Our verdict
Is Red Dog Blue Kat Bison Recipe for Dogs a good dog food?
We score it 64/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
100% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for adult dogs
- Labelling or feeding guide is aimed at small dogs
- Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
- Single named protein: bison
- Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
These points are derived from declared ingredients and analysis, not a substitute for veterinary advice. If your dog has a diagnosed condition, food choice is a medical nutrition decision: speak to your vet. Find foods that fit your dog.
Ingredients (13)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- veg 37.3%
- meat 36.9%
- supplement 11.9%
- carb 8.5%
- fibre 5.4%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bison | Bison | meat · good | - | 10.0 |
| 2 | bison heart | Heart | meat · good | - | 9.6 |
| 3 | bison liver | Liver | meat · good | - | 9.2 |
| 4 | chard | Chard | veg · good | - | 8.8 |
| 5 | sweet potato | Sweet Potatoes | carb · good | - | 8.5 |
| 6 | bison kidney | Kidney | meat · good | - | 8.1 |
| 7 | celery | Celery Seeds | veg · good | - | 7.7 |
| 8 | squash | Butternut Squash | veg · good | - | 7.3 |
| 9 | lettuce | Lettuce | veg · medium | - | 6.9 |
| 10 | beets | Beetroot | veg · good | - | 6.5 |
| 11 | lactobacillus casei K9-1 | Lactobacillus casei | supplement · good | - | 6.2 |
| 12 | lactobacillus fermentum K9-2 | Lactobacillus fermentum | supplement · good | - | 5.8 |
| 13 | inulin | Inulin | fibre · good | - | 5.4 |
- 1. Bison10.0% estimated
- 2. bison heart9.6% estimated
- 3. bison liver9.2% estimated
- 4. chard8.8% estimated
- 5. sweet potato8.5% estimated
- 6. bison kidney8.1% estimated
- 7. celery7.7% estimated
- 8. squash7.3% estimated
- 9. lettuce6.9% estimated
- 10. beets6.5% estimated
- 11. lactobacillus casei K9-16.2% estimated
- 12. lactobacillus fermentum K9-25.8% estimated
- 13. inulin5.4% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 15.60% · Fat 3.50%
Declared analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 15.60% |
| Fat | 3.50% |
| Fibre | 1.60% |
| Ash | 1.02% |
| Moisture | 77.50% |
Energy: 103 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Storage
Keep product frozen until ready to use. Defrost package in a leak-proof container in the refrigerator for 24 hours, or until soft through. Partially eaten food should be refrigerated after 20 minutes. Poultry should not be kept longer than 2 days. Red meats & fish should not be kept longer than 3 days.
Feeding guide
General guide as a percentage of body weight: Puppy 6-10%, Small Breed 3-5%, Athlete 4-6%, Adult 2-4%, Senior 2-3%. Rotational feeding of red meat, poultry, and fish recommended. A daily feeding calculator is available on the site.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Probiotic: lactobacillus casei K9-1, lactobacillus fermentum K9-2, inulin
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19
Brand and contact: Red Dog Blue Kat
- Phone
- 1-866-WHY-RAWW | 604-987-2166
- Address
- Red Dog Blue Kat warehouse proudly located in Port Coquitlam, BC, Canada
- Contact page
- www.reddogbluekat.com
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-19
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- www.reddogbluekat.com
Recall history is presentation-only and never affects the score. Dates are when we recorded the data, not when the manufacturer last changed the recipe.
Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.
Score details and methodologyCalculations, history and evidence
Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated
Why this score?
The overall score is 64 out of 100. Undeclared ingredient shares, meaning ingredients without printed percentages, contributed -10.6 points against the score. Overall ingredient quality, referring to the overall quality of the ingredient list, contributed +8.2 points. Complete recipe, being labelled nutritionally complete, contributed +2.3 points, and printed percentages, meaning printing percentages for most of the recipe, contributed +1 points.
Scored with model v3 on 2026-10-25. Each component is the feature value for this product multiplied by the model's published coefficient.
