Recommended rates for applying organic acid preservatives to hay Hay moisture level (%-DM) Rate (%) Dry weight basis lbs. of acid per ton of hay 20 - 25% 0.5 10 26 - 30% 1.0 20 31 - 35% 1.5 30 C.C. Sheaffer and N. P. Martin Ext Folder 489, University of Minnesota

Tons of Production Hay Acreage Tons / Acre Tons of Production 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 1.5 38 113 188 263 300 338 375 2.0 350 400 450 500 2.5 63 313 438 563 625 3.0 525 600 675 750 3.5 88 613 700 788 875 4.0 800 900 1000 4.5 1013 1125 5.0 1250 5.5 138 275 413 550 688 825 963 1100 1238 1375 6.0 1050 1200 1350 1500 6.5 163 325 488 650 813 975 1138 1300 1463 1625 7.0 1225 1400 1575 1750 7.5 938 1313 1688 1875 8.0 1600 1800 2000 8.5 213 425 638 850 1063 1275 1488 1700 1913 2125 Tons / Acre Tons of Production

Particle size recommendations for chopped forage and TMR diets Screen Pore Size Particle Size Corn Silage Haylage TMR Upper Sieve .75” > .75” 3% - 8% 10% - 20% 2% - 8% Middle Sieve .31” .31” - .75” 45% - 65% 30% - 50% Lower Sieve .05” * .07” - .31” 30% - 40% Bottom Pan - < .07” < 5% < 20% *Pores are square, so the largest opening is the diagonal, which is .07 inches. This is the reason the largest particles that can pass through the Lower Sieve are .07 inches in length Source: Heinrichs, J and P. Kononoff. Evaluating particle size of forages and TMRs using the New Penn State Particle Separator. Penn State Cooperative Publication Das 02-42.

Can I afford to build a barn? Source: Forage Crop Pocket Guide

Can I afford to build a barn? Source: Forage Crop Pocket Guide

Storage Options Tarped Stacks Hay Sheds Hoop Structures $1.50 – 2.50 $1.50 – 2.50 $3.50+ $2.00 – 3.00

Hoop Structures for Hay Storage

Hoop Structures for Hay Storage Adjustable tension to keep cover tight

Hoop Structures for Hay Storage Cost: Package (hoops, cover) $6,000-7,000 Posts, concrete, lumber, gravel, labor = $1,000-3,000 Total Materials Cost = ~ $7,500 - 10,000 250-300 bales Assuming 10-year structure life (prorated 16-year warranty on cover) $10,000/10 yr = $1000 per year $1000/300 bales = $3.00 per bale

Long-term Hay Storage DM Loss (Undercover) Net wrap or plastic sleeves 5-8% 1st year, little thereafter Net wrap or plastic sleeves 5-8% 1st yr, 2-5% ea yr Twine on the ground Don’t even think about it! Vitamin A content of old hay

Feeding Losses Method 1 day 7 day ---- % Waste---- Unrolled 12.3 43.0 Ring 4.9 5.4

Feeding Losses Ring 4 - 7 Trailer 10 - 13 Cradle 15 - 20 Item % Waste Cone 2 - 5 Ring 4 - 7 Trailer 10 - 13 Cradle 15 - 20 Adapted from: Southern Forages (4th ed.) and Buskirk et al., 2003. J. Anim. Sci. 81:109-115

What About Baled Silage?? Advantages: Minimize harvest loss Decrease influence of weather Capture high-quality Flexible system Disadvantages: Potential for ‘operator error’ Cost of materials Added labor Keeping vermin out

14 inches ~74% of the bales volume is contained in that 14 inches.

Moisture distribution of mixed grass-legume round bales stored on the ground Twine Wrapped Net Wrapped Moisture differences at 4 inches due to wrap appear to be greater with predominately alfalfa bales as compared with grass bales. Wisconsin researchers noted little change in bale core nutrient profiles due to wrap. This is due to low moisture (less than 20%) in the core of bales studied. Change in nutrient composition of the outer portion of the bales tends to be higher with twine wrapping as compared to net wrapping. (Reference: Shinners et al., 2002 ASAE International meeting, paper 021067) Shinners, University of Wisconsin

Moisture distribution of mixed grass-legume round bales stored on the ground vs. elevated Twine Wrapped On a Pallet Moisture differences at 4 inches due to wrap appear to be greater with predominately alfalfa bales as compared with grass bales. Wisconsin researchers noted little change in bale core nutrient profiles due to wrap. This is due to low moisture (less than 20%) in the core of bales studied. Change in nutrient composition of the outer portion of the bales tends to be higher with twine wrapping as compared to net wrapping. (Reference: Shinners et al., 2002 ASAE International meeting, paper 021067) Shinners, University of Wisconsin

Heat Damage to Crude Protein DM Intake Useable Protein Heat-Damaged Protein Protein Heat

Every little bit helps!

If it has to be outside… Store bales with N/S orientation Don’t store under trees Make dense bales Shed water better Elevate the bales

Typical Hay Storage Losses Twine Net wrap (% of dry weight) Pole barn 2-5% Hoop structure Tarp 5-10% 5-8% Stack pad, covered stack uncovered stack 15-40% 10-30% Plastic wrap N/A Outside on ground, well-drained 20-40% poor drainage/shaded 30-60% 30-45%

Hay Storage Research Storage Weathered DM Method Depth Loss (in.) (%) (Kentucky) Storage Weathered DM Method Depth Loss (in.) (%) Twine 4.4 18.2 Netwrap 2.1 10.6 Solid plastic 0.6 3.6 Shed <0.5 5.7

Storage Losses Source: Forage Crop Pocket Guide

Storage Losses Source: Forage Crop Pocket Guide

The True Cost of Storage and Feeding Losses About 3 billion dollars of hay is lost per year from storage and feeding in the U.S. (37.5 million tons)

Losses During Storage Even when hay is baled at the target moisture (15% moisture for round bales; 18% for squares), the forage will go through a “sweat” for 2-3 wks. Moisture is driven off, heat is given off, and DM dec. A 1% decrease in moisture ≈ 1% decrease in DM Moisture tends to equilibrate at 12% during storage 20% Moisture 12% Moisture CO2 H2O + 1000 lbs DM 920 lbs DM