This feeding trial took place in the high plains country of the U.S. just east of Cheyenne, Wyoming. Cheyenne is an area experiencing lots of frequent high winds in the summer time so it was an ideal place to test if there truly are varying results between ground ostrich feeds & pelleted ostrich feeds.

The feeding trial comparing pelleted feeds to totally ground feeds was completed in the following manner:

The trial was 2 groups of 12 birds in different pens. Bird groups were evenly matched for age and parentage. Both the Ground feed and the Pelleted feed rations were identical in nutrient content with equal levels and ratios of Protein, Fat, Fiber, Energy, Minerals, Trace Minerals, Vitamins, and Additives. The ground feed ration was formulated by Daryl Holle of Blue Mountain Feeds using the Blue Mountain Ultimate Ton Mix for Minerals, Trace Minerals, Vitamins and Additives. The rancher purchased the rest of the Ground feed formula ingredients (Alfalfa, Corn, and Soya) and ground/mixed by him using a grinder/mixer machine on the farm.

The pelleted ration was a complete pelleted feed of equal value in all nutrients and feedstuffs made by Blue Mountain Ostrich Feeds and also formulated to the same nutrient specifications by Daryl Holle.     

As you can see in Table 1 above, the results of this study are worthy of interest.

The trial ended when the birds reached 300 days of age (approx. 10 months). The birds fed the ground feed ration gained .96 pounds per day per bird over the feeding trial period. The birds fed pelleted feed gained .91 pounds per bird per day over the feeding trial period.

The feed consumption rates per bird per day were identical.

The ground feed birds weighed in about 15 pounds per bird heavier than the pellet feed birds at the end of 300 days. The ground feed birds averaged 288 pounds at the end of the trial and the pellet fed birds averaged 273 pounds per bird.

This was an interesting experiment and a most accurate one. It clearly gave us proof and reaffirmed our convictions that there is very little difference in performance between pelleted feeds and ground feeds when the ground feed is formulated correctly and mixed correctly. If there is any difference, it usually will be in favor of the ground feed as it was in this experiment.

The MAJOR difference in this feeding trial was the COST SAVINGS of the ground feed. The ground feed carried an ingredient cost of 25% less than the pelleted feed. However, the extra cost of fuel, labor, and machine capital was not included in these costs, as the rancher already owned the machine for use on other livestock feeds.

This experiment proves once again that ground feed can save dollars on feed costs.  But, grinding/mixing feed is lots of work and responsibility--it has to be done right or it won't work as well as a pelleted feed of the same ingredient contents and nutrient values.

We hope this study will help farmers make an informed judgement concerning the controversy of Ground Ostrich feeds versus Pelleted Ostrich feeds and hope it helps dispel some of the myths going around the industry about ground feeds not being as productive as pelleted feeds. You measure productive value of feed by the nutrient content, sources of ingredients, and levels and ratios of nutrients and not so much by its physical form.

Return to Research Menu