AN187

The Impact of Water Quality on Beef Cattle Health and 

Performance1

Megan N. Brew, Jeffrey Carter, and Mary K. Maddox2

1. This document is AN187, one of a series of the Animal Science Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural 

Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date November 2008. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2. Megan N. Brew, extension agent; Jeffrey Carter, assistant professor of Animal Science; and Mary K. Maddox, biological scientist; Department of Animal 

Sciences, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 

The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and 

other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, 

sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, 

University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry 

Arrington, Dean

Introduction

Important for the transport of nutrients between 

cells and as a vital medium for intracellular 

metabolism, water is the most abundant component 

in all living organisms. In fact, the typical body 

composition of an adult mammal contains about 60% 

water. When listing the nutrient needs of beef cattle, 

water is often added only as an afterthought. Despite 

its low profile, water may be the most important 

nutrient of all. Indeed water is needed for body 

temperature regulation and the digestion, absorption, 

and utilization of all other nutrients; water plays an 

essential role in every life process. Beef cattle need 

regular access to clean drinking water in order to 

experience optimum health. Research has 

demonstrated a positive relationship between access 

to clean drinking water and performance factors such 

as growth, reproduction, and milk production. 

Animals that drink clean, contaminant-free water are 

generally less prone to illness and disease, gain more 

weight, and produce more milk. Producers have a 

great deal of control over both the quantity and 

quality of water that is provided to animals. 

Monitoring water quality and observing best 

management practices (BMPs) for water 

management are inexpensive yet effective ways to 

improve overall animal performance. 

Common Contaminants of Drinking 

Water

Livestock drinking water may be contaminated 

by a number of factors including minerals (total 

dissolved solids, or TDS), manure, microorganisms, 

and algae. These contaminants can impact the 

appearance, odor, and taste of drinking water as well 

as its physical and chemical properties. See Figures 1 

(fountain), 2 (tank), and 3 (pond) and compare those 

photos with data found in Table 1 to see how 

appearance and measurable quality characteristics 

correlate. Some contaminants may directly impact 

animal health by causing disease and infection; others 

have a more indirect effect and may cause cattle to 

decrease their overall water intake. When water 

intake is suppressed, feed intake will also decrease, 

and, as a result, animals will gain less weight. 

Livestock can survive for as long as sixty days with 

little or no food, but only seven days without water. 

In sub-tropic, hot climates like Florida, that number 

may be even less. 
The Impact of Water Quality on Beef Cattle Health and Performance 2

When the mineral content of water exceeds safe 

levels, animal performance can suffer. High levels of 

sodium (salt) depress water intake and result in 

weight loss and diarrhea. Animals exposed to water 

that is high in sulfur have increased incidences of 

polioencephalomacia (PEM) and experience higher 

mortality rates. Salinity of water, the concentration 

of dissolved salts in water, can be expressed as either 

TDS or TSS (Total Soluble Salts), which is also 

known as electrical conductivity (EC). Therefore, 

TDS and conductivity results presented in Table 1 are 

complementary. Electrolytes, or ions that regulate or 

affect metabolic processes, such as magnesium 

(Mg+), calcium (Ca+), sodium (Na+), and chloride 

(Cl-), contribute to the salinity of water. At certain 

high levels, these electrolytes can cause toxic effects 

by themselves or by interfering with the absorption of 

other important nutrients. Alone, TDS, TSS, or even 

EC tell us little about the quality of any water sample. 

 However, these are benchmarks that when elevated 

give us a clue that some minerals may merit further 

and more precise analysis.

Manure is a common contaminant in cattle 

drinking water, particularly when the primary source 

of water is a pond where cattle may spend a good deal 

of time loitering. Manure is carried into drinking 

water on the cattle's hooves and is deposited directly 

when the animals defecate. Livestock drinking water 

that is contaminated with manure can become a 

hotspot for bacterial growth, which in turn can cause 

animal disease. High levels of bacteria have been 

found in cattle watering ponds where they may 

contribute to outbreaks of coliform related illnesses 

caused by E. coli, E. aerogenes, and Klebsiella 

species. These can lead to mastitis, urinary tract 

infections, diarrhea and numerous other unsavory and 

often lethal infections. 

Fecal contamination of livestock drinking water 

can cause algae blooms through a process known as 

nutrient loading, or eutrophication. Blue-green algae 

are common contaminants in standing water. When 

ponds become overgrown with algae, cattle will avoid 

drinking from them in favor of other water sources, if 

any exist. If no other source of fresh drinking water 

is available, they will decrease their overall water 

intake, which results in poorer performance. In 

addition to blue-green algae, other water-borne 

microbes can negatively impact animal health. 

Leptospirosis, which causes reproductive loss in 

cows, is spread by a microorganism found in water 

contaminated by urine. The soil-borne microbe 

believed to be primarily responsible for foot rot (F. 

necrophorum) can also be spread by consumption of 

contaminated water.

Figure 1. Tank watering system and photo (inset) of water 

sample.

Figure 2. Fountain watering system and photo (inset) of 

water sample.

 

Evaluation of Drinking Water 

Management Practices

Cattle producers have the opportunity to enhance 

animal health and performance by improving the 

quality of water offered to their animals. Small 

changes in water management may result in 

improved performance, as well as financial gains 
The Impact of Water Quality on Beef Cattle Health and Performance 3

Figure 3. Pond watering system and photo (inset) of water 

sample

associated with decreased potential for illness and 

disease. 

