A forum for owners of the Siberian Husky.
 
HomeFAQSearchRegisterRegisterLog in
Congratulations Balto, Sugar, Gizmo, Nova, and Melissa!, our December HOTM winners! HOTM - January : TBA!
Husky of the Month
Congrats Balto, Sugar, Gizmo, Nova and Melissa,
our December HOTM Winners!
Sweet Memories!





Thanks to all for this month's entries!
Forum Rules
1. Here we prefer clarity to agreement. Obviously not everyone is going to agree on a topic; here we prefer to talk out our differences in a respectful manner to ensure mutual understanding and respect.
2. Read the Stickies and Announcements. Each sub-forum may have specific rules which trump the Forum Rules in cases where there may be conflicting information. Read the rules of each board before you post so that you are clear on the expectations of the staff.
3. Respect ALL Staff and Admins. These people volunteer of their time and MUST be respected as well as their word adhered to. They are responsible for maintaining a free, open, clear and organized forum. Anyone found to be openly undermining any official ruling by a staff member will be warned.
4. Signatures: One picture only and no links. Images: To keep the forum looking neat and tidy, we ask that members insert just one picture only in their signatures. The picture should be no more than 200x500 pixels and should be of an appropriate subject, for example, your dogs and their names. Should you need assistance creating an appropriate signature, please PM an Admin and we would be happy to help! This is to ensure that signatures remain a welcome addition to our forum instead of a cumbersome distraction. Links: Hyperlinks in signatures--unless to a personal blog or photo stream of your dogs (like Flckr or Piscasa, for example)--are strictly prohibited. Please PM a staff member with any questions or concerns regarding this rule.
Rescue Spotlight
Our current rescue spotlight is:

Tails of the Tundra Siberian Husky Rescue!

Top Dog Website Award Winner!

Top Website
for
Siberian

Huskys


Share | .
 

 MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
burton4550
Newborn
Newborn
avatar

Male Join date : 2013-03-12
Location : Boise, Id

PostSubject: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:00 pm

So I was searching through the forum and looking at all the different foods people are feeding their Huskies, and happened to stumble on a post about nails in Merricks food. I tried to go to the article but it has been taken down. Can anyone tell me if Merrick is a good food or not?

I have a very picky boy and now another 7 week old one. I have put my 10 month old on Blue Wilderness, Wellness Core, Natural Balance and I'm pretty sure one other one, but can't think of the name. Any who, he has not really liked any of them. I always have to throw in some chicken or canned food or something to spice it up otherwise he won't eat it. He is ok with the Merricks, but still won't eat it without something else mixed in and he has always been like that. What foods or diets would you recommend for a picky dog?

Also one other question about my 7 week old. I got him his first shots and dewormer the day I picked him up and he has had the runs ever since. I've been adding the Merricks mixed with his food and about 3/4 a cup 3 times a day. It's been about 5 days and he still has loose stool almost watery sometimes. Is this normal because he did have worms and I'm gradually switching his food? Sorry for 2 separate questions in one post, just figured it was easier that way Smile

Brad
Back to top Go down
HuskyMom09
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-11-01
Location : Spokane WA

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:30 pm

I used to feed Merrick to my kennel, I stopped after a couple of my dogs started peeing blood and it was found that the food was making their urine too basic causing crystals to form in the bladder. I had to use a special prescription diet to increase body Ph to break up the crystals in hopes to avoid surgery for removal. After that I switched and never looked back. Since then I have been using Taste of the Wild, even my pickiest of dogs love it and the improvements to stool, coat, and health have been remarkable.
Back to top Go down
http://www.keahisiberianhuskies.com
Mobezilla
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-08-29
Location : Ohio

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:31 pm

Agree with Taste of the Wild, Cloud is VERY picky but he loves the bison flavor, Yuki is very sensitive and loves and, most important, does great on the pacific stram flavor. Wished I had switched sooner Wink
Back to top Go down
burton4550
Newborn
Newborn
avatar

Male Join date : 2013-03-12
Location : Boise, Id

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:37 pm

Awesome! Glad I found this out now before it started causing problems I just put him on it about 3 weeks ago. Looks like I'll be taking a trip to the store for some Taste Of The Wild and I'll give that Bison flavor a try. Thank you for the advice
Back to top Go down
Sheba&Kennedy
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-08-13
Location : Nebraska

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:38 pm

I fed Merrick for awhile too; and while my girls did pretty well on it, they didnt do as well as I would have liked. I tried Merrick for about 4 months to give it a decent amount of time to see if they did any better. I switched to Natures Variety Instinct and I love it! I have also fed TOTW, but I like NV better.
Back to top Go down
https://www.facebook.com/groups/379867695570/
counter
Teenager
Teenager


