News from the Midwest Sectional Meetings, March 16-18, 1998, Des Moines, Iowa
Contacts:
Michael Brumm, University of Nebraska (402)584-2816
Vicki Miller, IANR science writer, (402)472-3030
NU Research Shows Some Swine Drinking Systems are Big Water Savers
LINCOLN, Neb. Ä Maximizing growing-finishing pigs' water intake has long been a goal of pork producers who understand water's role in pig growth. However, producers increasingly are concerned about wasted water's impact on manure storage needs and costs.
"There are huge variations in water wastage among the various watering devices currently available to pork producers," said Michael Brumm, swine specialist at the University of Nebraska's Northeast Research and Extension Center.
Pork producers can reduce water waste and manure volume by matching watering devices to the manure system's overall goals, NU Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources studies show.
Simply recommending two nipple drinkers per pen of growing-finishing pigs is no longer sufficient, Brumm said. Today, a swine operation's manure storage and utilization system must be considered when deciding what type of watering system to install.
Producers using lagoons for manure storage rely on excess water to dilute waste and reduce odor. They would install watering systems that don't necessarily reduce wasted water, such as conventional nipple drinking systems, he said. Producers who store manure in deep pits or other systems that benefit from reduced water use would be better off installing bowl drinkers or other water-saving devices.
Brumm recently studied the effects of three different types of drinkers on pig performance, water use and manure volume during the grow-finish phase. All drinkers tested are commercially available.
In the first experiment, Brumm compared a wet/dry feeder with a single nipple drinker to dry feeders and conventional nipple drinkers. The wet/dry feeder with a single nipple drinker reduced water use 25 percent and cut manure volume 32 percent with no difference in pig performance.
Brumm compared pig performance using conventional nipple drinkers versus swinging waterers -- nipple drinkers suspended from a chain in the middle of a pen of 24 pigs. He found that the swinging waterer reduced water use by 11 percent and manure volume by 16 percent with no difference in pig performance.
In the most recent study, Brumm compared a drinking bowl imported from Denmark to the swinging waterer. Pigs drinking from the bowls used 25 percent less water and had a small but significant improvement in feed conversion.
During this experiment, an outbreak of swine influenza demonstrated that water medication costs may be cut 50 percent when producers install drinkers that minimize water waste, he said.
Estimates of water needs and manure volumes have implications for researchers, environmental regulators and producers, Brumm said. With the differences in manure volume and total water use documented through this research, Brumm recommends that specification of drinking devices become more critical in planning and regulating swine facilities.
Brumm presented his latest findings Tuesday (March 17) at the Midwest Section of the American Society of Animal Science meeting in Des Moines.
Watering device manufacturers partially funded this research in cooperation with IANR's Agricultural Research Division.
# # #