FINAL REPORT - Ministry of Health...Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-946-3237...

FINAL REPORT

20150371

COMPARISON OF A NEW DUGOUT TREATMENT OPTIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY

FOR LIVESTOCK

Funded by: The Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture under the Canada-Saskatchewan Growing Forward bi-lateral agreement

January 2017

Prepared by: District No. 08 ADD Board

Comparison of Dugout Treatment Options ADOPT Project 20150371

1 of 18

Project Identification

1. Project Title: Comparison of New Dugout Treatment Options and their Effects on Water Quality for Livestock.

2. Project Number: 20150371

3. Producer Group Sponsoring the Project:

District 8 ADD Board 45 Thatcher Dr E Moose Jaw SK. S6J 1N9 306-693-1936

4. Project Location(s):

WBDC Lanigan, SK; 4 Dugouts used at the ranch

Moose Jaw SK; 4 Dugouts at Saskatchewan Provincial Pasture: Old Wives

Outlook SK; 4 Dugouts in Outlook Region 5. Project start and end dates (month & year):

June 2016 to November 2016 6. Project contact person & contact details:

Colby Elford Regional Livestock Specialist Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-694-8953 [email protected] Travis Peardon Regional Livestock Specialist Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-867- 5504 [email protected] Leah Clark Regional Livestock Specialist Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-946-3237 [email protected] Halsey Shaheen Regional Livestock Specialist Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-946-3237 [email protected]

______________________________________________________________________________________


2 of 18

Objectives and Rationale

7. Project objectives:

The objectives of this trial were to compare 3 water treatment options readily available to Saskatchewan producers to the water treatment sphere option newly introduced to Saskatchewan called AquaSphere PRO by Bioverse. Our second objective is to determine the effects that the individual treatments have on water quality.

8. Project Rationale:

Dugout treatment is a common concern for livestock producers as there are a variety of quality issues that can cause deleterious effects on livestock production and in turn affect producer income. Production losses related to water quality can result in a variety of effects such as marked drops in conception rates and animal deaths. Or they can be less obvious but can still affect animal health and producer income such as decreased milk production, decreased weight gains and decreased immunity leading to decreased gains, decreased feed efficiency and increased treatment costs. Current research demonstrates that cattle who have remote or limited access to water and in turn drink cleaner uncontaminated water from troughs have increased gains and immunity. And there is widespread information regarding water quality factors that affect cattle. However, limited scientific research surrounding available registered products to increase water quality are available. Currently there are 3 registered products that are easily accessible to producers for dugout treatment that have never been compared under similar conditions. These products are: a. Pond Boss made by AXSYS Direct Manufacturing they claim the product will:

“flocculate suspended particles in the water and cause them to sink to the bottom. It’s a surface conditioning agent and accelerated the degradation of organic matter in the water. Assist bacteria in the natural biodegrading of odors and cleaning water”

b. Natures Pond Conditioner made by Koenders Water Solutions they claim the product is: “A natural and organic way to care for your pond, Creates clean, clear and health ponds, Promotes a natural eco-system, Improves water quality for healthier fish and increased livestock weight gain, Reduced pond sludge, It’s an easy, effective and affordable way to enjoy nature.”

c. Ponder made by SHAC Environmental Products INC they claim the product will: “Reduce offensive odors in treated water providing more pleasant source water for livestock and humans. Reduce black organic sludge (biosolids) from the bottom of ponds which is a significant nutrient source for aquatic weeds and algae. Reduce cloudy, turbid water providing clearer water for all uses.”


3 of 18

Recently a new product has been introduced to Saskatchewan called The AquaSphere PRO by Bioverse its claims are:

“The AquaSpherePRO works by consuming the excess nutrients in the pond, eliminating unwanted organic matter and preventing pond issues which can arise at any time. If the nutrients are not available for growth, the growth is unable to develop. It is an amazing all-natural pond maintenance product for season long care, and will not hurt plants, animals, or humans.”

Not only is this product new to Saskatchewan, the application of this product is a new concept. Instead of the adding this treatment to the dugout in the form of a liquid like the other three products, this product is a sphere which slow releases treatment in to the dugout. The Bioverse sphere is just thrown into the water instead of the hassle of trying to evenly distribute and handle the other bulky products.

