INTERVIEW WITH EAGLE PRODUCTS, INC.
By: Linda Arndt, Blackwatch Great
Danes
In 1990, I approached several dog food companies with the results I
had, in hand, concerning a “Bone Survey” I had done. I asked them to look
at the data turned in regarding nutritionally caused bone diseases in the giant
breeds. It was very obvious some company needed to develop a high quality
premium food with moderate protein and caloric density in order to slow down
the growth process for the first year of development. Most companies were
not interested in looking at the results of the “Bone Survey”. It was a
“dead-end” everywhere I turned.
THE INTERVIEW WITH EAGLE DOG FOODS
Then, one day I received a call from one of the owners of Eagle
Products, Inc. and they were interested in taking a look at the data from the
bone survey. I met with the owner, Mr. Joe Cocquyt
and Mr. John Marsman, as they were interested in what
breeders were saying. They felt they could be of assistance. It was
a very educational meeting and, a few weeks later, I spent a day with Mr. Cocquyt and Mr. Marsman at the
Eagle Pet Food plant, where they, so graciously, answered my questions and
agreed to let me put the interview into print. I am sure the Dane
Quarterly readers will find the discussion, regarding the pet food industry and
the “Eagle” philosophy quite educational.
The interview was held in 1991.
The following is Part 1 of a conversation with Joe Cocquyt, an owner and Export Manager of Eagle Pet Products,
Inc.; John Marsman, Marketing Director of Eagle Pet
Products, Inc., professional breeder and past AKC judge; and Linda Arndt, noted
Author, Nutritional Consultant and owner of Blackwatch
Great Dane Kennels.
Linda: First, let me say how much I appreciate you taking a whole
day out of your schedule just to discuss the bone survey results and the
concerns of the breeders across the country. I can not tell you how much
it means to have someone in the pet industry treat breeders with some respect
for a change. From what I understand, Eagle Pet Products, Inc. was the
first one to develop a complete line of extruded pet foods with no soy and high
caloric features, is that so?
Joe: Yes, we began developing these types of products in
1970. These were our Hy-Ration products.
They were low protein, low fat diets. The reason we began marketing those
types of diets is we saw benefits that were associated with the complete
nutrition of the animal. We found when we stopped incorporating soy in
the diet, we got more performance on the animal.
The characteristics of feeding the animal improved on a subjective basis.
Linda: I noticed your literature states you formulate the “Eagle
Pack” product to meet the requirements of the animal “based on breed,
environment and activity”. How do you go about doing that?
Joe: Long before we make a product available to
the market, we design a product for a specific application. Then
we do a field evaluation that takes anywhere from a year and
Linda: Yes, I have seen this evidence in the last year of running
my own tests on Eagle Pet Products. I was using another brand of
maintenance food at 26% protein, 15% fat and switched some of my adults to the
Eagle Pack Maintenance at 20% protein, 12% fat. Not only did I get better
results in coat, color and condition, but also the
muscle tone in the animals was much harder and defined—not a soft mushy muscle.
I was amazed to see the calorie count was comparable to the old brand and the
amount I had to feed was less. In fact, I am maintaining my two older
bitches (5 and 6 years old {145 pounds and 158 pounds}) on 4-5 cups per day as
opposed to 6-7 cups. These are fairly active old gals, too. Their vitality—that was the biggest shock.
Joe: If you look at the information that we have determined, we
actually have a higher digestibility on our 20% protein than other products
have at 30%. This is due because of our highest quality of protein and
the kind of carbohydrates (rice) we have chosen to incorporate into the
product. By introducing a number of sources (3) of protein (meat, chicken
and fish), Eagle Pack is able to get these terrific results.
Linda: Earlier this morning, when we went through the plant, I
asked you about your thoughts on the necessity for specific breeds to be fed
certain foodstuffs depending on where the breeds originate—for example, dogs
from the Northern climates needing things different from dogs originating from
Can we talk about the “myths” regarding the value of pork as a
protein source? I know that this might be an issue for some people that
do not understand that lean pork has more of the essential amino acids than
does other meat protein sources. Let’s face it, it is just a fact that
the beef industry has “done a job” on the general public over the years in
devaluing lean pork in terms of its nutritional contribution.
Joe: Let’s talk about why Eagle Pack uses pork in their dog
food. We spent 8 years developing the Eagle Pack Products. We tried
and evaluated every type of meat protein available to the industry: beef, pork,
lamb, chicken, etc. We even tried and evaluated some types of vegetable
protein products other than soy.
What we found when we used all pure pork protein, the benefits were
far above the rest. We had no preconceived ideas about what protein
source we were going to use before we did the evaluations. But after the
evaluations, it was pork—first it was abundantly available, so it was
relatively inexpensive; it was a high source of quality protein; and it is more
digestible than beef and easier on an animal’s system. When the animal
processes it, he receives more nutritional benefits from it.
Linda: When I saw the industry chart on nutritional break down of
protein sources, I was surprised to see the amino acid break down—is it that
pork had more of the essential amino acids or was it that pork has a more
complete amino acid profile? Most people don’t realize how important
those are because amino acids are the building blocks of muscle and tissue for
animals and humans.
Joe: It is not that pork is more complete, it is that pork
has more of the essential amino acids, which are the most important. This
is what is referred to in the industry as “First Limiting”. This means if
you don’t have a particular essential component, it doesn’t matter what else you
have; and in amino acids, more essential is methionine.
If you do not have enough methionine, it isn’t going
to work.
Linda: Do these amino acids have to work in concert with one
another?
Joe: Yes, that is the essence of what you are trying to do—to
lay the foundation so you can build the building. There is not enough
availability of complete essential acid in one particular ingredient (with the
exception of pure blood meal), therefore, it is
important to use a variety of protein sources; that is why we use three.
Linda: Now in order for a dog in the wild to get the necessary
amount of the amino acid, methionine, in the diet,
this would primarily come through the source of blood from the prey?
Joe: Yes, the first thing the dog would do is eat the
viscera, the entrails and specifically the organs. When they kill
something, it stops the blood flow and it concentrates in the organs and the
heart. Now, when an animal is for human consumption, they bleed the
animal first. In the wild the animal goes for the area of the prey that
has the essentials—the concentrations of minerals, vitamins and all your
enzymatic qualities related to proper digestion—they are all concentrated in
the area of the organs. That is why they don’t go for the hair or
feathers.
Linda: Those enzymatics (enzymes for
digestion), that is an issue I am researching now along with probiotics (also called micro-organisms), because I feel
this is a critical area that we overlook in regard to bloat and torsion.
Joe: Yes, both of these areas are important to us, and we
address this in our product line by the incorporation of “friendly bacteria” (probiotics) and digestive enzymes.
Linda: Besides an animal’s overall condition, there are many things
important to the owner or breeder, some in terms of ingredients, some in terms
or specific benefits or results in the dog. First: how do you
formulate a food for overall condition?
Joe: Again, by first insuring that there is an abundance of quality
essential amino acids introduced through a tri-protein based food.
Linda: How about for coat and skin condition?
Joe: We know that there are assigned values to certain key
components. There are “nutrient profile characteristics” that you
need. So what we do is specifically buy the highest quality ingredients
that, again, have an abundance of those essential characteristics. This
will insure we get good coats and healthy skin. Because if I go to Alaska
and a guy determines that he is going to use a particular dog on his sled team or
not, he knows what he is looking at--skin and coat condition. If they do
not have good skin and coat, he has already determined from his previous
experiences that the animal can not function properly. The external
manifestation of the animal’s health is reflective in the skin and coat.
