Minimizing Losses in Hay Storage and Feeding - MSUcares

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Another disadvantage of usingplastic sheets is that condensation mayoccur under the bales if hay was moistwhen stored or if water gets under, andinto, the bales. The result is that asignificant amount of spoilage mayoccur next to the plastic even thoughrain cannot reach the hay. (This makesa strong case for making certain anyhay stored using this technique is quitedry, preferably 18% moisture or less,before being covered and is not incontact with the soil.) In addition,disposal of plastic after use may bea problem.At least one commercially availablehay cover is made from a slightlyporous fabric. It is marketed in largetarp-sized sheets, and can be used tocover several bales at a time, usuallywith one row of bales stacked on top oftwo other rows in triangular fashion.This reusable product offers theadvantage of shedding a high percentageof rain water while still allowingmoisture to escape during sunny,drying days. However, bottom spoilagemay occur on bales which touch theground unless steps are taken toprevent it.If a cover is used (particularly aplastic cover), it may be desirable torelate the size of individual stacks tothe rate at which hay is to be fed. Oncea row end is uncovered and bales areremoved for feeding, covers are seldomplaced back as securely as they wereinitially. The result is that wind mayblow a cover off, or partially off,resulting in some weathering of theUse of a rock pad is one effective yet inexpensiveway to eliminate hay/soil contact.remaining hay. Therefore, minimizingthe amount of hay stored under onecover may help reduce weatheringlosses in some situations.Other companies market equipmentwhich places either individual bales orseveral bales inside plastic “sleeves.”This approach effectively protects thetops and sides of bales, but it is quiteimportant to make certain that the hayis dry when baled and to make certainthere is no way for moisture to enterthe bales or for condensation to “pool”at the bottom of the plastic duringstorage. Otherwise, there may be highspoilage losses on the bottoms of bales.When each sleeve covers only one bale,the sleeve should be tight. Despite theplastic on the bale bottoms, individuallysleeved bales should not be storeddirectly on the ground.Some companies produce equipmentwhich completely wraps or sealsindividual bales in stretch plastic. Donecorrectly, this may be the most effectiveway to eliminate weathering losses withoutside storage. However, dependingon the equipment design, this may beexpensive in terms of labor, equipment,and plastic, plus disposal of plastic afterfeeding is required.Several research studies have involvedspraying bales with waterrepellent substances. Hydrogenatedanimal fats and plant oils have beenused most frequently, and offer theattributes of being natural, environmentallyfriendly, and biodegradable.With most such products, animalrefusal of treated hay does notappear to be a problem, but the fat oroil may attract insects, which caninclude fire ants in areas where theyare present. Additional research isneeded to determine the feasibility ofthis approach.Protecting The Bottoms Of BalesSeveral studies have shown that it canbe more important to protect thebottoms, as opposed to the tops, ofbales. The bottoms of bales can beprotected in countless ways, limitedonly by imagination and ingenuity.The bale bottom is protected when it isheld off the ground by something thatdoes not trap and hold water. Forexample, wooden pallets, telephoneposts, scrap pipe, and cross ties have allbeen successfully used in hay storage.The most important point is to preventhay/soil contact, but providing someair flow under the hay is also desirable.Wooden pallets offer an inexpensivemethod of eliminating hay/soil contact,but are labor intensive as they need tobe moved as hay is used. They make iteasy to change storage location(s) fromyear to year because they have to bemoved anyway. However, palletscontain nails which can puncture tiresor cause other damage.Another relatively inexpensive andeffective storage technique is to placehay on rock pads. A good rock padkeeps bales off the soil, and alsoprovides all weather support forequipment. Rocks 1 to 3 inches indiameter should be piled 4 to 8 inchesdeep, depending on the soil type andthe weight of the equipment to beused. This size rock traps no water andeffectively channels water away.Rock pads last for many seasons andcan easily be repaired if damaged. Anerosion cloth can be placed below therock pad to help slow the rate at whichheavy equipment may push rocksdown into the soil and thereforeincrease the life of the pad (which canbe ten years or more).COSTS VERSUS BENEFITS OFHAY STORAGEMany producers probably do not fullyrealize the economic importance ofstorage losses because the amount ofloss is difficult to determine on a farm,and total hay costs are considerablyhigher than out-of-pocket expenses.8