Picture 1: Bioverse ball that was thrown into the dugout. This treatment was compared in our study to three other liquid products that are readily available.

________________________________________________________________________________________

Methodology and Results

9. Methodology:

The comparison of the four products was done in three extension regions of the Province. Four dugouts were used in the Outlook region, four dugouts in the Watrous region and four dugouts in the Moose Jaw region. In each region one product was used in each of the dugouts. Pre-treatment water testing was done two times starting in mid-May and ending before treatment occurred in the last week of June. After treatment was done, testing occurred every two weeks until the end of the grazing season. Each treatment was done according to the methods described on the containers.


4 of 18

Picture 2: A backpack sprayer was used where required to get even distribution of product throughout the dugout.

Picture 3: Treatment with the AquaSphere Pro only required that the Bioverse balls be thrown into the centre of the dugout.


5 of 18

Water quality testing was done to assess and evaluate the treatment success. The following parameters were tested through the provincial Health and Disease Control Lab:

Bicorbonate, Ca, carbonate, Cl, conductivity, F, Mg, No3-N, pH, Na, K, SO4, total and phenol alkalinity, total hardness, TKN, total-phosphorus, TM, DOC, MPN (total coliform and e-coli), ortho phosphorus, suspended solids, TDS, F, Turbidity and BOD (Biochemical Oxygen demand).

Picture 4: Water samples were regularly collected from each dugout.


6 of 18

Picture 5: When Cyanobacteria was suspected, water samples were also tested for common toxins.


7 of 18

10. Results

Water quality is subjective and largely determined by the intended use of the water. For example, the water that is fit for cattle to drink may be unfit for human consumption. For the purpose of this project we are looking at water quality as it relates to beef cattle.

In Saskatchewan one of the most common water quality issues is sulphates. The Saskatchewan Water Security Agency (formerly the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority) has estimated that 19% of surface water sources in Saskatchewan have sulphate levels that exceed the Canadian guideline for livestock.

It is very typical for sulphate levels to increase in surface water sources over summer, even in years with adequate to above average rainfall. As water evaporates, mineral concentration can increase to as much as twice the initial level. This scenario is clearly seen in Figure 1, where two of the Moose Jaw dugouts saw significant increases in sulphate as the summer progressed.

Although we did not expect these treatments to have a noticeable effect on sulphate levels, it was prudent to monitor the levels throughout the summer, as this is a major issue for many livestock producers.

During the summer of 2016, many areas across the province received higher than average rainfall. All three regions involved in this study received increased rainfall. Appendix A provides a map of the cumulative rainfall from April to October for 2016, as well as the same 2015 map for comparison. When examining the maps it is important to note that due to the excess rainfall, the map scale was adjusted for 2016. On each map, the three dugout locations are marked with a red star. In all three locations, the rainfall amount in 2016 was at least100mm greater than what was received in the same timeframe in 2015.

Excess rainfall has multiple implications in water quality; increased runoff may carry increased nutrients into water sources. On the other hand, excess rainfall may also dilute some of the water quality parameters that were followed in this study. Due to the excessive rain in the Outlook region, the dugout treated with Pond Boss was not sampled after week three. This dugout became joined into a creek and water flowed in and out; further test results would not have accurately reflected the water quality in the dugout.


8 of 18

Figure 1: Treatment had no discernable effect on sulphate levels in the Moose Jaw region.

Figure 2: Dissolved sulphate levels were unaffected by treatment in the Watrous region.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Sulphate Dissolved

(mg/L)

Week

Sulphates (Moose Jaw Region)

Pond Boss

AquaSphere

Ponder

Nature's Pond Conditioner

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Pre‐trtTest 1

Pre‐trtTest 2

1 3 5 7 9

Sulphate Dissolved

(mg/L)

Week

Sulphates (Watrous Region)

AquaSphere

Pond Boss

Ponder



9 of 18

Figure 3: Sulphate levels decreased in two dugouts in the Outlook region, however this decrease is believed to be a result of excess rain and resulting runoff out of the dugouts rather than a treatment effect.