Male Join date : 2013-03-24

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:16 pm

I recommend feeding raw. The dogs seem to love it way more than any kibble. I found a way to feed it cheaper than kibble per pound by getting it in bulk. At one point (before I started getting raw in bulk) we were forced to switch back to kibble to save money. The dogs looked at me like I was crazy, with expressions saying "you want us to go back to eating this crap?" They literally walked away from their bowls, and only ate out of hunger. That's when I knew I needed to find a way to feed raw cheaper than kibble so we could afford it. I knew it was a healthier diet, so after 8 months of researching, I found local bulk companies and yahoo raw feeding groups who came together to order in bulk. Anyways, when we switched back to raw, the dogs literally jump up and down on their hind legs until I put the bowls down in front of them. Of course, they have to calm down and sit first before I give them their food. But after seeing their pure happiness with raw, there's no way I'd ever feed kibble again.

But yeah, I was feeding a blend of Orijen, Acana, Wellness CORE, and Innova EVO for about $1.88 a lb. So now I feed bulk raw at less than $1 per lb, and will sometimes splurge for a more expensive meat to give them a change, but still won't go over $1.88/lb.
Back to top Go down
ljelgin
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-01-29
Location : Broken Arrow, OK

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Wed Mar 27, 2013 9:22 pm

I have been feeding my two Merrick grain free for a few months now and they are doing well on it. Currently they are only eating about 1 1/2 cups a day with add vegies and salmon oil.

We tried TOTW and my girl was very gassy and her poop stunk really bad. my boy did okay on TOTW.

Merrick is is listed as a 5 star. On petadvisor.


I have been using Merrick grain free real Buffalo and Merrick grain free real Duck.
Back to top Go down
burton4550
Newborn
Newborn
avatar

Male Join date : 2013-03-12
Location : Boise, Id

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:03 am

Thanks everyone for the responses and help. I went ahead and tried Taste Of The Wild and my they both ate it all up without any canned food or other toppings I normally put on. But we'll see how it works out, so far so good though.

I'm thinking if this food doesn't work out I may take up the raw diet Kevin mentioned above. I mean I already cook and make better meals for my Huskies than I did my ex girlfriend Lol probably why she's an Ex now Smile . But if it's cheaper and they like it better might as well give it whirl, but we'll give this Taste Of The Wild a go first. Hopefully it will firm up the little ones stool

Thanks again for all the help

Brad, Vulcom & Neiko Smile
Back to top Go down
soul embrace
Teenager
Teenager
avatar

Male Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : Alabama

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Thu Mar 28, 2013 9:45 am

i also feed mine merrick and my two does really well with it. i was feeding them Blue Buffalo wilderness but Maya my 4 month old didn't do well on the puppy version always having soft stool and it stunk really bad. Zoe the 2 year old did great on the wilderness though.

so when deciding to change food i really wanted to do an all life stage food so i could feed them the same food. they have been on merrick for about a week now and Maya's poop is now normal for the first time and it doesn't stink no where near as bad. with the blue buffalo i could smell it out side from about 3-4 feet away. both of my girls eat the merrick food up real quick and right now they are getting the duck flavor.
Back to top Go down
Huskyluv
Resident Nutritional Bookworm
avatar

Female Join date : 2009-06-23
Location : Huntsville, AL

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:12 am

Just for the sake of clearing the air on Merrick, it is a good food and is something that I personally would recommend and prefer far more than TOTW any day. Again though, how much a dog likes a food and how well they do on a food depends on the individual. You will find countless dogs who prefer and do better on Merrick versus TOTW. Likewise you will also find countless dogs who prefer and do better on TOTW vs Merrick.

I like that Merrick manufactures their own food versus TOTW which is manufactured by Diamond which is very well known for problems and recalls. But Merrick has not been without their own issues and recalls too, all foods (if they're around long enough) will have some problems pop up, but some manufacturers like Diamond and Menu Foods have far worse track records.

And pick eaters are not born that way, they are created. Changing up your dogs food and/or adding flavor/toppings to entice them to eat when they get bored all goes into creating the picker eater that you will forever be trying to please. A healthy dog will not starve itself and a little tough love can go a very long way in ensuring your dog will happily eat whatever you offer, whenever you offer it.

_________________
Back to top Go down
TooManyHuskies
...is a fool


Join date : 2012-06-02

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:28 am

@Huskyluv wrote:
Just for the sake of clearing the air on Merrick, it is a good food and is something that I personally would recommend and prefer far more than TOTW any day. Again though, how much a dog likes a food and how well they do on a food depends on the individual. You will find countless dogs who prefer and do better on Merrick versus TOTW. Likewise you will also find countless dogs who prefer and do better on TOTW vs Merrick.

