Payback period of a hay shelter?

[kenny thomas]

Many people think since you can roll hay with a little more moisture than you could bale it that it is ok to go ahead and do it. I filled 7 old tobacco barns with hay each year and I do not take any chances. Correct moisture will also mean no mold in the center of the roll.

 

[cowboy43]

For you that have tobacco barns, that is starting to be a part of past history, it would nice to see some pictures of them, always thought the big ole barns were cool, now everything is prefabricated and has no character, so if possible post some pictures of ole barns with character. When I was a kid on a cold wet winter day I would spend the whole day in the hay barn shooting mice with a BB gun, we had to entertain ourselves, didn't have all the video games the kids have now, just me, gun and ole dog.

 

[upfrombottom]

If you figure you lose the outside 3 inches of a 4x5 bale you are losing about 19% of that bale and considering the densest part of the bale is not the center, you could be safe to assume 20%. On a 5x6 bale its around 16 to 17%. Add to that a little more for the bottom frozen to the ground and you could easily justify some kind of shelter. Hay tarps will more than pay for themselves in one season, and if you figured in your labor wrestling them around you could probably justify a permanent structure. But who figures their labor?

 

[novatech]

If you figure you lose the outside 3 inches of a 4x5 bale you are losing about 19% of that bale and considering the densest part of the bale is not the center, you could be safe to assume 20%. On a 5x6 bale its around 16 to 17%. Add to that a little more for the bottom frozen to the ground and you could easily justify some kind of shelter. Hay tarps will more than pay for themselves in one season, and if you figured in your labor wrestling them around you could probably justify a permanent structure. But who figures their labor?

Don't forget the $ loss in protein for the rest of the bale.
I will never understand why people spend all that money on fertilizer just to leave it out in the rain. The higher the protein the faster the decompo0sition.
Well it does make for better compost. :lol2:

 

[tripleBfarms]

I've never tested any of our hay, but studies I've read say fescue hay is around 8% when baled, and about 1% by the time its fed in the winter if it sets outside. Then you buy tubs, or something else, to supplement cause the hay is not good. Seems like the cost of the supplement would be enough for some folks to justify a shed over time.

 

[Angus Cowman]

I've never tested any of our hay, but studies I've read say fescue hay is around 8% when baled, and about 1% by the time its fed in the winter if it sets outside. Then you buy tubs, or something else, to supplement cause the hay is not good. Seems like the cost of the supplement would be enough for some folks to justify a shed over time.

must be some pretty mature fescue when they baled it as I routinely have it test 11-13%
but most people let fescue get to mature before baling

 

[canoetrpr]

If you figure you lose the outside 3 inches of a 4x5 bale you are losing about 19% of that bale and considering the densest part of the bale is not the center, you could be safe to assume 20%. On a 5x6 bale its around 16 to 17%. Add to that a little more for the bottom frozen to the ground and you could easily justify some kind of shelter. Hay tarps will more than pay for themselves in one season, and if you figured in your labor wrestling them around you could probably justify a permanent structure. But who figures their labor?

Interested in your analysis. If one figures 19-20% of loss then you are quite right - it might not take as much time as I thought to pay back a shelter. The study I posted above claims it is 13-14% too high. Perhaps it is related to differences in weather - not sure. I found the finding of only 6% loss surprising - for the the way I store it.

I don't think I see anywhere near 19 or 20% once the hay is off the ground - but I have no way to really do a measurement.

One thing I can say is that I use a round bale feeder with the slanted slats and I wish now I had put the extra money in for one of those fancy funnel feeders. I think it would have paid for itself in a season or so. I think my cows do waste a fair share of hay eating out of a regular round bale feeder. It was more than 2x the price though.

 

[upfrombottom]

Most including me will take a guess at the losses. I actually sat down once to try and figure out what the actual loss was. It is actually quite easy with a little math. If you use ((piR^2)(width)) or (3.14159 x the radius squared x the width ) it will give you the volume of the bale. Just subtract the amount of the outside you are losing from the radius and take the difference of the two ( the original volume and the volume after the loss) and divide it by the original volume. Density and weight make no difference.

On a 4x5 bale the volume would be 3.14159x(30x30)x48= 135717.12 cubic inches.
Subtract the loss from the outside say three inches and the volume would be 3.14159x(27x27)x48=109930.56 cubic inches.
The difference is 135717.12-109930.56=25786.56.
25786.56 divided by the original volume will give the percentage of loss or 25786.56/135717.12=.19 or 19%.

Just losing the outside one inch is a 7% loss of that bale.

Clear as mud?

 

[canoetrpr]

The math is fine. I should have been clearer.

Do you find you lose an average of 3" all around even if the bale is off the ground?

I will try to estimate I guess when I feed what is left over of these in the fall.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

On setting hay on pallets - I find it really helps reduce the spoilage on the bottom of the bales, both unwrapped and wrapped.

However I am on my third winter with some pallets and they are starting to fall apart leaving nails all over, many pointing straight up from boards frozen to the ground. Tractor tires are expensive.

Now that I am wrapping all bales I think I am going to forget the pallets with their nail problems. jmho.