Linda: It is what we refer to as that “bloom”. Sometimes when
I am at a dog show, I play this little game—called “Guess what brand of food
that animal is fed”. After many years, I have a pretty high success rate
of guessing the correct brand name, just by looking at the coat, skin, pigment
around the eyes, nose, mouth and anal area. It proves to be very
revealing when I ask the owner what they feed their animals.
Joe: Let me relate to you a story. This happened in 1987 when
I went to the Westminster Dog Show. One of our distributors happens to
own a Portuguese Water Dog. Since she has been
feeding our food, she had been doing extremely well in the show ring.
Now, at that time, I was not familiar with the Portuguese Water
Dog, but I was walking around the concourse at
Linda: There are 5 different foods fed to these animals,
that I can spot from a distance and the majority of the time I am
correct, based on specific physical characteristics produced by these
particular foods.
Joe: What we try to do is to have a comprehensive ingredient
structure so that we can address what is best for the overall nutrition of the
animal, not just coat.
Linda: How do you formulate foods specifically for reduced skin
allergies?
Joe: We incorporate higher levels of linoleic
acid and things such as fish oils (source of Omega-3)—things that specifically
address that particular problem, as long as it is not overall, detrimental to
the health of the animal. Our objective is to do the best job that we can
in feeding the animal.
Linda: There are only a couple of companies that incorporate
Vitamin C in their diets. When I asked one of the companies about the use
of Vitamin C in their products, their nutritionists told me it was not really
necessary, dogs make their own Vitamin C. How many times have we heard
that? Now, I know Eagle Pet Products, Inc. has taken a definite stand on
the necessity for Vitamin C in the animal’s diet. Would you care to
explain your philosophy on the Vitamin C issue?
Joe: Yes, definitely, we feel it is an important part of the
diet. There are specific things that we want to accomplish in our
diets. When we originally structured our diets, we wanted to test them in
the maximum stress environment. In our opinion, that would be the
environment of a sled dog. The distance running sled dog, like the
Iditarod sled dog, runs approximately 100 miles a day.
One of the benefits that you get by incorporating Vitamin C is a
tighter paw; thus, if the animal exposes less of the paw surface each time he
puts it down, he has less of an opportunity to injure it and the interior parts
around the pads. He is, also, less likely to accumulate snow and ice
balls in the area between the pads; thus, we have found one of the things we
get when we incorporate Vitamin C in the diet—the benefits of a tighter paw.
Linda: Does that mean that the mushers
have to use fewer boots on their animals?
Joe: Yes, we had a guy’s team run Iditarod on only 500 boots,
while usually people will use 1,500-3,000. It can be done through
breeding and conditioning too, but it can also be done through sound nutrition
and the incorporation of Vitamin C.
Linda: You choose to incorporate some exclusive ingredient in the
feeds, such as the reasons for your use of things like kelp?
Joe: One of the things we found when we spent years researching the
market before this product, was that people were going into pet stores, getting
$30 worth of food and then adding additional supplements to that food.
One of the things that
people wanted in their feed was kelp. We incorporate kelp
because of its enzymatic qualities that help in coat development, and help
maintain fertility in animals.
Linda: Yogurt cultures or “friendly” bacteria (probiotics),
in humans and in animals are important in maintaining a healthy gut and help to
reduce gases which could, in my opinion, help in the reduction of
bloat/torsion. Research in agriculture and in humans supports this
idea. However, you are only one of two companies that feel these “good”
digestive bacterias are essential in the diet.
What do you use and why?
Joe: We looked at what a veterinarian recommends when an
animal is having intestinal problems. There are several things: one is to
feed a bland diet often incorporating rice and yogurt to soothe the
stomach. Thus, we began to look at why they worked and found that the
yogurt and its “friendly” bacteria helped to correct the intestinal problem and
restore it to normal health. We then began to address the issue of
incorporating these live cultures found in yogurt into our feeds.
Linda: You use lactobacillus acidophilus, which are found in yogurt
as well as other things, what are they?
Joe: We also use enterococcus facium, which is used extensively in animal
husbandry. One of the things that it has been found to do, and why it was
introduced into our diet, was to help control and eliminate stress conditions
in the gut—for example, in the show ring, sled racing and/or field
trials. The way stress manifests itself for an animal is to have a loose
stool; sometimes this produces a loose, bloody stool and this is the
deterioration of the lining of the intestines due to the stress. Therefore,
we have to stop this breakdown. How can we help to stop this condition
from developing? Well, we found by adding lactobacillus cultures, we can
address a portion of that, and by the use of enterococcus
facium, we can help to control the diarrhea.
Then, we had to develop a process so these cultures were available
to the animal (they are heat sensitive). It took a great deal of time and
capital to insure that we had a system in which we could incorporate these
types of products in our feeds for the animal to receive their benefits.
Linda: As a breeder of the giants, I feel this is so essential in
helping to reduce the incidence of bloat and torsion. This is closer to
the natural way in which an animal eats, since these bacteria are found in the
viscera they would normally get in a wild kill. You have also introduced
some other important cultures, producing digestive enzymes.
Joe: Yes, we incorporated bacillus subtillus
and aspergillus oryzae into
our diets. A lot of people were buying digestibility enhancers like K-Zyme. These digestive enzymes were built around the aspergillus oryzae fermentation solubles and the bacillus subtillus.
We found we can introduce these into our diet, and what they do is improve the
overall digestibility of the diet. Although it is only a small percent,
the most important thing is that it helps to break down gases that may develop
through incomplete digestion.
Linda: Now I want to ask you about a very important question: That
of minerals, or commonly called “trace minerals or micro-nutrients”.
These are so often overlooked—and most of all, by nutritionists and the pet
food industry. There is definitely a difference in quality or
bio-availability of a mineral. (What the animal can actually use); isn’t
that true? Would you explain the difference in grades of minerals used in
the industry?
Joe: Yes, there are different forms: the oxide form, which is
the most crude but the most stable. Then there is the refined or sulfate forms which have 98-100% utilization by the
animal’s system, but they are unstable. The difference is, unless you
stabilize the sulfate forms, you can not use them in
the food formula.
Linda: Why?
Joe: The activities of the minerals can be detrimental to the
vitamin content. In other words, it is like the “Pac Man effect”—they,
the minerals, will cannibalize the vitamins. What we had to do is find a
system to be able to use the sulfates, which had
98-100% utilization to the animal, where the oxide may only have 50%
availability to the animal. That is why we turned to use sequestered
minerals. What the sequestering does is take the more useable sulfate form and encapsulate it. It is a protective
coating that the only thing releasing the sulfate
from the sequestered coating is the pancreatic acid released by the animal.
Linda: So the animal can actually get greater value from the
sequestered minerals than any other type because of that kind of delivery to
the system?
Joe: This is correct. We are also assured, because of
sequestering, that the sulfate forms have a greater
shelf life in the food. A professional breeder will often purchase food
in bulk—let’s say 500 lbs. or more, primarily for a price break. What we
have found in our market research was that breeders often purchased food to
last them 30-60 days. The bad part of that is
under normal circumstances, unless you stabilize the minerals, 19 days after
manufacturing, you begin losing nutrient value. So if you have most food
for 30-60 days, you do not get the vitamin and mineral value that was stated on
the bag.
Linda: That is why this processing of coating or sequestering the
minerals is an insurance policy, in a way?