I like that Merrick manufactures their own food versus TOTW which is manufactured by Diamond which is very well known for problems and recalls. But Merrick has not been without their own issues and recalls too, all foods (if they're around long enough) will have some problems pop up, but some manufacturers like Diamond and Menu Foods have far worse track records.

And pick eaters are not born that way, they are created. Changing up your dogs food and/or adding flavor/toppings to entice them to eat when they get bored all goes into creating the picker eater that you will forever be trying to please. A healthy dog will not starve itself and a little tough love can go a very long way in ensuring your dog will happily eat whatever you offer, whenever you offer it.

You are right Diamond has had problems, but TOTW is a brand owned by Diamond, not just made by Diamond. You made it sound like TOTW is a seperate company that contracts Diamond.

The best made, and safest line of GF foods are the Annamaet GF foods. You will find most of the others mentioned in this thread very high in ash, especially phosphorous, which over time poses risks. The Annamaet foods are also formulated by a person with real nutritional credentials. Nature's Variety is an abomination in terms of ash and I wouldn't feed it to the hogs. I will never understand why people feed such high protein (low quality protein at that) foods to companion animals when short race huskies eat 30% protein foods without supplements. Again, Dr. Tim's Momentum fed team won the Iditarod this year mostly on a 35% protein food.
Back to top Go down
Mobezilla
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-08-29
Location : Ohio

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:01 pm

I don't think anyone can outright say there is any "best" food. In my opinion, TOTW is the best food as MY dogs do best on it. However, other peoples dogs can do terrible on it, so for them, a different food is the best food.
Back to top Go down
cmanding
Nutrition Subject Moderator
avatar

Female Join date : 2010-10-12
Location : Denver, CO

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:29 pm

Ash is the inorganic (non-carbon) mineral portion of any substance. When referring to dog and cat food, "ash content" is the mineral matter, such as magnesium, calcium, phosphorus, iron, and copper.

Here's the link to one of Annamaet GF red meat formula:
http://www.annamaet.com/html/annamaet_grain_free_manitok_do.html

It has an ash content of 8.5% (max).

Here's the link to TOTW High Prarie formula (red meat):
http://www.tasteofthewildpetfood.com/products/dogs/dry_food/high_prairie_canine_formula/

It does not have the ash content listed, so I'm curious where you pulled the ash content from?

Here is a link to Orijen Region Red formula (red meat):
http://orijen.ca/products/regional_red/analysis

It has an ash content of 7.5% (max).

Here is the link to Nature's Variety Beef and Lamb kibble formula:
http://www.naturesvariety.com/Instinct/dog/kibble/beef

It does not list ash content so I'm curious as to where you got the ash content info from?

Here's one website I found that mentioned ash content of 5% is acceptable:
http://www.thebalancedcanine.com/pet-foods-truth-lies-outright-deception/

".....Another note on by-products is that they can, and do, vary in quality. The way to tell is by looking at the ash content, 5% is acceptable. Ash in a pet food comes from bones, both in the chicken feet and ribs/breast bone. Food made with by-products that has a high ash content has a lot of feet and ribs and is not of good quality....."


Annamaet has a higher ash content than Orijen....


_________________
Back to top Go down
soul embrace
Teenager
Teenager
avatar

Male Join date : 2013-01-04
Location : Alabama

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:44 pm

@cmanding wrote:
It does not have the ash content listed, so I'm curious where you pulled the ash content from?


he is always claiming that Annamaet and Dr. Tim's food is the best food out there and yet he doesn't feed his huskies either of them. i've asked him what he feed his huskies and got no response. i find it odd that he always claims these are the best food to feed huskies and yet he doesn't feed his this food.
Back to top Go down
blueeyedghost
Maverick
avatar

Female Join date : 2011-07-01
Location : Denver, CO

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:41 pm

He's a troll who most likely works for one of those companies and is being paid by them to post what he does. He just hasn't quite crossed the line to getting himself banned, but comes on periodically spouting the same rhetoric about those two foods. We just do our best to counter his posts.

_________________
Shadow's Blog

Canine Hydrocephalus Support on Facebook

"Being the parent of a special-needs pet means living your life constantly poised on the edge of a double-edged sword. On the one hand, you become a fierce defender of the ways in which your little one is perfectly ordinary — all the things he or she can do that are just like what everybody else does. And yet, you never lose sight of how absolutely extraordinary that very ordinariness is, how difficult, remarkable and rewarding that fight to be 'just like everybody else' has been."  -Gwen Cooper, "Homer's Odyssey"

Shadow - 03/01/2013 - 10/02/2014

Back to top Go down
TooManyHuskies
...is a fool


Join date : 2012-06-02

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:46 am

The tested Ash in Manitok is around 7% and in Salcha it is well below 7%. The Ash in Annamaet Ultra is well below 7%. Manitok is also a red meat formula so it will have a bit more ash

Dr. Tim's the ash is 6%, for a 35% protein food and 6.5% for a 30% protein food.

