Corrections

The short answer

• Factual errors are corrected on the page and logged here with the date and a description of what changed.
• Substantive corrections that change a recommendation are also flagged on the page itself.
• Typographical and formatting fixes are not logged, and do not change a page's update date.
• Anyone can report an error. Reports with a source attached are the most useful, but observations from your own feeders are welcome too.

The log#

Each entry carries the date, what was wrong, what it says now, and where the correction came from.

7 September 2026: kernel yields were too low#

What was wrong. Our food dataset used kernel yields taken from bird-feeding convention rather than from the agronomic literature: 60% for black oil sunflower, 50% for striped, 55% for safflower, 75% for nyjer. Those figures overstated hull waste, and because every cost figure on the site divides by kernel yield, they overstated the corrected cost of every hulled seed. The error made black oil sunflower look 25% more expensive per pound eaten than it is, and it made hulled sunflower hearts look closer in price to in-shell seed than they really are.

What it says now. Version 2026.2 of the dataset uses midpoints of published hull shares: 75% kernel for black oil sunflower, 60% for striped, 65% for safflower, 86% for nyjer, 82% for proso millet. Black oil sunflower now works out at about $1.80 per pound eaten at our benchmark price rather than $2.25, and sunflower hearts are correctly shown as substantially more expensive per pound eaten rather than nearly equal. Every derived figure across the site was recalculated.

Where it came from. Our own review of the underlying sources during a pre-publication check, against composition data for oilseed sunflower, safflower and niger. The basis for each figure, and the range it sits in, is now stated in the methodology.

What it does not change. The ranking of foods by energy per dollar, and every recommendation that follows from it, is unchanged: the correction moves the hulled seeds in the same direction by similar amounts.

What gets logged#

Logged here:

• A factual claim that was wrong (a species preference, a measurement, a date, a mechanism).
• A number that was miscalculated or based on a mistaken assumption.
• Guidance that was unsafe or contradicted the relevant wildlife agency.
• A source cited for something it does not say.

Not logged here:

• Typographical corrections, formatting and broken link repairs.
• Ordinary updates where the underlying facts have changed since publication, such as revised agency guidance or refreshed price benchmarks. Those change the page's update date instead.
• Changes of emphasis or rewriting for clarity where the substance is unchanged.

Why this page exists#

A reference site that never publishes a correction is not a site that never makes mistakes. It is a site that either does not hear about them or does not record them. Publishing the log is the only way to make the difference visible from the outside.

If you have found something wrong, the contact page is the fastest route. The rules we work to are in the editorial standards, and the assumptions most likely to need correcting are documented in the methodology.

Frequently asked questions#

How do I report an error?

Use the contact page and include the page address, the specific sentence you think is wrong, and, if you have one, a source. If your report is based on what you observe at your own feeders rather than a published source, say that: it is still useful, and several ratings in our dataset have been revised on that basis. We read everything, and we reply to reports that identify a specific factual claim.

What counts as a correction rather than an update?

A correction fixes something that was wrong when it was published. An update reflects something that has changed since, such as revised agency guidance or a new price benchmark. Corrections are logged here. Updates change the date at the top of the page and, if they are substantive, are described in the page text.