Joe: Yes, it is what I call an “absolute delivery system”. We
know we are introducing this much mineral value to the diet, and we know we are
delivering an assimilation value of 98-100% to the animal’s system.
Linda: Tell me about the yucca schidigera
extract (from the yucca plant) that is in the Eagle Pack foods. It seems
to be something we have heard about quite a bit lately.
Joe: We have had it in our food since 1985—we were 5 years ahead of
the game. They extract the juice from the yucca plant, then
dry the juice. The plant gives the benefit of helping control odors related to fecal and
urinary emissions.
Linda: Another thing that I have read about yucca is that it is
beneficial for arthritis.
Joe: This may be true.
Linda: To change the subject to something very important: what do
you mean by tri-protein based foods… how do you formulate for this?
Joe: Essentially, it goes back to the amino acid structure we want
to achieve. We can get a more favorable amino
acid structure and control the amount of ash content by going to a tri-protein
based food.
Linda: I noticed one of the protein sources you choose to use is
that of fish—why?
Joe: Well, the benefits have been known for some time in the animal
feed industry, not the pet industry because it is expensive to use. But
in the animal husbandry industry they have found positive growth benefits
associated with incorporating fish meal into a diet. If you look at the
amino acid profile, you will see that it becomes readily apparent that this is
true.
The particular fish meals that we choose to use in the Eagle foods
have enhanced our amino acid profile levels. For example, we can use
chicken meal and fish meal, but if I introduce the same amount of fish meal as
chicken meal, I double the availability of the critically important amino acid,
lysine.
What we have also found, in our studies of feeding applications, is
that the larger skeletal content of a fish does not have the benefits of fish meal, it has more of a flesh content. So we produce
fish meal with more flesh content to increase the lysine and reduce the ash
content, thus we have less fecal mass and more
nutritional value.
Linda: We talked about the idea that fish is an important part of
the diet and particularly for the diet for the northern breeds. Would you
like to speak about that issue?
Joe: What our thrust was as a company,
was that we wanted to design feeds for a bigger dog, and the essential
component of northern breeds diet was that of fish. We have already
talked about the other benefits of fish meal—unidentified growth factors, then
enhanced amino acid structure—and one of the things that we also noticed is
that it is being proven, in human applications as well, that fish oil seems to
enhance bodily organ functions. It is also, in the opinion of the sled
dog people in Alaska, that it improved the overall performance of their
dogs. Plus, there is some thought that it improves joint lubricity, more fluid around the joint, so that is why we
use it. We feel it can help, possibly prevent or alleviate some arthritic
conditions.
Linda: You have been instrumental in working with several of the
sled dog enthusiasts in Alaska and running feed trials—tell me about this.
Joe: Our feeling was, if we were going to introduce a product for
the general consumer, that we want the most stringent evaluation that the food
could be exposed to. We looked at the alternative applications:
field trial, show ring and breeding. But the ultimate test was a 1,100
mile marathon race over an extended period of time. It has to be the
perfect testing ground because you have a performance requirement, the animal
has to be competitive and he has to be willing to run for several days for 15
hours a day.
Plus, the importance of effective food utilization—we couldn’t have
a sled dogger going down the trail carrying 150 lbs.
of food—he had to have an effective means of feeding so he could carry a
limited amount of food to reduce the overall sled weight. So that is why
we went there: to develop and then incorporate a number of features in
our product. One being the performance aspect, and the
other being a reduced consumption for high performance.
Linda: Did you directly sponsor any teams?
Joe: We, as a company, did not sponsor any teams in 1989.
Yet, in 1989, 22 of the 49 teams chose to run their dogs on our food.
Linda: This was by their own choice, no financial backing from
Eagle Pet Products! That is very interesting and it says a lot.
They understood the quality of the product in relation to the kind of
performance they would achieve.
Joe: Yes, by their choice. They feed the Eagle Pack foods and
paid for it out of their own pocket. They were chasing a $250,000 purse,
but they made an independent decision to run this performance race and to
choose Eagle Pack as their best bet to win the race. It is a tremendous voice
of confidence.
I have to look at it another way. 5 racers only used the next
commonly used food. Two of those were sponsored by our competitors (they
provided the food for the mushers). If we had
22 teams, and the next level was only 5, a lot of people had tremendous
confidence in the Eagle Pack foods.
One of the things that would somewhat affect the decision-making
process was the cost of the food. We are less expensive, but 22 people
did not make that decision based on cost, but on performance aspects.
Linda: You must feel very good about
the results and the numbers that have confidence in Eagle Pet Products,
Inc. What is the picture like for this year?
Joe: This year we are being faced with an unusual situation.
Other companies are becoming involved and are providing the mushers
with free food, prize money and money for just finishing the race.
Although we are losing some of the people because of these incentives, overall,
I think we will pick up others and Eagle will still be the food of choice for
over 50% of the teams in the Iditarod.
Linda: So what you’re saying is, through financial incentives, your
competitors have made it unattractive to feed Eagle Pack for the race; but so
many choose to feed it regardless of the fact that you are not putting any
money up to promote the product. Plus, you got out of it what you wanted
in terms of feed trials and research information.
Joe: That is exactly correct. That is primarily what we
went after. In 1989, of the 22 teams that fed Eagle, we had 11 teams
finish in the top 20. The food obviously did the job.
Linda: And obviously your competitors are concerned. One of
the hot issues right now among breeders is the use of artificial preservatives
in the foods. That is not an issue that will go away as suggested by some
of the competitors. I know several years ago that Eagle chose to take a
firm stand against the use of the preservative ethoxyquin—this
was rather visionary on your part, especially in light of the current attitudes
of the majority of your competitors. What is Eagle’s position on the use
of the preservative, ethoxyquin?
Joe: Our position on preservatives, regardless of it being ethoxyquin or BHT, is that we want to incorporate as little
preservative as possible into the food. The ultimate decision on ethoxyquin was made in early 1986. We looked at the
levels of incorporation to accomplish a “given end”—to stabilize the
ingredients that tend to become rancid. We found that we had to use less ethoxyquin than any other preservative to accomplish the
same task. Well, some people would say that was a positive aspect… except
that it was stronger so we could use less.
But the big issue was, what are the known consequences of the use
of ethoxyquin on a continued basis?--this is an
unknown. We found the use in dog food was not on the manufacturers
“suggested use of the chemicals”. We chose not to use it based on its use
when originally introduced into the market. Because we chose not to use
it, we had to figure out a way to formulate our product to incorporate an
ingredient that had more human application, and still use it at the lowest
levels to accomplish the task necessary of preserving the fats. What that
entailed, on our part, was making a judicious choice of ingredient alternatives
to stabilize fats. We found that through a selection of fats and a
blending of certain fats, we could lower still the amount of preservative.
Linda: You have your own rendering plant. Are you the only
one that does?
Joe: Yes. There are two types of rendering
plants: a continuous-process type and batch-process type. We have a
batch process plant so we can produce smaller batches and, although it is more
expensive to do it this way, we can customize the process and extract and
select out the fats we want to use. We can sort out and blend them to
meet our specific needs.
Linda: Ah, designer fats?
Joe: Yes, exactly. And by doing so we
can control the amount or type of preservatives. Our basic
philosophy at Eagle Pet Products is, we do not want to
introduce anything into our feeds that is not naturally appearing. We do
not like to introduce manufactured components at all. That is why we use
a lot of meat meal in a tri-protein based food.