If you call TOTW, Natures Variety, Earthborn they will tell you the ash is as high as 10 - 12% with very high phosphorous. It is not required that Ash be disclosed, unfortunately.

I feed both Annamaet Ultra and Dr. Tim's Pursuit. I have said that before.

Feed what the champions feed and that is Annamaet & Dr. Tim's. Dr. Tim's team won the Iditarod for the second year in a row and the North American Skijoring Championship. Annamaet is the dominant food in eastern racing.

High ash will damage kidneys over time. Word to the wise.

I don't believe the ash content in Orijen for a number of reasons mainly because the calcium and phosphorous levels are way too high to claim 7.5% overall.





Back to top Go down
mbarnard0429
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2011-08-07
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:10 am

I actually agree with tmh this time. Ash can be really damaging and natures variety has very high ash content that used to be listed on bags and was a reason why I never purchased it. At one point he posted these figures on another forum and honestly, I called. They are all true...I even called Orijen. That is true too
Back to top Go down
https://www.facebook.com/mheath2
Mobezilla
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2012-08-29
Location : Ohio

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:28 am

I still don't agree with his first posting stating that the best foods are the Annamaet GF foods. I don't go around preaching 'TOTW is the best!' I simply ask people to research it and to give it a try.
Back to top Go down
cmanding
Nutrition Subject Moderator
avatar

Female Join date : 2010-10-12
Location : Denver, CO

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:33 am

@TooManyHuskies wrote:
The tested Ash in Manitok is around 7% and in Salcha it is well below 7%. The Ash in Annamaet Ultra is well below 7%. Manitok is also a red meat formula so it will have a bit more ash

Dr. Tim's the ash is 6%, for a 35% protein food and 6.5% for a 30% protein food.

So you're saying 6.8% ash content in Annamaet Ultra is well below 7%? .2% is that big of a difference?

And if 5% ash content is acceptable, then wouldn't 6.5% ash content be considered too high since that is 1.5% over what is acceptable?

I don't see the calcium and phosphorus amounts listed on Annamaet.com.
What would be considered high phosphorus?

If high ash content causes damage to kidneys over time, wouldn't we see a lot of pets with kidney damage who feed all these other brands of dog food? Wouldn't we see more pets with declined health at earlier ages?


_________________
Back to top Go down
mbarnard0429
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2011-08-07
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:22 am

5% is acceptable for cats and a food with more ash content than that can really damage kidneys...but dogs are more resilient.

I do not think any food is "the best" so that was not what I was agreeing with, I was agreeing about ash contents.
Back to top Go down
https://www.facebook.com/mheath2
cmanding
Nutrition Subject Moderator
avatar

Female Join date : 2010-10-12
Location : Denver, CO

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:03 pm

mheath0429 wrote:
5% is acceptable for cats and a food with more ash content than that can really damage kidneys...but dogs are more resilient.

I know cats are more sensitive to ash content, but 5% ash content was actually referred as acceptable for dog food. So what is acceptable ash content in dog food?

I'm still confused by the statement that Annamaet Ultra is well below 7% at 6.8%. Does a .2% make that big of a difference in reference to ash content?

_________________
Back to top Go down
mbarnard0429
Senior
Senior
avatar

Female Join date : 2011-08-07
Location : Michigan

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:24 pm

No, the .2% doesn't create that significant of an issue unless the dog has kidney problems.

Honestly Claudia, I've seen very little accurate information about ash content in books or online, but I did make the educated decision to keep my dogs at 8% or below when I was feeding kibble.
Back to top Go down
https://www.facebook.com/mheath2
cmanding
Nutrition Subject Moderator
avatar

Female Join date : 2010-10-12
Location : Denver, CO

PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:45 pm

Megan,
I mostly see info on ash content related to cats, and very little on dogs also. If you ever find more information published on ash content, please let me know. I'd like to learn more about it!
Thanks!

_________________
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?    

Back to top Go down
 

MERRICK IS NOT GOOD?

View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

 Similar topics

-
» BUG ID has this been a good bug or a bad bad bug?
» Does anyone have a good corn casserole recipe?
» What GOOD bugs will Neem oil and DE kill?
» Anyone know a good source for bulk daffodil bulbs?
» Stone Square Foot Garden Looking good

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
It's a Husky Thing - Siberian Husky Forum :: Advice and Discussion Forums :: Nutrition and Feeding-