SHORTENING the vicinity between drinking opportunities for free grazing cattle by boosting the number of watering points on stations has been a popular investment in recent years but for the most part it has been done on the back of producer instinct.
Little scientific work has actually been done on how water impacts feed intake, growth or reproductive performance let alone cost benefit analysis of allocating resources to increased watering points.
Central Queensland University (CQUniversity) postgraduate and government beef extension officer Lauren Williams is intent on changing that and is using state-of-the-art precision sensor technology to record animal behaviour at water points.
She has just finished a research paper assessing previous trials and experiments on the topic and says there is a huge gap in the scientific knowledge when it comes to water impacts on beef production.
“We all know the basics of cattle production are grass and water but while there is plethora of information available about grazing behaviour and nutritional needs, we actually don’t know much at all about what is driving the behaviour of cattle around water,” she said.
“Big stations are investing heavily in water infrastructure - often ensuring they are now available at two kilometre spacings as opposed the 6klms that has been traditionally recommended.
“It would be very good to have the evidence of what value that can add.
“There are so many questions around water that should have been answered already - the optimum number and spacing of water points is just part of it.”
Ms Williams spoke at the recent Northern Beef Research Update Conference in Rockhampton and said industry feedback also indicated more research was desperately needed on water quality, such as whether taste affected how much cattle would drink.
She is currently running trials using walk-over weighing, water telemetry on troughs to give indications of water intake and monitors mounted to animals on a neck collars to measure the number of drinks taken and length of time drinking.
This data can then be run against performance measures.
The trials, at CQU’s farm site in near Rockhampton, were allowing for cattle drinking behaviour to be recorded without a researcher having to sit in a paddock and observe, Ms Williams said.
In the long-term, the research had the potential to help producers make evidence-based decisions on the optimal placement of water points in open grazing systems and how water quality may influence performance, she said.
All the studies identified in her research paper were controlled trials, with none conducted under free grazing systems where voluntary drinking behaviours were measured so this work really is delving into new territory.
“We have general ideas of how far cattle will travel comfortably a day to drink from what scientific literature is available,” she said.
Cattle have a tendency to concentrate their grazing around water points, preferentially grazing pastures up to 3klm away.
But when forage around water points is sparse, cattle will move further, sometimes resulting in them travelling to drink only every second, third or even fourth day.
Earlier trials showed beef cattle drink 15 to 25 per cent less water and consume 9 to 16pc less feed when accessing water only once every second and/or third day, compared to once-daily access.
Further work was needed to better understand the implications of water availability on health, welfare and performance, Ms Williams said.