Turbidity of water is a measure of the amount of light able to pass through it. Higher turbidity levels reflect an increase in suspended material in the water. Such materials can include clay, silt, organic matter and micro-organisms. Organic matter that is present will promote growth of algae and bacteria in the water. If algae or bacteria are present, they can significantly affect water quality. In addition, some bacteria and algae such as cyanobacteria can be fatally harmful to livestock.

In the dugout treated with Ponder in the Moose Jaw region, a severe increase in turbidity is seen from week 3 to week 5. This turbidity increase, from 26 NTU to 140 NTU is shown in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows the turbidity levels for the treated dugouts in the Watrous region. From week 5 to week 7, a similar but much smaller increase in turbidity is seen from 7 NTU to 17 NTU when looking at the dugout treated with Ponder. This increase was not seen in the Outlook region, as shown in Figure 6, possibly due to excess rain and runoff. The Ponder product description states benefits that include reducing black organic sludge and reducing cloudy, turbid water. The effects described above show that Ponder did not decrease the turbidity of any of the dugouts studied, but may rather contribute to increasing the turbidity of the water contrary to the product claims. The other product treatments appeared to have no significant effect on turbidity in any of the dugouts. Picture 6 shows images of the water in the Moose Jaw region dugout treated with Ponder at different stages of the study.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Pre‐trtTest 1

Pre‐trtTest 2

1 3 5 7

Sulphate Dissolved

(mg/L)

Week

Sulphates (Outlook Region)

Pond Boss

AquaSphere

Ponder



10 of 18

Figure 4: Turbidity significantly increased in one of the four dugouts treated in the Moose Jaw region.

Picture 6: Images from before (far left), during (middle left), 1 month after treatment (middle right) and 8 weeks after treatment (far right) of the Moose Jaw Region dugout with Ponder.


11 of 18

Figure 5: Turbidity measurement of treated dugouts in the Watrous region.

Figure 6: Turbidity levels of dugouts treated in the Outlook region.

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) is a measure of total inorganic salts dissolved in water. TDS


12 of 18

is frequently used as a guide to water quality, and tolerance to it varies depending on the type of animal. In addition, the tolerable and maximum levels depend on the water intake, type of feed being utilized, and the total mineral intake from all feed sources and water. TDS is used as a general indicator of water quality, however the individual components that constitute TDS should be examined as well, because they are what may lead to adverse health and metabolic effects.

Generally surface water has much lower TDS than groundwater sources. However, if the surface water is recharged by groundwater it may have a higher TDS level. If the water level in a dugout drops below that of the groundwater table, high TDS groundwater may seep into the dugout. If this occurs, the water quality can change drastically in a short time period and become unfit for livestock consumption. In addition, as described about sulphate previously; even with excess rainfall, evaporation during the summer may lead to concentration of minerals that are present, as seen in Figure 7. TDS provides a water quality snapshot of a sample, which can help to determine if quality should be examined in further detail.

Figure 7: TDS levels in the dugouts in the Moose Jaw region were unaffected by the treatments.


13 of 18

Figure 8: TDS levels in dugouts in the Watrous region were unaffected by the treatments.

Figure 9: TDS levels decreased in two dugouts in the Outlook region, however this decrease is believed to be a result of excess rain dilution and resulting runoff out of the dugouts rather than a treatment effect.


14 of 18

High nutrient levels in water promote the growth of algae and bacteria. These nutrients may be already present in a dugout, and can also be deposited with runoff. Cyanobacteria, commonly called blue-green algae, is commonly found in Saskatchewan dugouts and thrives with adequate temperature and nutrients. In some cases cyanobacteria will produce neurotoxins and hepatotoxins that can be deadly to animals and livestock such as cattle. For this reason, cyanobacteria is a large concern to cattle producers, who often rely on dugouts as the sole summer water sources for their cattle. Cyanobacteria was observed in most of the dugouts involved in this study. It did not appear that any of the treatments in this study were effective at killing or preventing cyanobacteria growth, as depicted in Picture 7 which shows one of the dugouts treated with AquaSphere.

Picture 7: Suspected blue-green algae present on June 23 (left) before treatment and still present on Aug 17 (right) after two treatments with AquaSphere.

