Ok, so I'm convinced barf is the way to go (for the puppy anyway), and am eagerly awaiting the arrival of the billinghurst book. My only real queation is where do you feed your dogs? At the mo she's fed in her cage, but I'm guessing having raw meat in there won't be too hygenic. Feeding in the kitchen is out of the question (dog free zone :-) ). My final option is either outside, or in the back passsagey thingy that connects the house to the shed, storage room and downstairs bathroom. I'm thinking the passage thing, but will the floor need disinfecting after each meal? Sorry if I'm being totally thick!

Thanks for any help!

Fagan tends to drag his food about everywhere (and buries it )  if he has chunks like turkey necks or chicken wings, we either confine him to the kitchen so we can clean the floor after or just spray around with a disinifectant spray if he takes the stuff in to the living room :rolleyes:  Personally it doesnt bother me, I dont have any small children who can catch anything and I dont lick the floor myself  ;)  but my OH is very fussy about these things (spot the one who didnt grow up with dogs :rolleyes: )

Yep...got to admit mine are all at present layed round the living roon chewing on large raw bones! Most of the other meats don't last long enough to touch the floor
Archer

Marrowbones are only allowed in my house for a day, after that they are banished to the garden because they start to smell

Yep mine too...
Archer

If your crate has a plastic tray then it would be really easy to wipe clean after.  Or you could line the crate with a plastic table cloth that can be rinsed clean easily.  HTH. :)

Thanks everyone :-) I think I might try the crate after all (it has a metal tray, but that'll be ok right? I can't really leave her to drag it all around as Dylan won't be on barf. Anyway, feeding her in the back passage would entail going out of the house and in the back door (so as to avoid going through the kitchen) and that's where the cat's fed anyway.

Thanks again, I'm really looking forward to it! Going shopping this weekend for freezers!!   :-D

I feed my dogs in the kitchen by the time I have put the second bowl down the first one is empty and so on. I dont have children and just clean the floor at the end of the night.  If OH doesn't like it tuff he can eat his dinner in the kennel!!  

As far as other posts feeding and barf versus complete etc there is some evidence to suggest that due to the fact that barf feeders nearly always feed large amounts of chicken on the bone they are opening themselves and their dogs up to the possibility of hormone inbalances as poultry still contains growth hormone, and when fed raw traces would still remain in the chicken & bone, the fact is we have seen a large increase in reproductive problems over the last few years and many (not all) are fed raw.

I feed chopped up meat in her bowl and it doesn't get chance to touch the floor. ;)   For bones and chicken wings I spread a plastic sheet on the kitchen floor and just wipe down after wards. :)

Hugex, can you give us more details?... what sort of reproduction problems (infertility? mammary tumours?...) Have you any statistics for the percentage of raw and complete feeders whose dogs have these problems?  As a raw feeder I'd be interested in more info. :)

Kath.

Thats very strange...reproduction problems was one of the reasons my breeder changed from complete to BARF and has experienced a much better success with breeding since
Archer

Ditto Archer.

Male humans have had dropping fertility rates over the last ~40 years as have stud dogs. There have been lots of theories as to why (including the popularity of Y fronts!) but the main one is oestrogen in the mains water supply from al the ladies who take the contraceptive pill. My breed seems to have a particular problem with getting reliably fertile studs who are keen to work. Yet my boys only have to look at a bitch. It might just be good luck ..... but then we don't have mains water .....

Funny I am an a group that is my breed only and we are seeing the exact opposite results,  whether food related or not . Reproduction has been far better. :-))

Hugex
would also like to know whare you get your info and out of interest do you work for the vetinary or pet food trade or is it just through reading you have gained this 'knowledge'?
Archer

I must admit since feeding raw my home has started to look more like a scene of crime :D  Lana rubs her chops along the cream leather sofa leaving bloody streaks!  The kitchen gets covered in blood from the clevering of rabbit etc lots of interesting blood patterns being produced :D  She drags chicken wings all over the place (to be discouraged :rolleyes:) and buries all sorts of things in her bedding!!!  Its even better in the summer
Sarah

Ha ha ha.. I'll have to see how long the 'keep it in the crate' philosophy lasts!  :-D 

I did really only post for advice on how to feed, not what to. But in response to Hugex, there's loads of pros and cons, but as far as I can figure out most barfers feed a BALANCED diet (and so will I), and don't just rely on chicken anyway. I've also realised that many go to great lengths to get organic meats (without growth hormones I presume)

However most of us feed human grade chicken so if its good enough for my kids then its good enough for my dogs
Archer

>the fact is we have seen a large increase in reproductive problems over the last few years and many (not all) are fed raw.<   I too would be interested in some supportive evidence.   Are antibiotics and other growth hormones really killed by cooking?

