|
Forums36
Topics42,115
Posts571,695
Members19,116
| |
Most Online45,564
Yesterday at 03:05 AM
|
|
|
0 members (),
9,175
guests, and
169
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 22,033 Likes: 483
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014  Lunker
|
|
Moderator Hall of Fame 2014 Lunker
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 22,033 Likes: 483 |
Glad you brought up this matter as we all needed an answer as to what was going on. Most of us had the same questions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,981 Likes: 18
Ambassador Lunker
|
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,981 Likes: 18 |
I wanted to revisit this issue just to let everyone know that I heard back from Ms. Fischer at Purina. She affirmed what Bob has stated, that the additional corn was added to meet the required energy content of the feed, and that production is expected to move back to Richmond, whereupon the feed will revert back to the older, more familiar formulation.
I think it is important to note that Ms. Fischer tried a few times to call me with this information, but as it was apparently after my shop office hours, she responded via email.
I greatly appreciate her efforts in this matter.
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57 |
|
.gif)