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.9 | 9.191 | +8.19 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 6.2% | -0.115 | -0.72 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 16.5% | -0.005 | -0.09 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 32.4% | -0.012 | -0.40 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.12 | 33.786 | +37.84 |
| Processing: Raw | yes | -0.054 | -0.05 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.9 | 9.191 | +8.19 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 6.2% | -0.115 | -0.72 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.092 | +0.00 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 16.5% | -0.005 | -0.09 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.163 | +0.00 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 32.4% | -0.012 | -0.40 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.027 | +0.00 |
| Recipe graded poor | 0.0% | -0.065 | +0.00 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 0 | -0.876 | +0.00 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 0.0% | 0.060 | +0.00 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Frozen or chilled fresh | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | no | 0.707 | +0.00 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| High carb and low meat | no | -1.180 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × printed percentages | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × fresh | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Fresh × high meat | 0.0 | 11.084 | +0.00 |
| Additive penalty | 0.00 | 0.222 | +0.00 |
| Processing multiplier | 1.12 | 33.786 | +37.84 |
| Processing: Raw | yes | -0.054 | -0.05 |
| Processing: Fresh Chilled | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Refrigerated | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Freeze Dried | no | 6.629 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Air Dried | no | 6.331 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Cold Pressed | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Baked | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Semi Moist | no | -6.174 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Muesli | no | -10.146 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -1.74
- Additives declared on label
- +1 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 63.5
- Final score
- 64/100
Contributions are rounded to two decimals, so they may not sum exactly to the subtotal. The full coefficient table is published on the methodology page.
Nutritional: declared analysis vs reference ranges
How the declared analysis compares with FEDIAF reference ranges for adult dogs. The label prints as-fed values; we convert to a dry-matter basis before scoring, and the bands are dry-matter ranges. Scores rise to 100 at the band midpoint: the reference is adequacy, not maximisation. Nutrients with a published upper limit taper again above it; fat is policed through calorie density rather than a direct penalty.
Guaranteed-analysis FEDIAF score: crude minimums and maximums are bounds, not typical values; moisture (a maximum) uses the processing median where available; experimental US score.
| Nutrient | As fed (label) | Dry matter (scored) | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protein | 15.6 | 50.6 (band 18 to 40%) | 100 |
| Fat | 3.5 | 11.4 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 94.3 |
| Fibre | 1.6 | 5.2 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 103 | 334.4 | 100 |
Scored over 4 declared nutrients (combined weight 60); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score. Moisture was not declared and was estimated at 69.2% from the food type.
Declared fortification: 1 nutritional additive on the label
- Probiotic: lactobacillus casei K9-1, lactobacillus fermentum K9-2, inulin
Low confidence: partial analysis or moisture estimated from the food type.
This measures agreement with published reference ranges, not suitability for an individual dog. For medical conditions, follow veterinary guidance.
Transparency: what the label discloses
How much the manufacturer discloses, measured against the FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice and Regulation 767/2009. Mandatory items dominate the weighting.
| Item | Points |
|---|---|
| Ingredient list on the label (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Printed percentages on the label (voluntary) - not on file | 0/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) | 15/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| Energy value declared (voluntary) | 5/5 |
| Complete/complementary designation (mandatory) | 5/5 |
| Feeding guidance given (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Country of manufacture stated (voluntary) | 10/10 |
| Batch and date labelling (mandatory) - not on file | 0/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Batch and date labelling).
Safety: recall history
Recall and safety-notice history, time-decayed. This dimension is shown alongside the score and never feeds the headline number.
No recalls recorded in our database.
Evidence: what the brand claims, and what supports it
The claims made on the pack and product page, checked against the declared label. We record claims as stated; "consistent" means our stored label data supports the claim, "contradicted" means it conflicts with it. Functional claims are recorded but never scored.
Claims on file; none we can check against the label
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free-range Canadian bison (on page) | provenance | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Sous-vide cooking friendly (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Canine-specific probiotics (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 75% MEAT AND ORGAN / 25% VEGGIES (on pack) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Human-grade ingredients (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Certified organic vegetables (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Complete adult nutrition with a recipe rotation of red meat, poultry, and fish (on page) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Limited-ingredient raw food diet formulated to meet the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profile for adult dogs when fed in a recipe rotation of red meat, poultry, and fish (on page) | Nutrient | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Bison Recipe for Dogs
Similar on ingredients, protein, format or nutrition, using the same stored data.
Community0 comments
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.