For example: we see so many competitors far too concerned
with stool size (as if that were the real indication of the digestibility of
the food, which it is not). So what they do is, they strip the calcium
and phosphorus from the meat or protein sources and then they add back with a
process manufactured product with a lower ash content that manifests itself in
a smaller stool.
Linda: Yes, and so many times they incorporate lesser quality
micro-nutrients or synthetics, or fractionated elements because it is
cheaper. But in the end, the animal is the one that suffers because the
nutrients are less available for the animal’s system to utilize.
Joe: Yes, this is a problem. When we evaluated diets,
we found that we got enhanced performance in the animal’s feed from whole food
sources of meat and bone meals, rather than if we introduced it into a
supplemental manufactured form.
Linda: Let’s talk more about the issue of low volume stool versus
high volume. The breeder/consumer has been duped, by the commercial dog
food companies and their marketing departments, into thinking that a low-volume
stool is of utmost importance. Obviously, this is a desirable
characteristic when you have to clean up a yard or kennel (particularly in
giant breeds).
But I have also noticed, over the years, that some of the very
concentrated high caloric/high fat foods are difficult for the animal to
pass. Plus, as we discussed earlier, a small stool is not necessarily an
indication that the food is highly digestible. One of the things that I
think is important is to re-educate the public regarding this issue.
Joe: The way Eagle Pet Products addresses that is this:
On the bag it states, “dog food”. We are selling
“dog food” not “dog fecal matter”. The
predominant message on the bag is that we are trying to feed your dog.
We, as a company, approach it in a way that we have to feed your dog right
first. If we get a small stool in the process, that is great… but that is
not the most important issue. A lot of people in our industry, a lot of
breeders or users are oriented in the wrong way. They are more concerned
about what is on that ground than what is in the dog, or the value the animal
has extracted from the foods.
Linda: Again, because of using whole foods as a source of nutrients
and not going to lesser quality fractionated food sources, you might have a
larger stool; however more nutritious food-correct?
Joe: Yes, our first thought is to feed the animal properly,
to provide complete quality nutrition—therefore we probably do not have the
smallest stool.
Linda: Isn’t there methods of “faking” a smaller stool?
Joe: Yes, you can incorporate lower levels of fiber;
the bottom line is that this is like everything else in life—there is
compromise—and we have chosen to maintain the high nutritional value of the
food in lieu of a smaller stool. There is such a reduction in consumption of
food, that the actual stool volume weight over a 30-day period is actually less
than our competitors on an overall basis. We also take into consideration
the odor by the incorporation of our yucca schidigera product, which helps to neutralize odors..
Linda: As I had mentioned to you earlier, over the 18 years I fed
one of the other well known premium foods on the market. When I switched
to Eagle Pack 3 years ago, I found that I have been able to reduce the amount
of food consumed per month by one-third.
Joe: That is one of the things we found in
Linda: Many owners supplement their dog food—Vitamin C, yogurt for
friendly bacteria, enzymes, kelp, etc. How do you feel about tampering
with the diets?
Joe: Well, first of all, I can see no sense in someone spending $25
to $35 per bag for dog food and then having to buy those things. Our
philosophy is, as the manufacturer, we should be able to buy and incorporate
those things into the diets (if they have any value), and we at Eagle have
determined those things have value and, therefore, are incorporated into our
feeds.
Linda: One of the things that I was excited to see is that you have
developed canned foods (chicken, lamb, beef, liver)
that are a mixer as well as a prescription diet. At this point it seems
one manufacturer monopolizes the market for prescription diets. I have
noticed your canned food has an interesting combination of ingredients as well
as what is intentionally left out. What are you trying to accomplish with
your prescription, canned diet?
Joe: Let’s look at what we have done with the natural canned meat.
What we found was the average owner feeds canned meat in combination with
dry. So, they buy Eagle dog food, then go out and purchase another brand
of canned meats and treats. In doing so, they are combining foods that
have been developed under three different philosophical approaches to a
commercial food. So we decided to develop a canned food and treat that
“fits” our dry food line. When you’re feeding the animal, we want continuity of
philosophical input, so we can accomplish the same thing with each product.
Linda: Why is there higher protein in the prescription diet?
Joe: We looked at other canned prescription diets made and all they
provided was a substance level of nutrition. If you have an animal that
is on a prescription diet, it means he already has a problem; and if all I am
providing him with is subsistence level input, he is probably not going to get
any better. So we began evaluating different protein levels in different
packages, and developed our four canned foods, because we are not only looking
to maintain the dog, but to correct a problem.
Linda: It would seem to me, if an animal is on a prescription diet
(unless it is a pancreas or kidney problem) where they would need a low fat
diet, they would need something highly digestible with enough protein to build
what they are losing in weight and muscle mass.
Joe: Yes, because when we put protein into anything we enhance the
amino acid structure that gives us more of the corrective ability that you just
discussed.
Linda: You also have a dry food that is low fat that can be used as
a prescription diet too.
Joe: Yes, that is correct. We have a 17% protein, 8% fat dry
food that can address those needs. Both the dry and our canned foods have
cross-over applications. There are so many specialty products on the
market; we felt that we could combine functions of our product line.
We try to broaden the ability of our products to better address the
needed applications. From the consumer standpoint, it makes the decision-making
process a lot easier—you don’t have to have as many products to stock.
Because we have incorporated so many essential ingredients into our diets like
digestive enzymes, yogurt-like friendly bacteria, kelp, etc. This means
the breeder does not have to have such a large inventory of additional
additives and the foods have a broader application.
Linda: It has been my personal experience, as well as other
breeders, that we have this tendency to want to “cook” and “add” things to the
dog’s diet…almost as if, “if I don’t do this, it means I don’t love my dog, or
“I am not doing the best for my dog” syndrome. We want to do something
extra for the dog. That is why I am so pleased you have developed a whole
line of dry, canned and treats that are “compatible companion products”, so
people have the choice of using quality canned products and treats as opposed
to the substandard brands.
Joe: We know this. We also know that our dry product is
comprehensive; and that we would choose that breeders fed it alone.
However, we do know that breeders are going to do what you mentioned…to add
canned foods. There is a personal psychological thing that says I have to
add something rather than just to feed dry foods. We would prefer that
our canned foods were used because supplementing other foods can create some
problems.
Linda: Because it throws the balance off?
Joe: Absolutely.
Linda: Will you talk about your lamb and rice product—the Natural
Pack, lamb and rice product. Well, about two years ago, Eagle introduced
the Natural Pack—23% protein and 12% fat. It has been an answer to a
prayer for raising these giant puppies the first year of their life.
Joe: Right now we have six products in our line and we have
the introduction of the new Eagle Natural Pack, lamb and rice product.
Natural Pack has been very successful in feeding all breeds, but especially
Great Danes and other larger boned breeds during the first year of excessive
growth.
Lamb was included as the third ingredient, however effective
October 1991; we revised the formula to make lamb the number one
ingredient. We did it strictly from a marketing standpoint; i.e., to
provide a product for those pet owners who believe a lamb-based product to be
good for their dogs. Eagle’s philosophy is that there is no “magic”
ingredient, every ingredient makes an important contribution, and not one
ingredient by itself can carry the formula. That is why we also include
chicken and fish in the formula. By including three “meat” based
proteins, a superior amino acid profile is provided for the animal.
Linda: Why do you include rice in your other diets, not just the
lamb/rice diet?
