Hay test results??

[Stocker Steve]

Can someone explain to me what is so great about these results. I see there is pretty good protein content, but otherwise, I'm not sure. I looked at this webpage and according to it this result seems kind of average.

It depends on your goal:

Dairy guys are particular about hay quality because they get feedback from the bulk tank level every day. They would not be interested in this hay.
If cow/calf guys test hay they usually focus having an acceptable protein level to avoid supplementing dry cows. This hay is fine for that.
I feed some mature low legume hay like this the last couple years (decent protein but too high in fiber for a gutless wonder). It was OK bred heifer hay but is not good enough for stockers IMO.
The issue with hay only stocker feeding is they don't grow well on hay like this (I think this is both a capacity and an energy issue), and they get the squirts with high protein dairy quality hay. It is hard to get it just right w/o supplement. If I had to feed this to growing cattle I would be tempted to add some DDG every two to three days.

 

[novatech]

We must be behind the times. We never have tested hay. We feed it and keep an eye on the cows and adjust from there. It would have to be some pretty crappy hay to supplement with anything other then energy (mix30). And we only do that during really severe cold/icey weather.

Looking at the results of the test posted it is no wonder that people do not have their hay tested. Most of us would have to start our education completely over to make heads or tails of it. First you have to know what the abbreviations mean. Then you have to know why it is important and how it is used. Then you have to be a mathematician. The people that do this calculating evidently think that the average cattleman has the ability to decipher all this stuff.
This does not mean that the average cattleman is dumb by any means. It means he has the skill to figure out good from bad without the aid of a microscope and test tube. It would help a lot if the scientific brains would learn a little about how better to communicate with the average Joe cattleman.

 

[tom4018]

This sample came from a square bale and the field was split between being rolled and squared, averaged around 2 4 x 5 bales per acre on this cutting.

If I'm reading this right, you only tested a sample from one bale?

Yes, they were doing some free testing at a field day. They would have done more if I had known more detials. Done this mostly out of curiousity. I am mostly like the others on here I have to feed what I have, but I did learn a few things as I always here about moisture and protien but learned about the TDN and RFV. Plus it makes me feel I am doing a decent job of getting the hay put up.

 

[gberry]

We must be behind the times. We never have tested hay. We feed it and keep an eye on the cows and adjust from there. It would have to be some pretty crappy hay to supplement with anything other then energy (mix30). And we only do that during really severe cold/icey weather.

Looking at the results of the test posted it is no wonder that people do not have their hay tested. Most of us would have to start our education completely over to make heads or tails of it. First you have to know what the abbreviations mean. Then you have to know why it is important and how it is used. Then you have to be a mathematician. The people that do this calculating evidently think that the average cattleman has the ability to decipher all this stuff.
This does not mean that the average cattleman is dumb by any means. It means he has the skill to figure out good from bad without the aid of a microscope and test tube. It would help a lot if the scientific brains would learn a little about how better to communicate with the average Joe cattleman.

That's why they developed RFV and RFQ. Gives you one number that can be used to compare different lots of hay without being an animal nutritionist.

 

[novatech]

That's why they developed RFV and RFQ. Gives you one number that can be used to compare different lots of hay without being an animal nutritionist.

That's all well and good, if they stick to it long enough for everone to get used to it. It will probably sink into my dense brain eventually. The problem is that as soon as I think I have all this figured out there will be another brain child come along with a better way. Then of course I get to start learning all over again.
When buying hay I can see where this can be an important asset.
When raising hay you are pretty much controled by the elements. You can do a soil test and apply the proper fertilizer but we cannot control the weather. Once you have the hay you got to feed it. The cows will do the test for you.
The ability for the cattleman to read his cattle as to what they need can determine the quality of hay he needs to buy or raise.
Some cattle can do better on lower quality hay, some must have higher quality hay. Read the Capacity/Efficiency thread.
Some cattle have to put up for the winter up north, some have grazing most of the winter down south. Some have stockpiled forage.
When my cattle get the squerts on clover I feed them low quality bluestem to plug them up a bit.
I do not think it is right for the desk jockies to determine what the RFV or RFQ of hay should be whithout knowing how, where, and to what it will be fed to. I guess they would want a fecal sample. :lol2:

 

[denoginnizer]

We must be behind the times. We never have tested hay. We feed it and keep an eye on the cows and adjust from there. It would have to be some pretty crappy hay to supplement with anything other then energy (mix30). And we only do that during really severe cold/icey weather.

What is (mix30)?

 

[gberry]

I'll add to this post that I don't see why more don't test, particularly if they feel they make good hay. I for one would pay a little more to make sure I had the quality of feed I expected.

