Covered vs. Uncovered Feeders: What’s the Real Difference for Livestock Supplementation?

When planning livestock supplementation strategies, one often-overlooked decision is the type of feeder used to deliver the feed. While both covered and uncovered feeders are commonly used in cattle operations, the differences in performance and outcomes can be significant—especially when dealing with dry licks or moisture-sensitive ingredients.

This article breaks down the key differences between covered and uncovered feeders, helping producers make informed decisions based on feed quality, safety, and economic return.

1. Moisture Protection

Uncovered feeders leave feed exposed to the environment. This can be problematic in wet or humid conditions, like we have in Queensland, where ingredients such as urea and mineral powders are prone to clumping, leaching, or becoming unpalatable.

Covered feeders offer protection from rain, dew, and humidity. This reduces the risk of spoilage and helps ensure that cattle consume feed in its intended form, preserving both its value and effectiveness.

2. Feed Contamination

Uncovered feeders are more likely to allow contaminants such as dust, faeces, or bird droppings into the feed, particularly when placed in open paddocks. These contaminants can reduce feed intake and pose health risks.

Covered feeders help limit the exposure of feed to external contamination by creating a physical barrier. This improves feed hygiene and supports consistent intake.

3. Consumption Control

Dry licks—especially those containing urea—must be consumed in controlled amounts. Uncovered feeders may allow spillage or uneven access, increasing the risk of overconsumption or toxicity.

Many covered feeders are designed to regulate access and reduce waste. This is particularly useful in systems where measured intake is essential for animal safety and performance.

4. Longevity and Maintenance

Uncovered feeders, being more exposed, are more prone to rust, structural wear, and the need for more frequent cleaning or replacement. This adds ongoing costs to their operation.

Covered feeders are typically built for durability and weather resistance. Over time, this can translate to lower maintenance needs and a longer useful life, offering better value for money.

5. Cost Implications

While uncovered feeders may have a lower upfront cost, their tendency to allow more wastage, spoilage, and contamination often leads to higher ongoing feed costs. Additionally, they may require more frequent repairs or replacement.

Covered feeders, though typically more expensive initially, offer cost savings in the form of preserved feed, reduced labour, and better control of intake. These savings can offset the initial investment over time.

Conclusion

The choice between covered and uncovered feeders has a measurable impact on feed performance and operational outcomes. For cattle producers seeking to reduce waste, maintain feed quality, and support animal health, covered feeders offer clear advantages.

While every operation is different, understanding the differences between feeder types is a critical step in improving the efficiency and safety of livestock supplementation.

To learn more contact our sales team on 0428 735 850 to learn more about our range of covered feeders today.