Jim

I was wondering how long before you would come to that conclusion. Pallets don't last long with hay bales sitting on them. And, with us, if they were lined up, the pallets would have gotton stuck to the ground - which you have to get out of your way before you can get the next hay bale.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Did you guys go to the site with the research? or read canoetrpr post?
If you are seeing 3" of waste all the way around your bales, I think #1 you must be using string instead of net wrap #2 your bales are not tight enough when made.
I have stored dry bales outside for 30 years here in NY. They get LOTS of rain, summer & fall & lots of snow/freezing/thawing in the winter.
They are net wrapped, tight bales, on bare ground. I have to agree with the study reported. Our biggest loss is on the bottom because it is a frozen chunck - but left aside, it eventually thaws and the cattle eat it.
Yes, the outside edge (maybe 1/2" at most) gets "spoiled" and yes, the cattle eat it too. But, the inside of the bale is just about the same as when it was baled.
Garbage in - garbage out.
Big dry bales actually need to be as dry or slightly dryer when baled than small square bales, if you don't want dusty hay.
But, I do totally agree that if you had tie rails or somethiing to get your bales up off the ground, that it would help. Pallets definately will help, but they deteriorate and become too dangerous for the health of your tires. (and health of your cattle, because those nails do sometimes stick to the frozen bottoms of the bales).
Those "bonnets" look interesting, but again, with the little hay loss I see, and the struggle to get the tarp off the frozen/snow covered bales is not worth it. We used to stack the bales in a pyramid and tarp it. I never worked so hard trying to feed hay in my life. Never, never again.

 

[novaman]

I think most of you are underestimating your losses on your hay. Just because it looks "good" and the cows eat it doesn't mean you aren't losing nutrients. Protein supplements are expensive and most of us don't want to have to buy them and make them available to the cattle, yet we fail to realize how much protein is degrading in our haystack. Lots of $$$ gone because of the weathering and very few "see" it.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I still go with my statement. Feed value is NOT deteriorated - at least in our case. Yes, the outside 1/2" & the wad on the bottom is - but not the rest. Again, did you read that research? And that is not the only research I've read on the subject. I know I read one on the quality/tightness of the bale & string vs net wrap. There's been lots of research on it over the years. I just know the research on my own farm. Quality in - quality out.
I save our dry hay for our replacement heifers or our calved out 2-year olds.

 

[canoetrpr]

Jeanne - thanks for your observations.

Interested to hear what you use instead of pallets. I've gone the pallet route so far but yes it is a pain and they are deteriorating. I'me concerned about using rail ties since all the ones I see are coated with creosote.

I'm considering building some sort of a tie system of my own to keep the bales off the ground. Somethlng along the lines of two or three 2x6s held spaced by say 8" or a foot apart with 2x4s on the underside. Maybe 2 or 3 2x4's per 12 foot section. The bales would sit on the 2x6s. The 2x6s would be spaced such that the whole thing is narrower than my tractor (maybe 2 feet) - so that I don't have to get anything out of the way when I am picking up bales.

I am no genius at designing anything. I'd appreciate any thoughts if anyone has done something like this before. How far apart would you space the 2x6's? Would two be enough? How far part to put the supporting 2x4s? Should I use pressure treated wood or not. I like the idea of them lasting but worry about things leaching out into the hay.

 

[dun]

Why not just use rock?

 

[canoetrpr]

It is a part of my driveway that I like to have back int the summer when I don't have much hay left.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

My bales go right on the ground. The same area has been used for 30 years, so a lot of the top soil is gone, but enough to create mud. We put up mostly baleage, so they are a non-issue. The 60-150 dry bales a year that we have isn't worth creating something to put them on. As I stated, I do not have enough spoilage to warrent doing anything different.
All our hay is put up by a neighbor - and his baler always makes a super tight bale. I think that is the biggest secret to keeping dry hay in good condition outside - AND NET WRAP. Net wrap really "sheds" the water.
I think more hay is wasted when fed than from storage.

 

[hillbillycwo]

Triple B,
We drive a 3-4 foot piece of rebar in the center of 2-4 round bales with srveyors tape flagging on them. When those are cool enough to touch the rolls are safe for storage.

 

[canoetrpr]

Jeanne:

I would get netwrapped bales if they were available but I generally don't have the choice. My bales are very tight though.

Here is another link to a study that I found that compares losses of outside stored netwrapped bales vs twine wrapped: http://www.progressiveforage.com/index. ... Itemid=123

From the study:
In this study, in the outside hay rind nutrient composition was significantly higher and dry matter losses were lower for net wrap compared to twine, but the core was generally unaffected. Average total dry matter losses for bales stored outside on the ground were 11.3 percent for plastic twine wrapped bales and 7.3 percent for net wrap. However, both of these options have significantly higher losses than inside storage. Net wrapping bales for uncovered storage outside does not substitute for inside storage.

It seems to me that it would be a good idea for bales to have some breathing room under them. My bales are on my relatively well drained gravel driveway though so i will rethink whether it is worth the hassle of pallets or building something to keep them off the ground.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I went right to the full article - which was very good - kinda reinforced my thoughts. But, it also made me think about the water shedding & ending up under it. Maybe the reason I don't have very much bottom spoilage is that ours are always lined up going downhill, so water would be more apt to flow down, rather than under???
Bottom line, I don't see enough spoilage to change what we are doing. Cheap & easy - that's my motto :banana: