A quarterly news publication of The Ohio State University Extension, Editors: Clif Little and Mark Sulc
Click here for past issues of this publication.
Click here to subscribe to an e-mail version of Amazing Graze.

Contents:

• Feeding Corn to Stretch Pasture and Hay Supplies
• Evaluate Hay Storage Losses on Large Round Bales
• Feeding Hay - Receiving More Value for the Cost!

[top] Feeding Corn to Stretch Pasture and Hay Supplies - Chris Penrose, Extension Educator, Morgan County

For many in eastern and southern Ohio, this past grazing season has been a serious challenge on our forage supplies. Many simply do not have enough stockpiled forages or stored feed to make it through the winter. Our options are to sell livestock, purchase hay or purchase other feed.

If you haven’t already culled unproductive livestock, now is the time. Next, inventory available forages and stored feed for winter use, then estimate if there is a deficit. Depending on location and local availability, there can be several options to meet the feed deficit. In most situations, corn will be an attractive option.

What is the cost? You can use any figure you think is appropriate in your location to calculate what the cost of feeding corn will be, and in my example, I will use corn at $4.00/bu and hay at $5.00/50lb. bale. Corn will cost around $.07/lb. and hay $.10/lb. Keep in mind that corn has close to twice the energy as hay, so one pound of corn (@ $.07) can replace two pounds of hay (@$.20).

For ruminants, we have a couple good options for feeding corn. The first is a high corn diet. This is where we feed 1% body weight per day with corn and supplement with 4-6 pounds of hay per day. In an OARDC study, 1300-lb. cattle were fed 12-14 lb. corn and 2 lb. of protein supplement with 2 lb. of first cut hay, so the high corn diet works. One caution with this is that although the cattle will receive adequate nutrition, they still may feel hungry, so good fence is essential. This diet will need additional vitamin A and calcium.

The other option is to feed ½% or less body weight in corn and the remainder with hay. A simple example would be to feed a 1000-lb. cow 5 lb. of corn a day and 10lb. of hay (vs. 20 lb. of or 2% body weight in hay) and meet her nutritional needs.

When comparing costs, the high corn diet for a 1000-lb. cow would cost $1.20 (10 lb. corn @ $.07 and 5 lb. hay @ $.10). The partial corn diet would cost $1.35 (5 lb. corn @ $.07 and 10 lb. hay @ $.10). A full hay diet at 20 lb./day would cost $2.00.

What are the options for feeding corn? Whole shell is a good option. Grinding the kernels into 3 to 5 pieces or rolling the corn will help digestibility. Keep in mind when starting a corn diet gradually increase the amount fed to allow the animal to adjust to the new diet.

When feeding corn, we need to make sure all animals have an equal opportunity to eat. Cattle fight less when there is three feet of bunk space than when six feet is available. With only three feet of space, cattle must back out verses turning sideways. When feeding on the ground, utilization is improved feeding under electric wire. Place wire 12 inches above the ground and provide two feet per cow.

The extreme drought many have had this summer have left feed in short supplies. Many producers typically raise enough hay and do not need to purchase additional feed. This year may be the exception. Now is the time to evaluate your feed needs and if additional feed is needed, corn will be an excellent option. Finally, if you plan on buying corn and have a place to store it, purchase as soon as possible as prices are likely to increase throughout the winter.

[top]Evaluate Hay Storage Losses on Large Round Bales- Rory Lewandowski, Extension Educator, Athens County

Storage losses in any hay production system are unavoidable, but what level or degree of loss is acceptable with a large round bale? Like the answer to many questions, it depends. It may depend upon the price/availability of hay, how storage losses affect animal performance, alternative storage options, and may even boil down to the goals/objectives of the producer.

