Manage Hay Feeding To Reduce Costs And Improve Profit
KNOXVILLE, TENN.
Feeding the beef cowherd this winter is likely to be expensive due to
the added cost of production. In addition, about 30 percent of the hay
allocated to the cows during the winter is wasted due to poor management
and feeding practices, which increases the cost of wintering the
cowherd.
Approximately 92 percent of the Tennessee beef cow-calf producers
winter their cowherds on hay. Hay is simply too valuable to permit a
high volume of waste. Ohio State University recently published its 2013
hay enterprise budgets, which showed the cost of grass hay production at
$67.86 per ton, and alfalfa hay was priced at $92.96 per ton. Tall
fescue is the primary source of hay for Tennessee cowherds, and UT
economists estimated the cost of production to be approximately $95 per
ton. The average hay price reported by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service for 2006 to 2011
was $80.33 per ton. Regardless of how the hay is valued, producers
cannot afford a 30 percent loss.
The cost could rise to $123.50 per ton with a $28.50 loss, given the
cost per ton of Tennessee fescue hay and the 30 percent loss in feeding.
A Tennessee mature beef cow could consume about 1.6 tons of hay during a
120-day winter feeding period; the daily winter feed cost per cow would
be about 4.8 cents per day. Factoring in the 30 percent loss due to
poor management, the cost would increase up to 6 cents per day, or 25
percent.
Feeding methods also affect the amount of waste and cost. The use of
hay feeders compared to allowing free access to the hay has resulted in
reduced waste and is a recommended practice. For example, Michigan State
University beef specialists studied four types of hay feeders: cone,
ring, trailer and cradle. All types allowed approximately 14.5 inches
for each cattle. Dry matter waste was 3.5 percent, 6.1 percent, 11.4
percent and 14.6 percent for the cone, ring, trailer and cradle feeders,
respectively.
Normally, when cattle are allowed unlimited access to large round
bales, a large percentage of the hay is wasted. Purdue University
researchers have reported a 30 percent loss, Texas workers reported a 24
percent loss, and UT researchers reported a 27 percent loss when using
the unlimited access method. The use of a ring feeder reduced waste by 8
to 9 percent.
Larry Moorehead, UT Extension director and agent in Moore County, has
conducted “on the farm” demonstrations to estimate hay waste for
various feeding practices. He showed that by using cone feeders, waste
was reduced to 1.6 percent. This loss is less than the reported 4 to 5
percent. However, it was still a large reduction in waste.
Regardless of the feeding practice applied to your cow-calf herd,
some hay will be lost. However, proper management will greatly reduce
these losses. Because hay is an expensive commodity, it will be to the
producer’s advantage to apply those practices that will aid in
maintaining waste at the lowest possible level thereby reducing the
winter feed bill and increasing profitability.∆
DR. JAMES B. NEEL: Professor, Department of Animal Science, UT Extension Beef Cattle Specialist, University of Tennessee