Go for it Elle.  BARF that is.    Dogs digestive systems were designed to digest raw meat and bones, not dried and processed commercial dog food.  If she changes sex or anything as a result of hormone ingestion, I will eat my hat.

Wendy

In answer to your questions I have worked in the veterinary profession at one of the teaching universities for a number of years and the evidence whilst not overwhelming is not without indication, that the hormone levels in dogs fed BARF are very much different to those fed on complete or even other forms of feeding (fresh but without the huge amounts of poultry on the bone).

We are seeing dogs referred due to infertility problems/irregular seasons/small and premature litters with low birth weight etc

If it is good enough for your kids???.....do you feed it to them raw then? and on the bone...the point is that the residue of growth hormone used in poultry (human grade poultry still contains GH !!) remains in the bone marrow...when cooked and off the bone the biggest risk would be salmonella from it not being cooked sufficiently....a big difference I'm sure you'll agree.
BTW it has been against the law for a number of years to use GH in cattle etc but it is still allowed in poultry.

I am not here to knock BARF just to let you know there is a reaction to every action and all must be considered,
I should also point out that I am not the greatest advocate of feeds sold through veterinary practice either as many are recommended without consideration for the animal only for profit.

Dogs digestive systems WERE ORIGINALLY designed to digest raw meat and bones however after many years of domestication where we have adapted the outside of the dog we have also adapted the inside too. Our dogs are living longer healthier lives due to many factors not least of those being advances in nutrition.....In the wild a dog would kill and eat the predominant prey in the area it lived every day of it's life with little variety large animal bones would not be ingested but the vicera and muscle tissue would be, smaller prey would be eaten complete including feet feathers heads etc. how many BARF feeders are replicating that????
One other point is that in the wild a dog would only live to the average age of 5-6 years now I am sorry but I want my dogs to live long and healthy lives we currently have one GSD at 16 years old and she is still fit enough for two hourly walks daily. Oh and she has always been fed complete.

I am not suprised you are a member of the vetinary proffession.
I will stick by the recommendations and experiences of my breeder who by the way has just lost her 'old boy' at 16 ...not bad for a BARF fed dog eh.
BTY we don't only feed chicken bone...all other types are fed too.
Archer

>One other point is that in the wild a dog would only live to the average age of 5-6 years now I am sorry but I want my dogs to live long and healthy lives we currently have one GSD at 16 years old and she is still fit enough for two hourly walks daily. Oh and she has always been fed complete. <

My two eldest dogs are 15 and 13 and have never seen a vet through illness in their entire lives.  My two four year olds haven't either.  They are all fed mainly BARF.

Canids in the wild would have a shorter 'average' life span because many of them would get killed.  The ones that did not succumb to a traumatic death would live longer and healthy lives.

Anyhows, a question.  Are the GH in bone marrow rendered inactive by cooking?

When my dogs kill a rabbit they eat all of it except one funny looking piece of the insides.

Wendy

They are not renderred inactive but when cooked we would not feed the bone would we??
Mine eat the whole thing too however very few wild rabbits have been farmed and grown rapidly using Growth Hormone...as I said in a previous post rarely would the bones of "LARGE ANIMAL" prey be eaten...not so in smaller prey

I feed only Soil Association approved chicken that is guarenteed not to have any chemicals How do I know because the farmer is now a friend & she would lose her SA certificate if it was found in they chickens & the SA are very very strict Same with if the animals have to have Anti Bios they must be out of the animals system before slaughter-not everyone who feeds raw meat buys it from unknown source farms

Must add I would never let my dogs eat wild rabbit in view of all the tranmuted diseases they can have

It's not allowed in Soil Association organic chickens !

Not only a member of the VETERINARY PROFESSION but a dog breeder and KC member who has bred numerous champions(show and field).
I am not making recommendations here only pointing out professional observations which I would have thought would have been of interest to all BARF feeders, obviously I am wrong, and my 26 years of specialisation in canine and feline nutrition have taught me nothing, so I bow to your superior knowledge and that of your breeder friend.
You stated in a previous post that your Breeder friend had only relatively recently switched to Barf, Presumably He/She had no problems 16 years ago and I doubt whether anyone including Dr Dunbar had even thought of BARF then.
Even despite my obvious ignorrance I am aware that Chicken is not the only thing on the diet but it is the predominant protein source of BARF feeders.
As I said I am not totallyagainst BARF or any other form of feeding just making the observations known so that people may make an informed choice not one based on speculation/rumour and fantasy.
Go ahead keep your blinkers on and your ear defenders maybe one day you will learn to listen instead of thinking of ways to counteract what someone else says.