A drive around the roads that surround the fields and farms of Ohio will reveal a common sight; large round bales stored out in the open in fields and farmyards. Bales stored in this manner and exposed to the elements develop a weathered layer. The depth of the weathered layer and yield loss associated with outdoor storage of bales depends upon both weather and site conditions. Yield loss is highest on bales in direct contact with the ground and in situations of high rainfall and/or where water can collect in the bale storage site. This weathered layer can represent a significant loss in terms of yield if animals refuse to eat it. The following table taken from a University of Kentucky Extension publication entitled “Round Bale Hay Storage in Kentucky” illustrates the percentage of bale volume that is affected for various sized round bales and depth of the weathered layer:

Percentage of Bale Volume in Weathered Layer

Even if cattle will eat the weathered layer, it still represents a loss in forage quality with digestibility decreasing and fiber concentration increasing as compared to the unweathered interior portion of the bale. This table, taken from the University of Kentucky publication mentioned previously demonstrates this loss of quality.

Quality of Weathered and Unweathered Portions of Grass and Grass-alfalfa Hay in Round Bales

In years like this, with forage in short supply, it is hard to see these kind of losses due simply to weathering from storing bales outside. In years when hay is abundant and/or can be purchased cheaply, more hay can be fed to make up for the losses and the hay that is not eaten might even be thought of as a cheap source of nutrients. However, it is much harder to justify these losses when hay is expensive or extra hay is not available to feed. Producers may want to think about other storage methods to reduce dry matter and forage quality losses.

As might be expected when comparing storage options, bales stored outside on the ground have the highest dry matter losses. Up to 35% of the bale dry matter can be lost. By selecting a well drained site and getting bales out of direct contact with the ground by using pallets, tires, crushed rock or other materials, losses may be reduced to 25%. Using net wrap on outdoor stored bales instead of twine can reduce losses by another 10%, bringing the total dry matter loss into the 15 to 25% range. In terms of storage options that have been found to result in the lowest dry matter losses, plastic wrapped bales, bale sleeves, bales stored on a pad with a tarp, or a roofed structure have all been found to keep dry matter losses in the 4 to 7% range.

When deciding what storage option to use, factors that should be considered are: cost of the storage option, price of hay, environmental impact, and your goals/objectives as a producer. According to the University of Kentucky publication mentioned previously, a storage structure can be built for anywhere from $37 to $80 per ton depending upon the design and materials used. I know producers in Athens County who have used lumber cut and sawed on the farm combined with some re-used roofing materials to build some in-expensive hay storage. If this structure has a useful life of 20 years, then (using the University of Kentucky numbers) this figures out to $1.85 to $4.00 per ton per year in storage cost. Plastic wrap and net wrap are listed at a cost of $3.00 per ton. This would also be the yearly cost per ton since these materials are not re-usable. Twine tied bales stored on the ground outside are listed at a yearly cost of $1.50 per ton.

Now we need to figure the storage costs in terms of dry matter (DM) saved with relation to the price of hay. For the purposes of this example, lets assume dry matter (DM) losses of 25% for twine tied hay stored outside, 15% for net wrapped hay, and 5% for plastic wrapped hay and hay stored inside a structure. Let’s look at the economics if hay price is $40 or $60 per ton. The results are shown in this table:

After subtracting the cost of net wrap, plastic wrap and structure from the savings/ton column, all of the alternative storage options pay for themselves by reducing storage dry matter losses, even at a hay price of $40/ton. The greatest savings are made by the plastic wrap and structure storage options. Choosing which of these to use might come down to an environmental consideration or cash flow situation.

Plastic is dependent upon petroleum resources, and can only be used for one year, so disposal must be thought about. A structure is probably more environmentally friendly, but it might be easier for some producers to come up with the dollars needed each year for plastic wrapping as compared to coming up with a large one-time dollar expense for a structure.

Finally, the decision on what type of round bale storage is used may come down to individual goals/objectives. If the cattle operation is more of a hobby than a business, the losses may not matter as much, or, if hay costs get excessive, it may be easier to sell off animals rather than think about putting dollars into alternative storage options. Possibly the producer is approaching the end of his/her cattle production life and does not want to invest in any long-term costs. On the other hand, the producer may be in the cattle business for the long haul and willing to make long-term investments to improve the economics of the enterprise.

Regardless of the decision that is made, cattle producers need to be aware of potential storage losses when using large round bales and the options and economics of various storage systems.

Reference: Round Bale Hay Storage in Kentucky, Publication AGR-171

[top]Feeding Hay - Receiving More Value for the Cost!- Daryl Clark, Extension Educator, Noble County

A quick overview of last year’s farm expenses will make the point - feeding hay is expensive. For most farms the costs associated with making hay or buying hay and feeding it will be more than one half of the total out-of-pocket costs. Although some people have suggested hay making and feeding can be eliminated for mid-western livestock producers, the winter of 2002-03 would challenge this thought.

Hay cost analysis usually reveals costs between $0.02 and $0.10 per pound of dry matter. Hay is expensive since (1) it requires a large machinery investment for storing and feeding, (2) it requires labor to store and feed, and (3) depending on feeding method, up to 50% can be wasted at storage and feeding.

Steve Boyles, OSU Extension Beef Specialist states “You wouldn’t dream of throwing away one-third of your hay..... Livestock trample and waste 25 to 45 percent of the hay when it is fed with no restrictions.” He cited two feeding trials in which wastage was measured. However, these trials are both outside of Ohio, and the wastage on east and southeastern Ohio farms, wouldn’t be near this high. Right?

University of Missouri

S. Bell and F. A. Nartz, 1973 University of Missouri Agriculture Exp. Station.

Purdue University

*W. H. Smith, et al 1974 Purdue Coop. Ext. Service

Lowering Waste

Dr. Boyles makes the following suggestions to help minimize waste.

1. Feed hay in small amounts or in a feeder.
   Feeding hay in a rack or a “hay ring” limits trampling if more than one day’s supply is fed.
2. Feed hay in well drained areas.
   Hay being fed in a single location all winter would benefit from a gravel or concrete base to help minimize mud.
3. Feed hay stored outside first.
   Large bale systems are designed to minimize labor, not waste.

Some Thoughts on Hay Rings

1. Hay rings can be moved (tractor or by hand). Bales randomly placed in the feeding area can have rings moved to them. This helps dispense the trampling effect.
2. Hay rings with a solid bottom ring reduce hay wastage further.
3. Hay rings have a limited number of feeding access areas (usually 10). More than a day’s supply may need to be fed at once so all animals can eat.

Big Bale Storage

The big round bale hay system is a labor saving system. However, hay wastage can be significant. The forage system manager can help to significantly reduce this wastage.

In a 6 foot bale:

• 1/6 of hay is in outer 6"
• 1/3 of hay in outer 12"
• 1/2 of hay in outer 18"
• Only 1/4 of hay in inner 3 foot

In a 4 foot bale

• 1/4 hay in outer 6"
• 1/2 hay in outer 12"
• 3/4 hay in outer 18"

Storage Considerations

• Utilize high and dry storage areas to minimize spoilage from below.
• Store bales where they will be fed.
• Utilizing stone as a base for storage greatly reduces bottom spoilage.

Spoiled Hay Not A Total Loss
Hay contains large amounts of N, P, and K and smaller amounts of minor fertilizer nutrients. These fertilizer values are over $30 per ton. However, to be of greatest value these nutrients need to be distributed and applied thinly enough to maintain forage growth.

Recycling Nutrients
A system of strategically spacing large round bales throughout the “pasture-feeding” area before winter and then restricting access to them with electric fence is becoming popular. This system doesn’t require much “feeding” time during the winter. Bale rings are placed over the appropriate number of bales and a portable electric fence is moved to allow livestock access to these bales. This system allows manure to be more evenly distributed over the entire feeding area often eliminating manure spreading needs.

Another system being used is unrolling large bales and allowing livestock access to the unrolled hay again eliminating large piles of manure and wasted hay.

Although many variations of these systems are used, the main benefits are reduced winter feeding time and better manure (nutrient) distribution.

Winter feed costs remain the livestock producer’s greatest expense and labor need. However, some common sense and ingenuity greatly reduce this cost through controlling hay wastage and labor costs.

The USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service reported alfalfa yields in 2007 were 23% below 2006 yields in Ohio. Other hay in 2007 yielded 25% below 2006 levels in Ohio. The lower yields and a 6.6% drop in acreage resulted in a 30% drop in total Ohio hay production.