Taste of the wild dog food

[Christine_72]

Has anyone fed this to their dogs? What are your thoughts on it? 

 

here are the main ingredients for the puppy dry:

 

Buffalo, lamb meal, sweet potatoes, egg product, pea protein, peas, potatoes, canola oil, tomato pomace, roasted bison, roasted venison, beef, flaxseed, potato fibre, natural flavour, ocean fish meal, salmon oil, salt, tomatoes, blueberries, raspberries

[Diva]

I have found ToTW to be a good food. No doubt some people will reply that the peas are a problem for fertility (phytoestrogens), but that far down the ingredient list I think they are OK. Not a problem for non breeding dogs anyway. And sweet potato is a one of the better vegetables for dogs. If you are near a Costco store their home brand grain free, Nature’s Domain, is quite similar and much cheaper, but less variety and I don’t recall a puppy version.

 

One of the issues in picking a puppy food is how big your dog is going to be. Very large/giant breeds need to be careful with the nutrient balance in puppy diets, too nutrient dense may cause growth problems. But if you have a JRT as your pic suggests that isn’t an issue, they don’t put on the massive growth of a Great Dane!

[Apricot]

It looks good, but we haven't ended up buying it because from my understanding it is imported from America.  ( I could be wrong )     We would prefer a food that is more locally made, so we went with another brand.

[Christine_72]

@Apricotthat it's made in America made me think twice too. Nugget is currently on Ivory Coat, but i would like to add in Taste of the wild to his rotation.

 

@Diva yep, Nugget is a 5mth old Jack Russell.

Edited April 27, 2018 by Christine_72

[juice]

They make the Costco food under the Kirkland brand , I use it . If you want an Aussie made one  Meals for Mutts is pretty good . 

[Asher]

I use TOTW fish recipe for one of my dogs who has a beef allergy and grain intolerance - it’s been fabulous, very reliable and zero issues for him. I use Meals for Mutts for another dog and he has been doing really well on it. I find Ivory Coat is a too high in fat, particularly for the older dog.

[Maddy]

I mostly feed raw but we use TotW as a backup food. I've tried a lot of other kibbles and looked at ingredients for heaps more, but TotW has definitely been the easy winner. I buy the High Prairie variety and I've never had a dog refuse it. Also, dogs don't seem to get upset tummies, soft poo or any other problems. Only downside is that it's hard to buy locally, but that might just be a Tasmanian thing.

 

 

[Christine_72]

@Maddy I was planning on buying it online through mypetwarehouse

[PANDI-GIRL]

The ( Clean Label Project)    tested   TotW  & found it has a high level of  toxins  &  contamination  in the kibble

[Christine_72]

1 minute ago, PANDI-GIRL said:

The ( Clean Label Project)    tested   TotW  & found it has a high level of  toxins  &  contamination  in the kibble

Oh Jeez, that's not good news! 

[sandgrubber]

On 4/29/2018 at 1:44 PM, PANDI-GIRL said:

The ( Clean Label Project)    tested   TotW  & found it has a high level of  toxins  &  contamination  in the kibble

They gave it three stars... which is average.  Before you decide this is bad, check and see all the other 'premium' brands that get three stars.  Unfortunately, this source doesn't identify what it measures, so it's very hard to interpret the results.

I hate it when someone makes a big deal about being 'scientific' and doesn't document their methods.

Edited April 30, 2018 by sandgrubber

[Daisys Mum]

I feed my two dogs TotW and they are doing very well on it ... my 13 year old has a coat that gleams.

[PANDI-GIRL]

 

@sandgrubber   The Balanced  Canine Sydney,  Facebook  page,     has a great  website  link about  Clean Label Project ,  TOTW  tested  1 star only for Toxins !

 

Canidae  has a 5 star score for clean food, so that's  really interesting.    5 star- being best,   1 star- worst score.

 

Balanced Canine  also  has a great  Data Spreed Sheet  on kibbles  & meat content %

 

@Christine_72   you may find  The Balanced Canine Sydney,  Facebook  page  very helpful reading. 

