Skip to content

Treat Sale: Buy 2, Get 1 FREE

SHOP ONLINE

Other Resources

STANDLEE PREMIUM PRODUCTS CUBES AND PELLETS VS. DEHYDRATED HAY PRODUCT

Dr. Tania Cubitt and Dr. Stephen Duren, Performance Horse Nutrition and Standlee Premium Products Nutritional Consultants

Overview

Dehydrated hay is a recent product in-market that claims to absorb over five times its weight in water. A national feed provider markets the dehydrated hay as an easy means of hydrating traveling horses due to the portability and the absorptive capacity of the product. Six Standlee Premium Products were tested against the dehydration hay product and evaluated on several factors. These factors included: (1) volume of water absorbed, (2) time of absorption, (3) cost, (4) initial moisture content and (5) palatability.

Results

The dehydration hay product held true to its’ claims of absorptive capacity. That being said, it was determined that though the dehydrated hay product absorbed more water more quickly, Standlee Premium Products have more initial moisture, are cheaper, and are a more palatable option than the dehydrated hay product.

The following chart illustrates the results based on the factors tested:

Product Amount of Water Absorbed Time of Absorption Initial Moisture Content Cost per lb.*
Dehydrated hay product 5-6 quarts 25-30 minutes 7.3% $1.04
Standlee Alfalfa/Timothy cubes 4-5 quarts 45 minutes 8.6% $0.31
Standlee Alfalfa cubes 3-4 quarts 45-50 minutes 8.9% $0.31
Standlee Alfalfa/Oat cubes 4-5 quarts 40 minutes 11.0% $0.31
Standlee Alfalfa pellets 4-5 quarts 50 minutes 9.7% $0.31
Standlee Orchard grass pellets 4-5 quarts 35-40 minutes 8.5% $0.34
Standlee Timothy grass pellets 4-5 quarts 35-40 minutes 8.2% $0.39

*Note on Cost per lb.- All product pricing derived from retail/in-store at D&B Supply in Idaho.

A feeding trial was completed with five horses. All five horses were given a choice between the dehydrated hay product and Standlee Premium Products Alfalfa/Timothy Cubes, which are similar in composition to the dehydrated hay product. Of the five horses, three preferred Standlee and two showed no interest in either option. None of the horses showed a preference to the dehydrated hay product.

Conclusion

The dehydration hay product was able to absorb over five times its weight in water and it was able to do so relatively quickly. However, Standlee Premium Products remain a greatly viable alternative to the dehydration hay product. All six Standlee products were able to absorb water while starting out with higher moisture contents. Furthermore, Standlee Premium Products proved to be a more palatable option, while averaging less than a third of the price of the dehydrated hay product.