Before making decisions regardinghay storage, a producer shouldobtain and study hay budgets todetermine the actual cost of hayproduction and the dollar value ofhay storage losses. Budgets are usuallyavailable from County AgriculturalExtension Agents.Cost Of Hay LossesProper hay storage has a cost in termsof both time and effort, and this mustbe considered by producers seeking toreduce losses. Material and labor costsexpended to store hay, as well as thenutritional value of hay, dictate whichstorage techniques are most costeffective. The higher the quality of thehay, the greater the economic cost ofstorage and feeding losses (Table 3).Storage losses increase the quantityof hay needed, plus they may lowerforage quality of the remaining hayenough that additional supplementationof animal diets is required. Thecost of storage losses can readily becalculated based on the selling price ofhay of various qualities. The economicvalues of dry matter losses provided inTable 4 were calculated usingMinnesota quality-tested hay auctionprices. This information can be used tocalculate how much one can afford tospend in constructing overhead storageor in improving site drainage.Table 4 illustrates that as hay valueincreases, a greater investment in time,energy, and money can be justified toreduce losses. Furthermore, in additionto the value which is lost due toweathering, the lost hay must then bereplaced. For example, dry matterlosses of 15 to 20% require a livestockTable 4. Economic value of loss (storage and feeding) of hay by quality test.___________________________________________________________________________Average quality Value of loss 2Test standard RFV 1 Price 5% 10% 20% 40%___________________________________________________________________________index - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - $/T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Prime 168 121 6.05 12.10 24.20 48.401 138 97 4.85 9.70 19.40 38.802 115 78 3.90 7.80 15.60 31.203 97 64 3.20 6.40 12.80 25.604 81 51 2.55 5.10 10.20 20.405 60 34 1.70 3.40 6.80 13.60_________________________________________________________________1Represents the mean test values from 11 years of quality test auction data in Minnesota.2Y = (0.81 x RFV index) - 14.8, where Y = $/ton of hay. This calculated loss value assumes a 4 inchweathering loss and 5 foot diameter bales (25% of the hay volume).Table 3. Cost of hay consumed as affected by storage and feeding losses.———————————————————————————————Beginning hay value, $/ton 1———————————————————————————————% Loss 50 70 80———————————————————————————————5 52.69 73.68 94.7410 55.55 77.78 100.0015 58.87 82.35 105.8820 62.50 87.50 112.5025 66.68 93.33 120.00———————————————————————————————1Numbers listed under a given beginning hay value represent the cost of unweathered hay fed (that is,losses due to storage and feeding, in essence, increase the cost of hay).9producer to harvest 15 to 20% morehay, which further adds to the costs ofproduction, harvesting, and storage.Barn StorageBarn storage is usually considered to bea consistently highly effective methodof storing hay, so it is often used as thestandard against which other techniquesare compared. When the typicaldry matter storage loss of dry hayduring inside storage (usually around5%) is compared to the 30% or morecommon with hay stored outside inthe humid portions of the UnitedStates, it isn’t difficult to see thatreduced losses can often providepayback on barn construction within afew years. The more valuable or porousthe hay, the higher and/or morefrequent the rainfall, and/or the longerthe period of storage, the more easilybarn construction can be justified.For commercial hay producers theremay also be considerable benefit fromthe improved appearance which resultsfrom barn storage. Outside storagehurts the appearance of hay even whenactual losses are minimal. Appearanceis not closely linked to nutrientcontent or feeding value, but it is oftenimportant in marketing, and mayjustify barn storage even in relativelylow rainfall climates.
Page 1 and 2: MINIMIZING LOSSES INHAY STORAGE AND
Page 3 and 4: In the eastern United States it is
Page 5 and 6: In the eastern United States, stori
Page 7: considerably more important thanrai
Page 11 and 12: Breakeven barn cost ($/sq. ft)to bu
Page 13 and 14: sites should therefore be chosen fo
Page 15 and 16: OUTSIDE HAY STORAGE RECOMMENDATIONS

Minimizing Losses in Hay Storage and Feeding - MSUcares

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?