Joe: One of the reasons we use rice is because it is sort of
a universal recommendation by veterinarians for any dietary problems (intestinal
upset or allergies). It is highly digestible, 99%. We also found
that it works for corrective purposes because it is soothing on the animal and
persons system. It is simply easier for the stomach to process and
doesn’t cause any trauma.
Linda: Since we first spoke, you have since introduced a
product called Premium Select. What is it, and why did you introduce it?
Joe: Premium Select is a lamb and rice based formula.
Unlike our other formulas that have a tri-protein meat base, we limit this
formula to just one meat protein for two reasons.
The first is so it can be fed as an isolation or hypoallergenic
diet. By limiting the meat protein in a diet to a single source, not
commonly fed to the animal, the theory goes, you can
begin to isolate just which meat (or vegetable) protein is causing the allergy.
The other reason is, simply, the market demand for a lamb-based
product. With a 22% protein level and a 15% fat level, Premium Select is
also ideal for developing Dane puppies.
Linda: Why do you include whole dry eggs in your products?
Joe: For a couple of reasons. It has protein value, but
it is not incorporated into our foods for that purpose. We do not count
its protein value when we compute the total protein value of the food—that is
an added benefit. In a human diet, it is one of the most easily digested
foods we can eat. We use it because it has extremely beneficial skin and
coat qualities.
Linda: How about brewers dried yeast?
Joe: Brewers dried yeast has a couple of benefits that we
consider when incorporated into the diet. It helps build blood, improves
appetite, and it is also the source for some important Vitamin B’s.
Vitamin B is very important in maintaining a balanced nervous system—which is
reflected in temperament. It just helps make all those little connections
in the system work better.
Linda: Let’s talk about the topic of stress as it relates to
reproduction, infertility, litter size, bitches not coming into season,
etc. How do you address these issues in the formulation of your foods?
Joe: We have a couple of opinions on these. One, of
course, is genetic. This can predispose an animal to problems in these
areas, including the way in which they manage stress. But, what we do is
to assume that this is not the case and try to introduce into our formula,
ingredients identified as having beneficial characteristics associated with the
reproductive process, such as Vitamin E and kelp. Specific
ingredients that allow us to maintain the animal in top condition to maximize
their fertility. One of the benefits of this is improvement in
size and vigor within a litter and easier birth
delivery on the bitch.
Linda: So, even though there may be a genetic predisposition
for reproduction problems, inability to handle stress or temperament problems,
these problems can be directly related to the condition of the animal’s overall
health. Then, in turn, this would be based on the quality of the diet
that the animal is fed. Many animals are under stress if they are in a
new environment, traveling to a show or the pressure
of showing. It is not unusual to see an animal ringside that may have diarrhea. How do you formulate your foods for those
conditions?
Joe: Again, this is associated with our adding the probiotics or yogurt-like friendly bacteria to the
diet. A stressed condition results when an animal, or human for the
matter, is put into an uncomfortable environment. This is generally a
problem more common with younger dogs than older dogs, due to their lack of
exposure and conditioning.
So what we have to do, is try to prevent
the stress induced diarrhea from occurring by
introducing a very favorable culture (probiotics/micro-organisms) into the animal’s stomach
through the diet being fed. When an animal gets into what would be a
“stressed condition”, it affects his body’s pH balance. What that does is
it kills off the favorable bacteria count in the
intestines. So we re-introduced the yogurt-like (friendly bacteria {probiotics}) in an additional stabilized form that will not
be as prone to being killed off due to the change in pH. Our introduction
of favorable bacteria through the Eagle Pack diets,
increases the colony count of the favorable bacteria
to such a level that it probably will not happen.
Linda: Interesting, because I am preparing an article on my
thoughts regarding the necessity of using probiotics
and enzymes in our diets, in helping to manage stress as it manifests itself in
the bloat-torsion in the giant breeds. Although it may not be the only
cause, the re-introduction of friendly bacteria and digestive enzymes is closer
to what is normally found in the diet when an animal is allowed fresh killed
meat. I am really glad to see this is an important part of the Eagle Pack
foods—it is just another step in the right direction. What about other
forms of stress, such as pregnancy and lactation?
Joe: Those issues are addressed through overall formulation
of the diet, and the incorporation of adequate levels
of a high-quality vitamin and mineral packages; and of course, the favorable bacteria plays an important role in addressing
these areas of stress.
Linda: Eagle Pet Products states there is no soy, or
artificial color or flavor
added to the diet. Can you talk about these topics?
Joe: Again, we try to emphasize that through our ingredient
selection we can incorporate the important
ingredients that the animal needs. We, as a company, are not concerned
with cosmetic or aesthetic appeal of the general public. It is important
to know, however, that we use the same ingredients from the same suppliers so
that we can maintain a continued high quality and consistency from batch to
batch.
Linda: Rather than shopping around for the best price on the
market? As a breeder, I certainly appreciate the consistency. When
you say no added salt, do you mean a no-salt diet, or that you do not add
additional salt, only what is natural to the ingredients?
Joe: There is natural occurring salt in the meat ingredients,
and until recently, we did not add back any salt. What has happened,
however, because of the direction that human diets are taking (i.e., less
salt), our meat ingredients do not have enough “ingredient born” salt to meet
the animal’s needs. Both dogs and cats need a certain level of salt for
many reasons—among them is that proper salt levels will prevent urinary tract
diseases. However, too high a salt content, where a manufacturer adds
back more salt than necessary so he can enhance palatability to overcome poor
quality ingredients, causes other problems.
Linda: In lesser quality foods (and these can be premium
diets) they supplement salt, can you explain this?
Joe: In your lesser quality foods, you’re talking about a
food that has a lower ratio of meat and a higher ratio of vegetable
protein. The meat proteins, because they have a more complete and
abundant amino acid structure, also have more essential nutrients, particularly
minerals like calcium and phosphorus. Therefore, you do not have to rely
on introducing a mineral form or a manufactured form of a mineral into the
diet. It is what we call “ingredient born”. That is why the feed
industry assigns more “value” to meat protein than vegetable protein diets.
Linda: It is the same principle as in the vegetarian diet
where it is important to combine certain grains and beans in order to get the
necessary amino acids normally found in a meat-based diet?
Joe: Yes, what you see in a vegetarian’s diet is that he/she
introduces grains into the diet in a whole form, not fractionated, and the
whole form of grains have more protein value and a
more complete amino acid structure. But what we are seeing today in the
pet food industry, is grain “by-products” as opposed
to using the whole grain. By-products, are a preserved form and therefore
very incomplete in nutrients and a comprehensive amino acid structure.
Linda: One of my fellow colleagues, from the University, went
to
Joe: This is due to the more comprehensive amino acids.
Linda: I have long felt that we can actually alter the
structure of an animal depending on the way we feed them. I have seen so
many Danes and young foals for that matter, that are fed a quality very high
protein/calorie dense diet and it seems they shoot straight up and actually
gain excessive height, loss of angles and long, lean muscle. I have some
interesting photographs from some of my feed trials to support this theory.
John: Certainly, look at your Great Dane standard height
requirements where it states males should be no less than 30” at the shoulder,
but preferable that he be 32” or more. Females no less than 28”,
preferably that she be 30” or more. That standard was set when the commercial
diets in this country were vegetable protein based and very low in protein.
Linda: Oh my gosh, John you are
right—what a great revelation. I never thought about it in that
respect. Most of the males are at least 33-35”, and bitches, I think, we
could safety say are 32-34”. Why you’d be laughed out of the ring with a
32” male! I think it is rare to see a 34” male in the ring anymore.
