Was I bamboozled by a TS employee?

[lazy gardener]

I found my roosters die at about age 4 when eating layer. They now live longer eating an all flock. Just what I have noticed.

You've been breeding your own birds, yes? Just playing the devil's advocate here. If you're breeding your own birds, it's possible that the increased longevity of your roos is related to steadily improving genetic quality in your stock due to your husbandry methods.

 

[oldhenlikesdogs]

You've been breeding your own birds, yes?  Just playing the devil's advocate here.  If you're breeding your own birds, it's possible that the increased longevity of your roos is related to steadily improving genetic quality in your stock due to your husbandry methods.

Some are home bred, some are hatchery birds. My bantams were always fed grower for half the year because of chicks, my large breed were always fed layer and all rooster died by 4 where my bantam roosters lived longer. Also 3 bantam roosters who resided in the large breed shed and were kept away from the layer by the large breed roosters are still around at 7 years old. They have lived mostly on scratch and free range.

My oldest large breed rooster was about to turn 4 when I switched to an all flock, he was looking old and I thought he was going to go. He has perked up and now is like a younger roosters again. He is currently 5. I need a few more years to know for sure, but it's what I am seeing in my roosters which I keep plenty of. In my opinion layer isn't good for any backyard flock as it's formulated for confined layer who eat nothing else. Roosters were never meant to eat it. This is all my own opinion and observations, and I mean no disrespect to anyone.

 

[lazy gardener]

Thank you for sharing. Your perspective and results are certainly valid.

 

[EggSighted4Life]

Another myth? That layer feed is bad for roosters. Poppycock. Been feeding layer feed to all ages for 40 yrs without any health issues at all....never have illness in my flocks. They consume MUCH higher calcium levels in simple clover than they could ever get in layer rations, so the whole calcium debate is a moot point.

I can't say if it's poppycock or not, roosters is new to me. But I don't see it as the best option. Studies can come out either way, I'm sure depending on who sponsors it. And maybe it mainly has an effect if predisposed.

For me, layer doesn't meet the nutritional need of my mixed age and gender flock. I know plenty of people feed it for years without issue. Have heard from some on here who specifically had that issue as well though. And while my birds may forage on clover they don't over focus on it per say... If it's mixed in the feed they can't avoid it. I was wondering what the approximate nutritional value of my pasture was and how to come up with the answer, just earlier today.

 

[Beekissed]

http://www.feedipedia.org/

This link above will tell most anything you will ever need to know on nutritional value of just about any kind of grass or feed grain currently known.


I've searched and searched for studies done on roosters fed layer feeds and the effects thereof for the past several years and have found no studies done. The only study that most people can produce was high calcium fed to meat bird chicks and the effects it had on them, which doesn't even equate to DP chicks and roosters or even layer chicks and roosters in a backyard setting...CX chicks are already not healthy specimens and their growth rate is off the charts due to a high metabolic rate, so the way they metabolize nutrients of all kinds is different then regular birds.

I still say poppycock to all those warnings. The proof lives in my backyard for years and years without issues, so I believe what I see, not what I read on a study done once long ago on birds that are vastly different than mine.

 

[lazy gardener]

My roo has been on layer most of his adult life, and he's an incredible specimen of health and vigor.

 

[casportpony]

I found my roosters die at about age 4 when eating layer. They now live longer eating an all flock. Just what I have noticed.

X2, and I think @ChickenCanoe might have some info on the correlation between layer feed and roosters with gout.

-Kathy

 

[casportpony]

http://www.feedipedia.org/

This link above will tell most anything you will ever need to know on nutritional value of just about any kind of grass or feed grain currently known. 


I've searched and searched for studies done on roosters fed layer feeds and the effects thereof for the past several years and have found no studies done.  The only study that most people can produce was high calcium fed to meat bird chicks and the effects it had on them, which doesn't even equate to DP chicks and roosters or even layer chicks and roosters in a backyard setting...CX chicks are already not healthy specimens and their growth rate is off the charts due to a high metabolic rate, so the way they metabolize nutrients of all kinds is different then regular birds. 

I still say poppycock to all those warnings.  The proof lives in my backyard for years and years without issues, so I  believe what I see, not what I read on a study done once long ago on birds that are vastly different than mine. 

I think the AAAP Disease Manual says that diets in excess of 3% calcium, or diets in excess of 30% protein can cause gout. I also read that diets too low in phosphorus can cause it, but I can't remember where I read that.

-Kathy

Edited to add:
http://www.aaap.info/avian-disease-manual

 

[junebuggena]

http://www.feedipedia.org/

This link above will tell most anything you will ever need to know on nutritional value of just about any kind of grass or feed grain currently known.