The first step in improving water quality is to do 

a thorough evaluation of your current situation. 

Following are some tips to help guide the 

development of your on-farm protocol for water 

quality: 

• Is water offered in adequate quantity for the 

number and type of animals on your property? At 

least two feet of accessible linear water space is 

needed per 10 head of cattle.

• Are watering devices spaced appropriately and 

located away from stream banks? Watering 

devices should be easily accessible by animals. 

Strategic placement of watering devices can 

influence grazing, compaction, and nutrient 

deposition patterns. 

• Is water offered fresh or from a pond? Recent 

research has shown that heifers with access to 

water pumped from a well or spring gained 23% 

more weight than heifers drinking pond water. 

• How often are watering devices cleaned? 

Increasing the frequency of cleaning may 

improve milk production in brood cows. 

As part of the evaluation process, it may be 

useful to have the water on your property tested for 

contaminants. Your county extension agent can help 

you develop a testing plan and identify an appropriate 

laboratory. You may also refer to Mylavarapu and 

Kennelley (http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS184) for 

complete information on sample collection and testing 

fees. Once any problems are identified, steps can be 

taken to improve them. Evaluate water quality 

regularly in order to ensure a constant supply of high 

quality drinking water.

Conclusion

The quality of drinking water provided to beef 

cattle can have a significant impact on animal health 

and performance. Reducing the concentration of 

TDS, blue-green algae and other microorganisms, 

preventing fecal contamination, providing fresh 

rather than pond water and cleaning watering devices 

regularly can all result in measurable improvements 

in beef cattle health and performance.

References

Bagley, C.V., J. Kotuby-Amacher, and K. 

Farrell-Poe. 1997. Analysis of water quality for 

livestock. Utah State University, Animal Health Fact 

Sheet AH/Beef/28.

Church, D.C., and W.G. Pond. 1974. 

Introduction to nutrition. In: Basic animal nutrition 

and feeding, 3rd Ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New 

York. 

Coffee, C.J. 1998. The cell: The fundamental 

unit of metabolism. In: Metabolism. Fence Creek 

Publ., LLC., Madison, CT.

Ensley, S.M. 2000. Relationship of drinking 

water quality to production and reproduction in dairy 

herds. PhD dissertation, Iowa State University. 

Fraser, C.M., J.A. Bergeron, A. Mays, and S.E. 

Aiello. 1991. The Merck Veterinary Manual, 7th Ed. 

Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ.

LeJeune, J.T., Besser, T.E., Merill, N.L., Rice, 

D.H., and D.D. Hancock. 2001. Livestock drinking 

water microbiology and the factors influencing the 

quality of drinking water offered to cattle. J. Dairy 

Sci. 84:1856-1862.
The Impact of Water Quality on Beef Cattle Health and Performance 4

McDowell, L.R. 1985. Nutrition of grazing 

ruminants in warm climates. Academic Press, N.Y.

McDowell, L.R., and J.D. Arthington. 2005. 

Minerals for grazing ruminants in tropical regions. 

University of Florida /IFAS, Gainesville, FL.

McFarland, D.F. 1998. Watering dairy cattle in 

Proceedings of Dairy Feeding Systems: 

Management, Components, and Nutrients, NRAES, 

Ithaca, NY.

Mylavarapu, R.S., and E. Kennelley. 2005. 

Water test information sheet. University of Florida 

/IFAS Extension Electronic Data Information 

Service. (http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SS184).

Patterson, H.H., Johnson, P.S., and W.B. 

Epperson. 2003. Effect of total dissolved solids 

and sulfates in drinking water for growing steers. 

Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of 

Animal Science. Vol 54

Willms, W.D., Kenzie, O.R., and T.A. 

McAllister. 2002. Effects of water quality on cattle 

performance. Journal of Range Management 

55:452-460.

Wright, C.L. 2007. Management of water quality 

for beef cattle. Veterinary Clinics of North America: 

Food Animal Practice. 23:91-103.

Table 1. Water Analysis Report from Three Different Sources

Nutrient1Fountain Tank Pond Limits2Critical levels

(%)3

Nitrate N 3.3 1.2 8.3 <100.0 ---

Phosphorus 0.1 0.9 0.04 --- 0.19-0.73

 Calcium 15.6 36.1 75.4 --- 0.12-0.34

 Magnesium 1.5 1.8 1.7 --- 0.10

 Sodium 14.6 3.6 2.5 --- 0.06-0.08

 Chloride 19.0 22.0 13.0 --- 0.10-0.20

 Sulfate 14.5 1.4 1.5 <500.0 0.10-0.32

 pH 7.1 7.0 7.4 ---

 Conductivity40.1 0.2 0.4 --- ---

Total Dissolved 

Solids (TDS) 89.6 145.9 238.7 <1000.0 ---

1

Unless otherwise indicated, all values expressed as parts per million (ppm).

2

Established in Bagley et al. (1997); values less than those stated are optimal.

 3Establsihed in McDowell (1985) and further reported in McDowell and Arthington (2005); these are minimum 

levels based on animal nutrient requirements most of which is provided by forage or other feedstuffs.

 4Values expressed as milliohms per centimeter (mmhos/cm).