And I think most of them spent zero time and effort studying chicken nutrition. The difference is the birds were not dependent on their humans for food and water.

Part of the problem is we are not very good at knowing what is proper food for ourselves, let alone chickens.

This is true. But people who switch to give their chickens proper food are more likely, I think, to eat better themselves, or at least think a bit more about what they're putting into their own and their chickens' mouths.

The only justification I can see for commercial feed is when chickens are locked up in a barren run 24/7. Then feed designed for production birds intended to live in those conditions till they're 18 months old is appropriate.

 

[Shadrach]

The only justification I can see for commercial feed is when chickens are locked up in a barren run 24/7. Then feed designed for production birds intended to live in those conditions till they're 18 months old is appropriate.

Unfortunately I think this is the condition many backyard chickens live in.

 

[saysfaa]

The 10% recommendation has never yet been backed up on BYC with any sort of proper reference to explain why anybody believes this; it is, in other words, just hearsay: people hear it and repeat it without question - so citing a thread or blog or other unrefereed source where it was said without support is just repeating it again.

The word treat means whatever the user wants it to mean on BYC. It is used by most posters who respond to such questions to describe anything other than commercial ultra processed feed - to describe real foods in other words. Thus it is doublespeak, the ultimate distortion of the truth by meaning the opposite of what it actually is. Real food is not a treat. Real food is essential for nourishment and health.

"Thus it is doublespeak, the ultimate distortion of the truth by meaning the opposite of what it actually is."

A little inflammatory, doncha think. Well, I found it so, anyway.

"never yet been backed up on BYC with any sort of proper reference to explain why anybody believes this"

Here you go:
Link

if the link doesn't bring it up:
Kidd, M.T., Maynard, C.W. & Mullenix, G.J. Progress of amino acid nutrition for diet protein reduction in poultry. J Animal Sci Biotechnol 12, 45 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-021-00568-0

Imho, you can even use this source, and some of its references in your crusade against ultra processed "food" to very good effect.

I don't like that it is the tired old example of protein or that it is about broilers but I have other things to do today than find the same concepts in the research regarding fats, minerals, and so on. And for chicks, layers, breeders. All that has been done and published. Extensively.

Short version:
"...The present review was written to provide insights on further reducing dietary protein in broilers.,, nutritional research areas of low protein diets, [and specific amino acids] have been assessed and combined in this text, thus providing concepts into reduced protein diets for broilers. In addition, linkages between the cited work and least cost formation ingredient and nutrient matrix considerations are provided. ...

Investigations in reducing dietary crude protein (CP) in chickens began in the early 1940’s, which commenced nearly a century of exploration in this area of poultry nutrition research. ...Lowering CP more than 30 g/kg has been shown to inhibit performance and increase adipose fat deposition...

Utilization of the ideal protein concept allows for precision feeding of poultry.... However, additional amino acids must be continuously assessed as their minimums can vary based on dietary protein status, bird strain, bird environment, and company production objectives to satisfy economics....

Diets with decreased CP and increased starch flood the small intestine with glucose and compete with amino acids for absorption through their respective sodium dependent pathways..."

The above combined with a few assumptions:
- protein is the most expensive part of the feed hence the usual goal is minimal protein
- adding anything that has lower protein than the rest of the diet otherwise would will lower the protein of the diet*

Results in a logical conclusion:
If the main diet of the chickens is a commercial feed then adding grass and veggies scraps (or anything else low in protein) will lower the protein of the diet as a whole.

So, why is 10% okay?
It may not be for any given bird. It may not be for any of the birds in a given flock. I think it isn't without at least some consideration to what the treats are and the differences (if any) between the needs of this bird or flock and the needs of the birds typically used in research.

But the vast majority of those asking want to feed handfuls of whatever it is, or the bowls of scraps of vegetables from fixing their own dinners, to two, three, six, maybe a dozen or so birds. Few realize how big a percentage of the chicken's/flock's diet that is. Giving an amount that is okay leaves the door open for learning about chicken nutrition.

Ten percent has a chance of actually being okay because, as the above source puts nicely enough, "...[amino acid] minimums can vary based on dietary protein status, bird strain, bird environment..."* and, I'd add, other things. So, they have to add some margin. I doubt it is ten percent but combined with the chance that a given flock needs the lower end of the range and with the chance the treats might be varied gives at least a theoretical hope for it.

*If you follow the references to the references to get to the peer reviewed study on how much the minimums can vary, you will get to a chart that gives requirements for individual amino acids ranging from 5% difference to 30% difference (MET being 25% difference, Lysine 25%). That one measured bird strain and male/female differences in 21- to 28-day old chicks. See, not heard and repeated without question. That is, of course, probably not among the studies I looked at over the past several decades but it gives similar numbers. Nothing so easy as each one being exactly and only ten percent different but enough to conclude 10% is a reasonable variation while still giving a reasonable amount of margin.

Ten percent is easy to remember, sort of easy to measure, big enough that most people feel like they have given a treat (defined here as something out of the ordinary that gives pleasure), small enough to not cause too much damage even if it isn't actually okay.

I respectfully suggest you try to make your case without indicating other people are unthinkingly giving double-speak.

Edit for spelling

 

[Morrigan]

A simple question, but, as you can see, it seems to be one of the more controversial topics on these forums.

Whether you want to call an item outside of their normal bagged feed a "treat" or "real food" is irrelevant. The important thing is that you are overall, providing your chicken with good nutrition. If you want to provide up to 100% of other things besides commercial feed, that is absolutely fine, provided you take the time to understand the nutritional requirements of chickens and make sure what you are giving them is sufficient.

If you don't want to worry about all that, commercial feed is a nice convenience. If you go that direction, most agree that giving some extra things outside of bagged feed is also fine, as long as it is small part of their diet. 10% seems like a reasonable benchmark in that regard. Even within this parameter, it is nice if you can keep the mix of extra's varied and include some protein sources in there -- meat scraps, insects, etc. The more varied, and the more quality protein, the more you are ok breaking the 10% "rule."

Free-ranging your chickens in a large nutritional diverse area and allowing them to select their own "treats," is unquestionably the gold standard, but not realistic for everyone, myself included.

I regularly give my chickens sprouted grains -- wheat, barley, millet, BOSS -- along with table scraps, weeds, garden excess, dried insects, canned sardines and meat scraps. It's always changing and very seasonable. It varies, but my chickens get between 10 and 40% of their nutrition from these extras. It took me a few years to get to this point, as I went slow, educated myself and monitored their health along the way.

As long as you are thoughtful about it, your chickens are healthy and your checkbook is still intact, there really is not a right or wrong answer.