Next to efficacy, cost is the most significant factor for producers determining if they will treat their dugout or not. Each of these products is readily available to Saskatchewan producers at retail outlets. The actual costs for the products that were used in this project are outlined below (taxes not included). Pond Boss $179.99/Jug (20 L) treats 3.78 million litres AquaSphere PRO $147.85/Sphere treats 1.89 million litres Ponder $129.99/Jug (10 L) treats 2.27 million litres Nature’s Pond Conditioner $89.99/Jug (4L) treats ¼ acre of surface Pond Boss, Ponder, and Nature’s Pond Conditioner each only required the dugout to be treated once in the spring. AquaSphere PRO required that the body of water be treated every thirty days in order for the product to be effective. Although there were differences in dugout dimensions between regions, treatment costs were similar in each location for the entire season. The average treatment costs across regions are summarized in the table below.

Dugout 1 Dugout 2 Dugout 3 Dugout 4 Treatment Pond Boss AquaSphere

PRO Ponder Nature’s Pond

Conditioner Cost $237.59 $887.10 $381.12 $293.36


15 of 18

11. Conclusions and Recommendations

In conclusion, it did not appear that any of the treatments examined had positive effects on water quality. The new Bioverse AquaSphere PRO product was no more effective than the other three at improving water quality or removing contaminants in the treated dugouts. In addition, the AquaSphere was significantly more expensive than the other three products. Due to the ineffectiveness of all of the products used, combined with their individual costs we would not recommend the use of these products in Saskatchewan dugouts.

______________________________________________________________________________

Supporting Information

12. Acknowledgements

ADOPT program will be acknowledged during each presentation of the data, whether in print, on screen, or verbally. A special thank you goes to the cooperating producers, Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture Lands Branch Saskatchewan Pastures Program, and Western Beef Development Centre who allowed us access to their water sources.

13. Extension and Project Outreach

This project has been of particular interest to producers local to the regions where it was carried out. Therefore the results will be highlighted in upcoming extension events throughout these regions by Regional Livestock Specialists that were involved. There will also be newspaper articles written about this project that will outline the results. The project managers will look for opportunities to get this information out to producers in the coming months.


16 of 18

Appendix A


17 of 18


18 of 18

References

Ali S et al. 1994. Estimating water consumption and factors affecting intake in grazing cattle. Can J Anim. Sci. 74; 551-554

Butcher, J.E., L.E. Harris, and R.J. Raleigh. 1959. Water requirements for beef cattle. Utah Farm and Home Sci. 20:72–73.

Crawford, R., E. Cole, and J. Carpenter. 1996. Effect of water source and quality on water intake and performance of steers grazing tall fescue. Pages 15–18 In: 1996 Research Report, Southwest Missouri Agricultural Research and Education Centre, Mo. Agr. Exp. Sta., Mt. Vernon, Mo.

Lardner, H.A. et al. 2005. The effect of water quality on cattle performance on pasture. Aus. J. Ag. Research. 56: 97-104

Olkowski, A.A.. 2009. Livestock Water Quality: A Field Guide for Cattle, Horses, Poultry and Swine. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

Wilms, Water, D. et al. 2002. Effects of Water Quality on Cattle Performance. J. Range. Mgmt. 55:452-460.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract

14. Abstract/Summary

Water quality is a significant concern for livestock producers in Saskatchewan. Many surface water sources that are used for livestock have poor water quality. Furthermore, dugouts that are used as watering sources for livestock are often high in organic matter and other nutrients. This leads to abundant algal and bacteria production.

This project aimed to compare three water treatment options readily available to Saskatchewan producers to the water treatment sphere option newly introduced to Saskatchewan called AquaSpherePRO by Bioverse.

At three locations throughout Saskatchewan (Watrous, Outlook and Moose Jaw regions) four dugouts were chosen to be part of this project. Each dugout was treated with one of the available treatment options (Pond Boss, AquaSphere PRO, Ponder, and Nature’s Pond Conditioner) according to product recommendations. These dugouts were monitored throughout the grazing season to see how they would respond to treatment.

The new product, AquaSphere PRO, was no more effective than the formerly available products at improving overall water quality.

______________________________________________________________________________________

FINAL REPORT - Ministry of Health...Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-946-3237...

Documents

Transcript of FINAL REPORT - Ministry of Health...Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 1-(306)-946-3237...