This all goes back to the ethics of the producer and wouldn't insure anything as he could use the same piece of paper on his whole crop. Just stating what I've seen. To most, price is the determining factor. Some people just don't get it.

Help me out here man. Are you suggesting that people (producers) who do not test their hay are unethical?

No. He's saying that just because a producer has a hay test doesn't mean that you're buying the same hay he tested.

 

[gberry]

That's why they developed RFV and RFQ. Gives you one number that can be used to compare different lots of hay without being an animal nutritionist.

That's all well and good, if they stick to it long enough for everone to get used to it. It will probably sink into my dense brain eventually. The problem is that as soon as I think I have all this figured out there will be another brain child come along with a better way. Then of course I get to start learning all over again.
When buying hay I can see where this can be an important asset.
When raising hay you are pretty much controled by the elements. You can do a soil test and apply the proper fertilizer but we cannot control the weather. Once you have the hay you got to feed it. The cows will do the test for you.
The ability for the cattleman to read his cattle as to what they need can determine the quality of hay he needs to buy or raise.
Some cattle can do better on lower quality hay, some must have higher quality hay. Read the Capacity/Efficiency thread.
Some cattle have to put up for the winter up north, some have grazing most of the winter down south. Some have stockpiled forage.
When my cattle get the squerts on clover I feed them low quality bluestem to plug them up a bit.
I do not think it is right for the desk jockies to determine what the RFV or RFQ of hay should be whithout knowing how, where, and to what it will be fed to. I guess they would want a fecal sample. :lol2:

I agree you need to be able to read your cattle. That's the way we've done it for years, but I think these tests would be useful to folks feeding the hay they grew also. If you know you're going to be feeding dry cows and your hay has an RFQ of 130, you might be able to wait a little longer on the next cutting and get a higher tonnage of hay that tests 110. I don't really know. What I do know is that there is a huge amount of variation between loads of hay even if bought from the same producer. We've bought some that the cows would hardly eat and other loads they couldn't get enough of from the same guy. Although these bales were priced the same, I would prefer to pay a few more dollars for the better hay (actually I'd prefer to feed no hay).

 

[dun]

We must be behind the times. We never have tested hay. We feed it and keep an eye on the cows and adjust from there. It would have to be some pretty crappy hay to supplement with anything other then energy (mix30). And we only do that during really severe cold/icey weather.

What is (mix30)?

Bascily an energy supplement
http://mix30.com/

 

[grannysoo]

All of the dairy people around here are buying all of the peanut hay they can find. They will give you a price picked up in your field. You bale it, they will come pick it up and take it home.

 

[TexasBred]

All of the dairy people around here are buying all of the peanut hay they can find. They will give you a price picked up in your field. You bale it, they will come pick it up and take it home.

Peanut hay makes milk...just gotta be careful of aflatoxin in some locations.

 

[TexasBred]

I'll add to this post that I don't see why more don't test, particularly if they feel they make good hay. I for one would pay a little more to make sure I had the quality of feed I expected.

This all goes back to the ethics of the producer and wouldn't insure anything as he could use the same piece of paper on his whole crop. Just stating what I've seen. To most, price is the determining factor. Some people just don't get it.

Help me out here man. Are you suggesting that people (producers) who do not test their hay are unethical?

My experience with them is that a large majority of them ARE NOT ethical in one way or the other. They'll wear that one hay test out on 200 semi loads of hay. BUT, there are some great guys out there that just will not take advantage of you.....their word IS their bond.
1. If possible test the hay before buying it.. You and the seller can sample a number of representative bales from each cutting available and send it off to a reputable lab. Agree on a price based on quality.
2. Buy yourself a moisture tester. It will pay for itself many times over. If you can buy 200 rolls of hay that is 9% moisture instead of 10% moisture you get almost 4000 lbs. more dry matter (4 extra bales). Negotiate a purchase price adjustment depending on moisture.
3. Test each field and each cutting of your home grown hay. If you don't you're just guessing at what the cows are getting --vs-- their needs. (Body score will eventually tell you)

 

[Angus Cowman]

We must be behind the times. We never have tested hay. We feed it and keep an eye on the cows and adjust from there. It would have to be some pretty crappy hay to supplement with anything other then energy (mix30). And we only do that during really severe cold/icey weather.

I am like Dun I don't test my hay I know when baling if it is good avg or below avg for my area but my hay must be pretty decent because I calve in the fall and feed only hay in the winter and my cows usually come thru the winter with a BCS of 4 or better and wean 500-600 lb calves between 175 and 220 days