No one is wearing blinkers....we all know there are many arguements for and against each method of feeding and try to do the best accordingly.
No one said any one had superior knowledge but we all have to make decisions made on our own experiences and of those we know.
No one is is doubting you or your knowledge of dogs....questions were meerly asked and opinions stated.
I think it is wrong to assume that BARF feeders as a rule feed a majority of their protien as chicken....I would guess that I feed chicken as approx.15-20 % of my dogs feed...hardly a huge percentage.
I'm sorry we didn't all just accept your post without question...this is a discussion forum and hence things get discussed
Oh and by the way....apologies for my spelling mistake...never was my strong point but I won't loose any sleep over it
Archer

15-20% of the dogs feed IS a large proportion if that is the main protein source or is it only 20% of the protein sources?
You may be feeding it in correct proportions however I have not made the assumption that BARF feeders feed mainly chicken IT IS MY EXPERIENCE that most feed chicken wings as the main if not only proprietary protein source.
People as you said have a right to make a choice and I would never have made a comment had I not thought that it would spark debate.
I appreciate where you and many others are coming from but please do not ignore what has been seen in colleges and practice around the world.
I have no axe to grind for or against any pet food company, in fact I have seen far more damage done from people feeding inappropriate ill informed diets following recommendations from others with little or no knowledge of nutrition.

I think if you speak to most people on here who feed BARF we all feed a good selection of meats.I for one feed a wide variety if different meats....in fact just about anything I can get my hands on.I also feed eggs,veg etc.
I appreciate what you are saying and we all know that BARF has its downside as well as its positive side....believe it or not we don't all wear blinkers :d but then doesn't every feed type have its pros and cons?
I am not ignoring any thing...I am simply trusting someone who has become a very good freind,feeding something which makes sense and that my dogs enjoy and have now seen with my own eyes the difference feeding Raw has made in my dogs.

<<<People as you said have a right to make a choice and I would never have made a comment had I not thought that it would spark debate>>>>
Don't worry....its not unusual on here and it does make for good reading and we all have a right to express our opinions.The pleasure of CD is the fact that people say what they feel
Archer
ps welcome to CD

Thanks for the welcome...I have read the forum for a year or two now but have always had more important things to attend to....now however have got my priorities in order and personal life has taken the lead over work...at least for now.

Your welcome
Archer

>They are not renderred inactive but when cooked we would not feed the bone would we??<

Thank you for that clarification Hugex.

Firstly, I do feed cooked bones.  I tend not to waste anything so if the [human] family have a joint of meat on the bone I pressure cook the cooked carcasses to make the bones go all soft and feed them to the dogs.

Secondly, commercial pet foods will use the cheapest of raw materials which will mean chicken for the meat base, whatever the 'variety'.  Therefore if cooking does not render the GH inactive, these hormones will be abundant in commercially produced foods as well.   And along with that you have all the restaurant grease and BHT/Ethyoxyquin etc etc etc.  resulting in commercially fed dogs getting not only GF but other chemical and possibly carcinogenic additives as well.

Wendy

When I posted that we would not feed the bones when cooked I was talking about chicken.  Beef,cattle,beast do not contain GH as this has been banned for quite some time, cooked Bones of other types are fine, be careful of rabbit and lamb though they have a tendency to splinter.
Having watched the manufacturing processes from raw materials to finished packaged product in at least two of the major manufacturers I must disagree that cheaper materials are used in fact they would put the major human food processors to shame (having also seen Human food manufactured from raw to packaged states). secondly the evidence of Hormone cross contamination/transferrence is only seen in those predominantly fed raw not commercial foods and mainly fed poultry as I have stated above, so the assumption should be made that YES the GH is renderred inactive following cooking and my post should have stated that.
Restaurant fats are purified and re used by the animal feed business and also the Human food business so your point is?????
BHA/BHT has been used as a preservative in human and animal foods for a long time and there has been no evidence to suggest that unless ingested in massive quantities it has any negative qualities.
Ethyoxyquin I believe however is a proven carcinogen but only following prolonged use but is now only used in ONE commercial feed that I am aware of.

Hugex you said something along the lines of the dogs outsides have changed over the years aswell as their insides.
I have to strongly disagree,yes we have manipulated the appearance of our dogs over the years but one thing will never change and that is their digestive systems which are designed to handle raw meat of every kind.I have read the opposite of what you have stated,it seems fertility problems have become much worse since the invention of commercial foods!

May i ask what you feed,pedigree perhaps?

