Bella & Duke Made Me Rethink Everything I Thought I Knew About Raw Feeding

by Lydia Grove

Bone Content in Raw Feeding: Why 10% Isn’t Always the “Magic Number”

Raw feeding conversations often get reduced to one headline rule: 80/10/10.
That shorthand (roughly 80% meat, 10% bone, 5% liver, 5% other secreting organ) has been recommended for years, and it’s easy to see why: it feels like a clean way to mimic “nature”.

But when you zoom out, two things can be true at once:

  1. 80/10/10 is a useful starting framework, especially for understanding what raw diets are trying to achieve.

  2. 10% bone can be too much for many pet dogs in real life, and it’s one of the biggest reasons people run into trouble.

Before I go deeper: I’m not the authority on this. I’m a retailer who spends all day looking at what actually happens with real dogs and real owners — and I’m sharing what I’ve learned, what I’ve observed, and what has made me rethink some assumptions.

Where 80/10/10 came from (and what it assumes)

The logic behind 80/10/10 is generally framed as:
“If a dog ate a whole prey animal, the rough composition might average out around those ratios.”

That’s plausible as a broad concept — but it includes assumptions we can’t fully prove:

  • Do wolves eat prey “nose-to-tail” every time?

  • Do they always consume the entire skeleton?

  • Do they leave part of the carcass?

  • Does it change depending on prey size, season, availability, pack dynamics, and the wolf’s needs?

I personally think it must vary. A wolf eating a rabbit is not the same as a wolf eating part of a deer. Even among domestic dogs, appetite, stress levels, gut sensitivity, and activity levels all affect digestion — so the idea that one static bone percentage is ideal for all dogs, all the time, deserves a rethink.

The practical problem: too much bone in the gut

In-store, the most common “raw feeding issues” we see aren’t mysterious.

They’re usually bone-related.

When bone content creeps too high, you can get:

  • Chalky white stools

  • Dry, crumbly stools

  • Straining / constipation

  • Dogs that seem “fine on raw” except they’re uncomfortable, skipping meals, or having irregular bowel movements

This is why, even while 80/10/10 is the default “rule”, many experienced raw feeders quietly do something else in practice:
they add boneless meals periodically to bring the overall bone load down.

I’ve been advising “a boneless meal once per week” for years for exactly that reason — which is basically an admission that 10% bone doesn’t always work smoothly.

A lower-bone approach: why 3–4% can be more forgiving

Recently, a conversation with Alice (a Bella & Duke rep) gave me a proper “hang on…” moment. She told me that many dogs struggle with higher bone levels and that 3–4% bone tends to suit the majority better.

This isn’t me saying 10% bone is “wrong”. It’s me acknowledging what I already knew from experience but didn’t always say plainly:

For a lot of pet dogs, 10% bone (especially every day) is simply too much.

A lower-bone formulation has a few practical advantages:

  • Less margin for error: owners don’t have to “correct” the diet constantly

  • More consistent stools for many dogs

  • Easier daily feeding: fewer “boneless days” needed to rebalance

  • Particularly helpful for small dogs and dogs prone to constipation

And that last point matters: all dogs have broadly similar digestive biology, but scale changes the real-world outcome. A small amount of bone that is trivial for a large dog can be much more challenging for a small breed to break down comfortably.

Bone isn’t “bad” — it’s about the dose

Bone provides minerals, especially calcium and phosphorus, which matter for skeletal health and many physiological processes.

The issue is not “bone is dangerous”.
The issue is when the total bone load becomes too high for that individual dog (or when a product contains larger/harder bone fragments and the dog is small or sensitive).

In other words: bone is like fibre or fat — essential in the right amount, problematic in excess for some.

“Complete and balanced” changes the conversation

Another layer to this is nutrition beyond meat/bone/offal ratios.

Many raw minces that look like 80/10/10 are not “complete and balanced” to recognised pet food guidelines. That doesn’t automatically mean they’re “bad” — but it does mean the owner needs to do more work:

  • provide sufficient variety across proteins

  • ensure micronutrients are covered across the week/month

  • understand that feeding one protein repeatedly can create gaps

A simple example:

If someone feeds chicken every day, they may not provide the same nutrient profile they’d get from rotating in darker red meats (which generally contribute more iron and different micronutrients). Owners often don’t rotate enough, even when they intend to.

With a complete and balanced (FEDIAF Balanced) product, the formulation is designed so that each portion contains the required nutrient profile, regardless of whether the owner rotates perfectly. It reduces risk when real life happens and people stick to what their dog likes, what’s in stock, or what’s easiest.

A balanced conclusion (no pun intended)

  • 80/10/10 has value as a framework and education tool.

  • But it’s also a simplification of nature, and nature is variable.

  • In practice, bone level is one of the biggest drivers of stool issues and discomfort on raw.

  • For many pet dogs, lower bone (e.g., 3–4%) can be easier to tolerate and easier to feed daily, with fewer “fixes” needed.

  • Complete and balanced formulations can reduce nutrient gaps. 

And yes — don’t get me started on the way some 80/10/10-style products get implied as “complete” when they aren’t. That really is a whole separate blog.

I hope this was helpful! I could talk about this all day as you can tell. Feel free to call or email with any questions or tell me why I am wrong, open to that as well!

 

Back to News