Over the years, we have literally built a larger animal because of the higher
quality, meat based, more complete amino acid
structure. However, I feel we have carried this too far and need to back
off on the caloric dense/high protein diets in order to establish a nice
mid-range of growth and development—resembling closer to what would be obtained
when raised in a natural environment.
John: Yes, we have seen this happen in
Joe: What we like to say about Eagle Pet Pack is, “we make
your dog all that he can be”. Why? Because we
have made available an abundance of essential nutrition by incorporating more
ingredients and higher quality in our nutritional package.
Linda: On to another subject: packaging. It is so
difficult to get information from some of these companies, and they simply do
not give it on the bag. Can you talk about this?
Joe: From a manufacturer’s standpoint, we feel that it is the
quality of protein that is of greatest importance, and the protein and fat
content does not even need to be addressed on the bag. What the package
should do, is reflect the nutrient profile of a
particular product. We do it on our packaging, and we also feel that the
bag should have the essential amino acid structure listed on it. If you
are very selective in the ingredients you select and maximize the value of your
input, you can produce a high quality, lower protein food.
Linda: I encourage breeders to get these giant breeds off
puppy food by 8 weeks of age at the latest, and switch to a high quality but
lower protein food to slow the growth process. I was so interested to see
that you are the only company that actually states something to this effect on
the bag.
Joe: Yes, we agree with your statement. In fact, if you
look at our packaging, it states that you should switch from our puppy food very
early to one of our other Eagle Pack products. The reasons being, if you
look at the food structure of our products, you will find that all of our
products incorporate all of the ingredients that we have in our puppy food…
that is generally not the case with other companies.
Our food is formulated for the specific application of feeding a
puppy when he is very small, then moving him over to one of our other
products. A lot of other products force the breeder to buy a variety of
things to supplement a poorer quality food in order to accomplish the same
thing that we do with the product alone—it is already in our diets. For
us, it is important to have a complete quality vitamin and mineral package in
all our products. Here is a good example: let’s say a breeder is feeding
a maintenance food, then they realize there has been an accidental
breeding. This could present some serious problems because the female is
not nutritionally ready to support these puppies. So it is our feeling,
why not make sure she is ready no matter what the situation.
Linda: I know that if I wanted to raise a litter on your 20%
or 23% protein diet I could, because the caloric intake is such that it is
suited for growth; plus you use high-quality sequestered vitamins/ minerals, digestive
enzymes and friendly bacteria. What I mean, is every product in your line
has the same important ingredients. The protein and fat levels vary
depending on the product and its application.
Joe: Yes, sometimes breeders think that a lesser-protein diet is a lesser quality diet, and a higher-protein food
means a higher quality diet. This is not necessarily true. We can
look at an Eagle product with a 30% protein—20% fat that is delivering
approximately 2,220 calories. Now we can take the protein down to 20% and
fat to 12%, and essentially we have reduced the product content by 35%, if we
just look at the imperical numbers. But we have
only reduced the caloric content by 10%; this shows you what you can do if you
carefully select your ingredients. We have taken the high caloric intake
value (which is fat) and reduced 40% of the animal fat yet only reduced 10% of
the calories.
Linda: In an article I read, it said it was necessary to feed
sled dogs 50-60% fat. I questioned this, is this so?
Joe: Let’s look at this…in people—if they need energy—they
consume sugar and that gives them quick energy. However, in a sled dog,
if the application is to convey “staying energy”, we would not introduce it in
the form of fat because the fat calorie is the most quickly absorbed and
utilized; so they need a balance of protein, carbohydrates and fats. But
if you introduce only a high fat/or hot calorie diet, it can lead to
dehydration since the fat calorie in an animal burns off at a higher temperature
than a carbohydrate calorie.
Linda: Well, that makes more sense. I have a portion of
an article from Veterinary Forum Magazine, that states,
“There have been studies done that show that house dogs (family pets) undergo
the same amount of stress as a sled dog.”
Joe: Yes, that is true. Same amount,
different kinds. With family pets there is constant contact with
strangers and abuse from children. The sled dog actually operates in a
more stable environment because of his limited exposure to stimulus compared to
the family housedog. There’s not open visitation at a sled dog
kennel. They spend their day in the kennel or tied to a doghouse.
Their stress is more physical than a housedog. It is the emotional stress
that is the real problem, such as with a show dog. It’s the constant
changes in the environment, and constant exposure to new situations that are so
stressful on these dogs.
Linda: Let’s change the subject. Why do commercial dog
food manufacturers tell us about the percentage of digestibility or caloric
count or gross energy available in the dog foods? Is this an accurate
indication of what is really going on in the animal?
Joe: What they are trying to do is convince you through a
specific marketing approach of certain characteristics of the food. But
there is not a consistent approach within the industry in determining these
characteristics.
An example would be in determining the percentage of digestibility
of a diet—it can’t be done without the actual weighing and processing of fecal solids, which is a very expensive process and is not
always undertaken. You see, the assumption is, by the consumer, that the
company wouldn’t be selling this product unless it was highly digestible.
So they (the companies) rely somewhat on the fact you are as the consumer,
pre-sold on a product if it is in a certain distribution system, in a certain
type of packaging or in certain marketing procedures.
Linda: I had expressed to you earlier what a difficult time I
have had getting any cooperation from dog food companies. I have
repeatedly written letters and called asking for specific breakdowns of
ingredients and amino acid assay. In fact, one very popular food from the
West Coast, put me in touch with one of their
veterinarians. Her response to me was, “Why do you want an amino acid
assay of the food? I don’t even know them, and you probably wouldn’t
understand the information anyway!” Another extremely well-known company
whose food is frequently sold through veterinarians, told me, “We can not give
out amino acid breakdown of our products because there is a lot of industry
sabotage going on and giving this information out might help someone to try and
duplicate our food formulas!”
This attitude made me very angry because I am a consumer comparison
shopper. I am entitled to that information and I certainly did know how
to interpret this information. Well, they never responded with any
information and only two companies, of every-one in the market, have ever
responded, with Eagle being one of them.
Joe: As a company we are proud to make this information
available; although it’s true most people would not know what to do with the
information or could not assimilate it properly. The other thing is
this: if you are making that information available to the general public,
there are specific minimum requirements in the AAFCO listing. As to the
availability of certain amino acids, you would probably find that companies,
refusing to supply the information, are only putting in the minimums to meet
the AAFCO requirements by law.
Linda: Minimums…that’s all?
Joe: Yes, that’s all. So I would be very reluctant to
accept that kind of comment from a company, “Why would you want it, you
probably wouldn’t understand it anyway!” Because there is a basis of comparison—you
can go to AAFCO for that requirement and to a certain extent, the consumer is
entitled to that information.
In a lot of applications it would not be beneficial because there
are many philosophies regarding what is essential in a diet and what
isn’t. But we have to look at what is being done outside the pet industry
to make an evaluation as to how important that information is. The animal
husbandry industry, which is tremendously large in comparison to the pet
industry, says that we have re-employed the philosophical approach that was
used in animal nutrition 30 years ago. Now, that concept is no longer in
vogue, but it is seeing a resurgence of this concept and it is that again of
“first limiting” that we talked about earlier. This means if you do not
have the essential components in a diet, then it does not matter what else you
have. The example I gave: if I do not have the amino acid methionine, then it does not matter what others I
have. If I don’t have this one thing (or essential components) then the
whole thing is a waste of time.
