|
|
|
|
|
| Letter to the Editor of BirdTalk Magazine |
|
Letter to Kathleen,
Thank you for allowing me to express my professional views and experiences, regarding the article titled "Stretching Your Bird-Food Dollars" which appeared in your November 1996 issue.
The "Pelleted" process is the proven method of the pioneers in the manufactured bird food industry. If there was a better way than a "Pelleted" process to feed a bird without teeth, strong acids and a gizzard, the poultry industry would have done it first. When a pellet can provide all necessary ingredients, then why would we want to add it to the outside, especially vitamins and fat?
The pioneers of the true "Pelleted" diet industry are the Lafeber, Roudybush, Kellogg, Ziegler, and Lake's companies. We are the pioneers who set the standards and educated your readers and the other competitors of today. The true test of any diet is time. Some of our pet birds could face the fate of extinction if quality diets weren't produced to successfully reproduce their young.
In the manufactured bird food industry all diets are "Extruded" diets, the difference being the process of extrusion either "Pelleted" or "Expanded". The "Pelleted" diets are quickly heated and densely compressed at a high enough temperature to destroy harmful bacteria, and low enough to preserve the integrity of the nutrients. Quite the opposite is true with the "Expanded" diets. These feeds are cooked at high temperatures which destroy bacteria, but also nutrients. In order for an "Expanded" diet to expand they cannot contain high levels of fiber or fat, and to compensate for the loss of vitamins and the need for fat they spray it on the outside of the morsel. The article suggests that a "Pelleted" diet is limited to the amount of fat it can obtain and this is not true. If a "Pellet" manufacture saw a need to exceed 15% fat, we can install an attachment to spray fat or oil on the outside of a "Pellet" as the "Expanded" diets require.
Birds, like humans, fill up according to the fat in their diet, and the speed in which they consume it. As proteins and fats become more concentrated the birds eat and need less, but this must be taken into consideration when the diet is formulated. With a society of fiber and fat conscious people, we realize that fat on the outside of a morsel will be more tasty as with fried foods, but is not necessarily nutritional. If a bird eats 20-30% less on an "Expanded" diet due to its high fat content as the article suggests, then is that same bird getting all the other necessary nutrients it requires from a diet? If this statement were true, that a bird eats 20-30% less on a "Expanded" diet, then do these manufactures make up for this by increasing their levels of protein, vitamins, minerals, etc? Let's face it, birds like the taste of fat, and they don't seem to care if its source is from animal or vegetable. Also the article states that a "Pelleted" diet contains less fat than extruded food and tend to contain lower caloric densities", but a good manufactured "Pelleted" diet can obtain calories from carbohydrates also. How much "FAT" does a bird need? They need "calories" for energy, but they don't store a lot of body "fat". Are birds getting enough fiber from their "Expanded" diet?
Not including the costs of ingredients, it costs less to manufacture a "Pelleted" diet. The consumer does pay for those heart, moon, star, and other "expanded" shapes, price per pound being equal - where is the benefit or compromise? There are some good quality "Expanded" diets just as there are "Pelleted" diets, but as with any industry, there are those who are in it for the buck - not the birds.
One last issue I'd like to address is freshness of a product. A concerned manufacturer will put a READABLE expiration date on their packaging, but many manufacturers don't, because it creates problems in turning over inventory. This isn't new, we can't read the expiration dates on many human foods either.
Your readers are more concerned over the quality and freshness of the ingredients of a feed, not the justification of manufactures for their higher costs of production. This kind of article will only mislead your readers when one process is emphasized as the best choice to save money. A manufacture must believe in the product they are selling, or there would be no profit. The other "Pellet" manufactures understand what I'm speaking about, because we were the pioneers who truly cared enough to stick our necks out on the line to better Aviculture.
I do conclude by saying I agree that is easier to get my kids to eat fruit loops and french fries, but I don't believe it's better than Total cereal and an apple.
To the Betterment of Aviculture,
Cheryl J. Lake, Founder of the Lake's Avian Diets
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| 0 items |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Affiliate Program |
|
|
|
|
Information |
|
|
|
|
|