[Christine_72]

Thank you @PANDI-GIRL I'll check out the Facebook page now.

[mackiemad]

Not everything on the internet or fb is 100% accurate, without bias etc. So worth doing more research than just taking one person's or one page's opinion as fact 

 

Pet food is a topic that gets people passions well and truly stirred up fwiw 

[Christine_72]

I have yet to find a dog food with better ingredients and meat sources than TOTW. I started off with Ivory Coat, but i just like the ingredients of taste of the wild better. Just sucks that it's an American food.

I might rotate between Ivory coat and TOTW.

[PANDI-GIRL]

On 5/7/2018 at 10:16 AM, Christine_72 said:

I have yet to find a dog food with better ingredients and meat sources than TOTW. I started off with Ivory Coat, but i just like the ingredients of taste of the wild better. Just sucks that it's an American food.

I might rotate between Ivory coat and TOTW.

Hi  @Christine_72

Have a look at  Stay Loyal  small bites  Salmon & turkey, my dog loves this & they have a great website. 

[sandgrubber]

On 5/3/2018 at 2:37 PM, PANDI-GIRL said:

 

@sandgrubber   The Balanced  Canine Sydney,  Facebook  page,     has a great  website  link about  Clean Label Project ,  TOTW  tested  1 star only for Toxins !

 

Canidae  has a 5 star score for clean food, so that's  really interesting.    5 star- being best,   1 star- worst score.

 

Balanced Canine  also  has a great  Data Spreed Sheet  on kibbles  & meat content %

 

@Christine_72   you may find  The Balanced Canine Sydney,  Facebook  page  very helpful reading. 

Couldn't find Clean Lanel Product data on Balanced Canine, Sydney's Facebook page, nor could I get the spreadsheet to display.  Odd that in your reading, BC gives a different rating for TOTW than the Clean Label Project website...or perhaps there's a logical explanation.  I got the feeling that Balanced Canine is pushing a point of view, and remain distrustful of Clean Label as methods, or even what they measure, are not described.  

Edited May 8, 2018 by sandgrubber
Clarification

[PANDI-GIRL]

Hi  @sandgrubber  the site has lots of information, if you click on  PHOTOS  the different  topics  will display  

 

One thing on Balanced Canine  I disagree  with, they say  kibble can only have 28%  meat in the formula  , post on 1st  may,

 

Robert from Stay Loyal  told me, via email  Stay Loyal has over 45%  meat meal  in the kibble,  with over  80%  of the  protein  in the food coming   from meat.

 

April 27th,  Topic  Kibble  Data , is in the photos  under a bowl of kibble,  then click on the green link  at top,   

On the spreed sheet  press,  Overview,   hope it works  for you.   

[Maddy]

9 hours ago, PANDI-GIRL said:

Hi  @sandgrubber  the site has lots of information, if you click on  PHOTOS  the different  topics  will display  

 

One thing on Balanced Canine  I disagree  with, they say  kibble can only have 28%  meat in the formula  , post on 1st  may,

 

Robert from Stay Loyal  told me, via email  Stay Loyal has over 45%  meat meal  in the kibble,  with over  80%  of the  protein  in the food coming   from meat.

 

April 27th,  Topic  Kibble  Data , is in the photos  under a bowl of kibble,  then click on the green link  at top,   

On the spreed sheet  press,  Overview,   hope it works  for you.   

They have information about what they test for but I couldn't find any information about what method they use for testing. And method does matter- some methods give you very accurate results but are long and difficult procedures, involving more expensive reagents, other methods are cheaper and quicker but won't give you the same accuracy or precision. 

Ideally, they would publish the methods used by the lab they contract the testing out to, along with the raw data and final numbers. If you're going to make claims, you need to allow others to test them, to see if your results can be reproduced.

I've done a fair bit of food testing and just saying "We tested food X and found worrying levels of Pb, Hg, As and whatever else" isn't even close to sufficient. They've obviously spent the cash to have the tests done, why not publish actual results?