I have to agree with you Rose - Hugex what was your role within the veterinary profession?  Someone of such scientific background and awareness should at least appreciate that our canines are no anatomically/physiologically different from their wolf/fox/jackal/wild dog relatives.  Delving deeper into the canine anatomy surely you have to accept that carnassial molars are for shearing and crunching (no grinding molars) the low stomach PH is for digesting meat/bone/anything a scavenger can swallow!  There is no caecum and therefore no bacteria for breaking down plant cell walls (so why do commercial feeds contain things like sugar beet pulp, wheat, cereal fillers etc - ££?)  This is obviously an example and merely the tip of the iceburg that show's dog's are adapted for a meat/bone/scavenger diet - I mean correct me if I'm wrong, enlighten me - tell me how the dog's anatomy and physiology has changed since domestication.  Have we adapted the dog outside or just played with the animals phenotype for a desireable appearance?
Sarah

Rozzer not was but IS my role.....I could sit here and replicate passages from text books and scientific doublespeak just as well as you, however most posters are non scientific and surely would appreciate a more sensible down to earth approach, I found exactly the same when in practice, you get far more respect by being able to explain things to peoples understandings rather than baffle them with jargon.
If you want to get into a scientific debate I will oblige but start a new thread, I am sure the readers will soon get bored.

The overall mammalian body plan imposes certain similarities on the digestive systems of most mammals regardless of their type of diet. For example, in both a carnivore, like a dog, and an herbivore, like a cow, the actual breakdown and digestion of food takes place primarily in the mouth, stomach, and small intestine. Digestive enzymes are supplied by the salivary glands and pancreas in both mammals. Absorption of nutrients occurs in the small and large intestine in both animals. Both dogs and cows have a bony skull with teeth embedded in the premaxilla, maxilla, and mandible.

Even with these evolutionarily-imposed similarities, the digestive tract of a carnivore differs significantly from an herbivore. The dog takes in highly nutritious food which digests quickly. Therefore, the stomach of the dog is relatively small, and the intestines are not overly long for the animal's size. In contrast, the cow's diet consists of food rich in cellulose that requires a long time to digest. Therefore, the cow has a large four-chambered stomach in order to handle the greater mass of food which is required. In addition, the cow's stomach has a rich bacterial and protistan culture that is required to break down the cellulose. Dogs do not have this requirement.

The teeth of a cow and a dog are also specialized for their diets. The dog has large, dagger-like canines for catching and killing prey. The cheek teeth of a dog consist of sharp carnassials which are specialized for cutting out chunks of meat. Typically, they do not chew their food and have no teeth specialized for chewing. In contrast, the cow's incisors are specialized for nipping off grasses, and their molars are broad and ridged for extensive grinding and chewing of their cud.
Please explain to me following your explanation why the BARF diet contains large amounts of vegetables??? especially considering your previous post ......

" There is no caecum and therefore no bacteria for breaking down plant cell walls "

Hugex - I so do not appreciate being accused of replicating passages from text books and scientific doublespeak , you dont know me or my background thank you very much.  Are you saying you are a vet then or maybe a polititian - the latter being more appropriate seeing as you totally avoided my question that I put to you!!  Do not spout the differences between carnivore, herbivore, and ruminant anatomy as I am already very aware of those.  All you have done is list adaptations that we all know the dog already has - what I asked you to do was back up your claim that dogs have evolved/adapted physiologically - as I believe that is utter rubbish!  As you rightly state "The dog has large, dagger-like canines for catching and killing prey. The cheek teeth of a dog consist of sharp carnassials which are specialized for cutting out chunks of meat. Typically, they do not chew their food and have no teeth specialized for chewing" - So you agree a dog is adapted to hunt, kill and eat meat, dare I say whole prey!!  What you have said is true for all canids - our pet dogs are no different internally from their wild counterparts...Our pets can produce viable offspring if mated to wolves, they cant be that different in evolutionary terms surely?  I'm not going to get dragged into a BARF debate - I respect anyones decision to feed their dogs whatever the hell they like, but I dont agree that you should fill peoples heads with idea's that our dogs are not adapted to eat a raw meaty diet.
Sarah
PS In answer to your question about "Why the BARF diet contains so many vegetables" - Does it?  My Biologically approriate diet contains hardly any vegetable matter - Most if not all natural feeders will know that a whole carrot, if eaten, will come out in pretty much the same state as it went in, because our dogs cannot break this down - so it is altered by freezing, juicing or blending - but thats a seperate thread :rolleyes:

Hugex - I so do not appreciate being accused of replicating passages from text books and scientific doublespeak.............who accused you of that?
A guilty conscience maybe?
I merely stated that I could sit here and do that, however this forum is hardly the place to do that, lets save that for congress eh?
Sorry I don't know what a polititian is? do you mean a politician?