I've searched and searched for studies done on roosters fed layer feeds and the effects thereof for the past several years and have found no studies done. The only study that most people can produce was high calcium fed to meat bird chicks and the effects it had on them, which doesn't even equate to DP chicks and roosters or even layer chicks and roosters in a backyard setting...CX chicks are already not healthy specimens and their growth rate is off the charts due to a high metabolic rate, so the way they metabolize nutrients of all kinds is different then regular birds.

I still say poppycock to all those warnings. The proof lives in my backyard for years and years without issues, so I believe what I see, not what I read on a study done once long ago on birds that are vastly different than mine.

How about this study involving pullets intended for egg production.
http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/content/87/7/1353.full
Or how about this one.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21781931?dopt=Abstract
http://www.roudybush.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=birdBrain.articlesRead&article_id=10
Or this one.
http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbca/v13n1/v13n1a05.pdf
This one showed that the more calcium a layer is fed, the lower the production rate. It was not a long term study though, and they did not look at the effects on the organs.
http://www.thepoultrysite.com/publications/6/diseases-of-poultry/232/gout/
This is regards caged layer hens, fed a commercial layer feed.
http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/p...poultry/urate_deposition_gout_in_poultry.html
This one lists ingestion of feed with a higher calcium than 3% as a cause for gout in non-layers.
http://docsdrive.com/pdfs/medwelljournals/javaa/2012/3705-3708.pdf
This one mentions broiler breeder males specifically. Mind you, these are DP males used to create the broiler crossbreeds.

But no matter what the study, and no matter what the birds, the effects of too much calcium in the diet is consistent. Too much dietary calcium is bad. Effects can range from an increase intake of water or lower egg production, to kidney failure and death. Why risk it? It's simple enough to avoid.

 

[Ridgerunner]

A few things about these studies. The results are usually given that they “can” cause problems. They don’t say each and every bird in the study 100% absolutely will have problems, they say it “can” cause problems. Most of them give percentages of how many die or have problems. It is not 100%.

In these studies they typically cut the chicks apart so experts can look at their internal organs and see what is going on. Internal damage may not be readily evident from outside the bird. The liver or kidneys may be damaged to a point that the bird is just a little less thrifty, not that they fall over dead. If you are running thousands of laying hens like the commercial operations just a bit less thrifty has serious consequences. Perhaps the damage is such that a year of more later the bird can’t handle stress very well and they do become ill or die. Sometimes the damage is subtle, not readily apparent and not immediately apparent.

Almost all these studies are performed on the hybrid meat birds or hybrid commercial layers. These are what the commercial poultry business is concerned with and they are the ones that pay for the studies. Who will pay for studies for our dual purpose birds or bantams? Who is interested in them that has the money?

In these studies one group of chicks is fed nothing but Layer with the control group’s diet also very controlled. It’s not what is in one bite, it’s how many grams of total calcium they eat all day. And it’s not limited to one day either. It’s what they average over several days.

If yours forage for a lot of their feed you aren’t micromanaging their feed or nutrient intake anyway. Quality of forage has a lot to do with it. We all have different quality of forage if we have forage at all. We feed differently. Chicks with my broody hens tend to eat very little feed, the hens take them out to forage most of the day. We are all so unique in how we manage them, quality of forage or treats, broody or brooder, and many other things that one person’s results don’t mean booger snot to someone that raises them totally differently.

Somebody, I thought it was Bobbi but could have been Canoe, I’m not sure, had a study on feeding roosters. I can’t recall if that was excess calcium or excess protein. My memory isn’t what I wish it once was. Anyway the results were that it could lessen fertility. “Could”. Commercial operations would pay for a study like that because they keep a lot of flocks of hens and roosters that produce all the eggs the meat birds or laying hens hatch from. Since roosters are taller than the hens and have bigger heads the roosters eat from feeders up too high for the hens to use. The hens eat from feeders down low but with wire separators so close together that the roosters’ heads don’t fit. Since these hens are fed a feed around 16% protein I think that study might have been about calcium but I could easily be wrong. There are probably other nutrients in those breeding flocks they are worried about for hens versus roosters.

I never feed Layer. I practically always have growing chicks in the flock. While mine forage enough that I probably don’t have to worry about it for my broody raised chicks or my roosters, I just consider it good practice to not feed Layer. Instead I offer oyster shell on the side for the laying hens and feed a Grower with low calcium levels for them all to eat. Since I don’t know how everyone that reads my posts actually raise their chicks or feed them, I’m not going to advise it’s not important. If (“if” is a big word) people are raising them where they are feeding them practically nothing but commercial feed there is way too much scientific evidence out there that it can and often does cause a problem.