Linda: So this theory of 30 years ago is being
re-addressed? This is like the B-vitamins, if they are not all present at
once, working in concert, they do not work.
Joe: Oh, you bet? It is just one part of a
puzzle. People were seeing what they put in a formulation—a linear
program extension of that information and what happened was they were not
getting the results. The computer says this was going to happen, but it
didn’t.
The industry placed too much on minimizing inputs to maximize
output. What we did (industry) was formulate down to a point where we got
the absolute essential minimum to accomplish what we thought was our
goal. We did this because it helped generally in the area of cost containing…
and now we are saying that it is not valid. It is our opinion at Eagle
that you cannot put in minimum levels. You have to put in an abundance, in order to ensure that these animals get that
value. This is the other aspect that is so important—you have to put it
into the diet so that it is usable by the animal.
Linda: Bio-availability? How much is actually available
for usage by the animal or human?
Joe: Yes, and this means, in our case, that we get
“ingredient born” characteristics. We know genetically, everything that
relates to the utilization of that component is better if it appears naturally
in a substance, than if it is manufactured in the laboratory.
Linda: That’s like natural vitamins—vitamins derived from
whole food substances are better utilized than synthetics made in a laboratory.
Let me back up here; in all our lengthy discussions over the past
few months and through our discussion today, I get the feeling that the
philosophy of this company is to be the best that it can be. If in the
process you become the biggest, that is fine. If you become the
wealthiest this is fine, but that is certainly not your primary goal.
Joe: Well, we don’t want to be the biggest because I don’t
think we can be the biggest and also be the best—there is
not enough quality ingredients out there; there is a finite availability of
essential components.
Linda: Is it fair to say that is probably what has happened
to some of your competitors? That is certainly the feeling most long-time
breeders have about a couple of premium foods. I know I have personally
seen a change in the results of the feeds over the past 20 years.
One company is so big they even have a line of designer clothes,
coffee mugs, and dog toys… who needs it! It
“feels” like such a loss of integrity; something isn’t right. If the food
is good, it will sell. Nothing is more swift than the “breeder’s
grapevine”. I bet you can attest to that fact? If they are making
that much money, I’d rather see them donate to research rather than develop a
line of clothing containing a logo.
There is always the Morris Animal Foundation or others desperately
needing funds for research on the degenerative animal diseases that have
cropped up over the past 35 years. Of course, sticking my neck out here,
I am convinced most of them are nutritionally-caused and not genetic, as we
have been told.
Joe: I think that a lot of our competitors have gone through
that problem. In some cases, we have compromised our philosophies to accomplish
other ends—growth being one, profit, market share—there are so many
considerations that are coincidental.
Linda: I am wondering—what do you think about the development
of a research center. On one hand it can have
positive aspects, but on the other hand it is not real! It has nothing to
do with what happens to these dogs in the real world… how they eat, the ways in
which we manage their lives. Perhaps that was the downfall (in the eyes
of most breeders) of one particular competitor.
Joe: In our opinion, we do not want a research facility.
Linda: Wouldn’t it be a tremendous financial drain?
Joe: That is not the real consideration for us as much as the
potential outcome. You know, we all have a “way” in which we approach
this business; here at Eagle, conveying this philosophy through training and
daily behavior is what we are trying to
accomplish. I think you can, somewhat, consider the type of information
you generate from a captive evaluation because, whether it is conscious on the
part of the evaluator or not, they are going to respond to what they think
management wants. Our approach is that we go to the consumers and get an
independent evaluation from their standpoint with no predetermined
outcome. What we are saying, we’d like to do this, we
think we are doing this, but we want you to tell us that. We do not want
to go into a laboratory environment controlled by us to make that outcome.
John Marsman: There are some
benefits to a research facility if all you want to know is how to raise a
kennel full of Beagles; but that is not the real world. That does not
deal with what happens when these dogs are used for hunting, guarding, going to
dog shows and other external situations… none of the day-to-day stress is found
in a protected kennel facility environment. Libby Riddles (first woman to
win the Iditarod sled race) made a real good comment: “The dogs can look
great on a chain in the summer time, but when you hook them up to a sled,
things go to hell real fast if you haven’t maintained the proper diet.”
Joe has been in contact with a lot more people than I have.
People like yourself around the country, that are not “fanatic” breeders; ones
that you can listen to. These people have an on-going dialogue regarding
these issues, and you know that you’re getting some honest feed-back, some
valid information and observations. We think that is a better form of
“reality basis” research, than a kennel full of Beagles.
Linda: You know, John, that kind of
information is really important for breeders to hear (not that I want your
phone to be ringing off the hook). There is a definite sense of
frustration felt by breeders across the country that no one in research or in
the industry is listening to them. I know there have been hundreds of calls
regarding one particular food that has caused “browned out/burnt” coat problems
the past few years, yet the company refuses to listen.
I have certainly felt a sense of frustration in my years of
investigating the pros and cons of commercial dog foods. I wrote a letter
to the owner of one of the premium dog food companies, and told him that I had
spent at least $26,000 over the years on their particular dog food. I
informed them that it was about time they gave me five minutes of time to
address some of my questions. It was like trying to get an audience with
the Pope!!!
It is my opinion, based on observations, researching and
interaction with breeders all over the country and overseas, that we are
plagued with more nutritionally-caused diseases in the past 25 years than there
has ever been before. Some of which are…hip dysplasia,
wobblers, bone diseases, cancer, thyroid, reproduction problems… (and yes, bloat and gastric torsion). Yet, somehow we
have come to believe these are genetically caused diseases.
Joe: Well, what applies to your breed, applies to others
across the board.
John: One other comment on the digestibility issue.
About 8 or 10 years ago, there was no way you could get digestibility figures
from a company and when you look back, those digestibility figures were from
50% to 75%; they simply did not want you to know.
Where as today, some of the companies are advertising what the
digestibility factors are because they are forced by public pressure. One
of the ads running right now is advertising their digestibility factor at
83%. Our digestibility runs between 89% - 93%, depending on the product.
Linda: That’s funny. In my files, I have a study of two
companies comparing each other’s product to their own, yet the results printed
in their pamphlets are different in each study.
Joe: Yes, that is right depending on the technique
used. That is why we, as a company, have been trying, since 1980, to get
a universal standard set in the industry for the testing of these foods, but the
industry will not accept that idea. You have to have a consistent
evaluation base. As long as we do not have a defined criterion in the
industry, anybody can say anything any way they want to because of the way it
is presented and the evaluation technique used.
Linda: Does the pet food industry have a board of regulators?
Joe: It has a governing body that is under financed and it
will not litigate problems.
Linda: It is rather important then in terms of what it can
do?
Joe: Yes, the national organization is administered on a
state-by-state basis, and it is under funded, and really has no enforcement
authority.
Linda: I need to backtrack here a bit… I just noticed,
in my notes, when we were talking earlier about research labs and feeding
trials, I talked to an orthopedic person at a certain
university, involved in research regarding diet and its relationship to bone
diseases in large dogs. I had a lengthy conversation with this person
regarding the “bone survey” information I have gathered from all the Dane
breeders across the country.
At one point, this person said to me, “Well, we don’t need to test
these foods on Great Danes, I just got in some adult Greyhounds to test these
high protein/caloric dense diets” (growth and
performance). Well, I said to myself, I’m certainly no Mark Morris, and
correct me if I am wrong, but what good is testing growth promoting foods going
to do on an already mature animal? So, I asked, “Are you developing a
breeding facility so you can test the offspring?” Oddly enough the
response to that question was, “No”. What kind of information
can they determine about growth, using adults?