I would have thought if you had read my complete post that it would have been obvious that I am a veterinarian due to my  reference of being in practice, however it seems you only pick certain portions of the post to reply to or take in.
If you had read the many many posts on this forum regarding Barf posted by barf feeders and so called experts you would also agree that 90% or more emphasise the feeding of raw vegetables......Species appropriate diet??? since when did dogs/wolves/coyote/cannids of all types have access to freezers?
I rest my case!

The point behind feeding veggies is to replace the nutrients that the dog would have got by eating the gut contents of its prey
Archer

Hi Hugex, as I've said here before my greatest concern about BARF style diets is the near certainty - imho - of correct balance (particularly the calcium:phosphorus ratio). Frankly I think it is madness to feed rapidly growing large/giant breed puppies & youngsters BARF and irresponsible for anyone except a vet or canine nutritionist to suggest that breeders do so. As a vet to you have any thoughts on this?

Dogs DO have a caecum. Anyway gut bacteria do not live only, or even mainly in the caecum.

Rose ... the adaptation and renewal of gut Villi takes approximately 10 days from start to finish...how then we have not changed the digestive sytem over the years...sorry I stand corrected.
No i do not feed pedigree but I have in the past.
I am currently feeding a complete food the name of which is neither here nor there as I am not here to advertise any particular brand over another.
As I have stated in previous posts I am not here to knock or disregard BARF as a feeding regime...on the contrary if done correctly it can be very successful but people should be aware that there is a flipside to every coin and for every positive a negative

Rose,

"I have to strongly disagree,yes we have manipulated the appearance of our dogs over the years but one thing will never change and that is their digestive systems which are designed to handle raw meat of every kind."

What you have just stated is diametrically opposed to everything that is known about evolution since Darwin.  NOTHING in any species is invulnerable to change, and that includes digestive tracks. 

Stacey

Well said!

lol Wendy   :-D

It won't be LOL if she does Elle, I hate the taste and texture of hats [specially my soggy ones that the wet dogs always seem to sit on].:rolleyes:

<Dogs digestive systems WERE ORIGINALLY designed to digest raw meat and bones however after many years of domestication where we have adapted the outside of the dog we have also adapted the inside too.>

I have always understood that evolution takes place slowly over many hundreds if not thousands of years.

Therefore I find it hard to accept that we have "changed the dogs insides" by selective breeding.

Hunting hounds have been selectively bred for many generations, over a period of hundreds of years.
In this time the main constituent of their diet has been, and continues to be, fallen stock which is cut up and fed raw to the dogs.
I would be very surprised if the digestive system of a hunting hound differs greatly to that of a family pet, whose ancestors have probably been raised on commercial food for several generations.

Commercial feeding is a relatively new 'fad', and it has certainly only been used by the average dog owner for less than 100 years.
Prior to this, the dogs in this country would have been fed on a diet very similar to that used by raw feeders today, animal waste (although there would not have been so much in them days), perhaps some grain and table scraps.

Therefore when would this evolutionary change have occured? Within 100 years seems like an incredibly short amount of time for changes to occur which would make raw feeding a problem for the average dog?

Surely if this was the case, our dogs would not thrive on a raw diet and we would be experiencing fertility and reproductive problems instead of a litter average of 10 and robust good health in all our dogs?

<Please explain to me following your explanation why the BARF diet contains large amounts of vegetables??>

Not everyone follows the same raw diet. Our dogs are not fed any vegetable matter, they are on an almost 100% carnivorous diet consisting of raw meaty bones, offal and muscle meat from several different species. We do add some biscuit to our 14.5 year old dogs diet because he becomes constipated if given 100% raw but the others do not have any as a regular part of their diet.

I totally agree that everyone should feed the diet that they are comfortable with, but to claim that major physiological differences exist in modern canines compared to those of only a century ago is to me beyond belief.

Snomaes

Who mentioned a century ago...ever since the domestication of dogs we have fed them a completely different diet to that which they would experience in the wild, with the exception of one or two very isolated breeds...they have been fed on cooked leftovers etc for thousands of years, in fact the romans used to be proud that legion dogs were fed the same as the legions.

Then surely we should not be giving them a totally foreign food to their systms, like dry commercial food.  Since when did the Roman legions eat food with a mere 10% water?

It is only in the last 60 or so years that there has ever been commercially produced dog food.

I've been feeding my dogs raw foods and table scraps for years and years and years, long  before BARF became popular.

Wendy

You may find this interesting, about traditional feeds for dogs and hounds.
:)