John: First of all, Greyhounds are a lot different dog, in
terms of bone size and growth patterns, than Danes or any other giant
breeds. As a breeder myself, I am aware of that.
Joe: I guess they think they can extrapolate the information
by using adults. I don’t know what the thinking is there…
Linda: I really believe most companies and research facilities
lump all dogs and breeds together, when in fact, different breeds may need to
be fed differently… I see you address that issue, with hounds in particular, in
the use of your maintenance diet. Why do you suggest feeding a smaller
amount of food, to a given size dog, than other manufacturers recommend?
If one over feeds, does that create any problems, such
as diarrhea?
Joe: Yes, it does. If you over feed an animal, you can
run into problems with a looser, moist stool or diarrhea.
That is why we ask that you adhere to the specific instructions on the
bag. We know they work, and are generally
20-25% less consumption than competitive foods.
Linda: I noticed on your bag of puppy food that you tell
people to switch their puppy from the 28% protein back down to the 25%, at
around 16 weeks of age. (Note: It is my suggestion based on the
bone survey, that you switch off a puppy food at 8
weeks of age and use the Eagle Natural Pack 23% protein instead of a puppy food
for that first year of development).
Joe: We know from tracking cycles that you can actually raise
a puppy from weaning on our Kennel Pack 25%, or our Natural Pack 23%. To
come out and say you do not need to feed a puppy food, we’d be answering a
million phone calls a day from people saying we’re crazy! That would be
the consequence of taking that position.
But what we are essentially telling the consumer is, you do not have to spend the money to purchase puppy
food. The same nutrient value is also in the adult line. The other
thing we are saying is that a puppy food is specifically designed to facilitate
the early weaning through the early stages of accelerated development of the
digestive system of the animal. We know that process is done by 8-10
weeks of age. Therefore, it is not necessary for people to insist you
feed a puppy food for a year.
Linda: I thank you Joe for saying that out loud… most
company’s formulations are not developed with your philosophy in mind.
Aren’t most foods just a “beefed-up” version of their maintenance foods?
Joe: Yes, and in a lot of cases what they have done is to
structure the design of those products with different characteristics, so you
do not get the essential values needed to feed your puppy. In some cases
you might have to feed it for an entire year. Based on our own research,
essentially a puppy food has done its job at 8-10 weeks, at which time you can
go to an adult food… well, you can with our food anyway.
John: Yes, but remember, that is not the case with other
foods.
Linda: So when the giant breeds get into growth problems
(H.O.D.) at 12-16 weeks of age, is it your feeling, that you should take them
off puppy food by 8-10 weeks, and place them on
a quality premium adult food, like your Natural Pack 23% or the Maintenance Pack
20% protein?
Joe/John: Yes, that is right.
Linda: So barring the giant breeds here, it is harmful for
someone to feed your puppy food for a year?
Joe: No, but they are incurring an unnecessary expense and
they are trying to accomplish something that has already been done way before…
of course, I am referring to our product.
Linda: When you recommend a certain food—Power Pack (30%
protein, 20% fat) for example, and you expect a dog to gain weight, but on rare
occasions he doesn’t; instead he firms up and his body becomes harder, what
actually happens?
Joe: When you introduce more protein (meat based), what you
get is a more firm tissue and sleek muscle development. Where as if you
introduce a carbohydrate (grain based) diet, you get a more loose and full
configuration of those tissues.
Linda: It appears that a protein condition muscle takes
longer to develop than a carbohydrate muscle or weight… because some breeders
will feed a premium meat based food and then when they want to gain weight quickly,
they cut it with the addition of some lesser quality, higher carbohydrate food.
Joe: What you get in a lesser quality food is more fat
generated from carbohydrates and moisture retention—a loose weight development
that is not toned.
Linda: It is a quick fix right, where the dog may plump up
quickly but is not muscle developed. Now you have another line of food,
other than the Eagle Professional Pack line that we have been discussing.
That is the Eagle Hy-Ration line… why is that?
Joe: For a couple of reasons. Through our market
research we have found that, in many cases, the dog professional is feeding the
premium foods for specific application along with also feeding commercial
foods. So what we have said that if he/she is feeding another food, we
would prefer it be ours so that he/she has a constant philosophical approach to
the way the animal is being fed. We feel that our commercial line is very
competitive with most of the premium foods out there. “Hy-Ration is a full-line brand.”
Linda: One thing with Danes is that you do not have that many
people with an excessive number of them, as with some other breeds. I
have some friends that have Toys and they have 50 dogs. That is rarely
the case in the giants. So, the Hy-Ration line
would be used in this application or in boarding kennel situations. In
fact, I know of a local kennel that does use the Hy-Ration
for boarders and is very pleased with the results.
I want to switch gears here and ask you about your canned
line. John and I have talked about the fact that canned foods can affect
the dog’s temperament with the use of a lot of food coloring,
preservatives and sugar…
Joe: We developed our own line of natural canned foods
because most canned foods do not carry adequate levels of supplementation of
the vitamins and minerals we feel necessary in a food.
Linda: Where the can, can be used alone?
Joe: Yes, absolutely. You can feed this canned food
straight, It is difficult to understand canned food labels and
ingredients. Labels that read Chicken and Rice, for example, must contain
95% chicken. Labels that add qualifying words like “formula”, “dinner”,
etc. may contain as little as 25% meat. Also, a can label that states an
8% protein content, actually contains about 31% protein, on a dry matter basis
(so you can make comparisons to dry food).
Linda: Can you explain the difference between digestible
calories and gross calories?
Joe: Digestible calories mean you might have a product with a
gross calorie value of 2,000 calories. Of those calories, the way in which they
are delivered to the animal—contingent on the digestive system—the animal might
only be able to use 1,200 calories. However, the tendency within the industry, is to list gross calories.
Linda: I have an old flyer in my files from a premium food
company in the
Joe: O.K. Soybean in itself is not bad as used 10 years
ago. More recently it is an ingredient that is abused in its use, and it
is not offset through formulation content to address the deficiencies of
soybean meal.
Linda: Is it an incomplete amino acid structure?
Joe: It is actually deficient in minerals. What
happened was people started incorporating higher and higher levels of soybean
meal in diets and weren’t compensating for the mineral deficiencies, which lead
to the manifestation of problems in animals. It got a bad rap, but not
necessarily because of the amino acid structure.
Linda: Was this first realized in the agriculture industry?
Joe: Yes, it was first noticed in swine. What they
found is they had to supplement… that is why they are getting back to the issue
of “first-limiting”, which we talked about earlier. It not only applies
to amino acids, it also applies to mineral deficiencies. We are now
seeing more meat proteins incorporated back into swine diets.
They are trying to get the farmer to mix his feed on the
farm. They could not do that with meat meal because it lends itself to
salmonella contamination if not processed properly. When they started
going to a solely-based soy diet, they started seeing serious nutritional
deficiencies in the animals. They were selling the farmer what is called
a concentrate pre-mix and it incorporated di-calcium
phosphate. But what happened was they were incorporating the di-calcium phosphate at the inherent value that it was
listed but it wasn’t meat appearing calcium and phosphorus; so they actually
had a deficiency in the diet. It simply wasn’t being utilized to the
extent that they thought it was supposed to be available.
Linda: There are several sources of calcium. One being
meat and meat by-products, as well as in the form of calcium carbonate or
ground limestone. That is not really as usable, correct?
Joe: