more


Share the EXTRA


Visit these pages inside:


Click on the images below to go to the websites:

American Angus AssociationMerck Veterinary ManualAngus Productions Inc
American Angus Tag Store
Certified Angus Beef
API Virtual Library

 


Angus Productions Inc.

January 20, 2012

Choose the Right Ring

When choosing a bale ring, here are some tips to consider to reduce hay costs for beef cows.

Winter-feeding cows represents the greatest expense in most beef cow-calf enterprises. Currently high feed prices, even for hay, should cause farmers to evaluate their winter-feeding strategies to identify ways to reduce feed costs through minimizing feed waste.

In the upper Midwest, a mature cow will eat approximately 3 tons of hay during a common six-month winter-feeding period. You can easily double your hay usage if your method of feeding is to place bales out in the pasture or lot without any type of feeder. In this situation, the hay becomes expensive bedding for the cows. Thus, you will also double your winter feed costs, which at current prices can easily add $300 per cow.

Even when feeding hay with hay feeders, the waste can vary from 15% to 50% depending on type of feeder, thus significantly increasing your feed costs.

Michigan State University (MSU) evaluated waste from different types of hay feeders in a recent study. The results showed some types of feeders do a better job of reducing round bale hay loss than others. This study compared

  1. 1. a typical ring feeder with a solid panel around the bottom;
  2. 2. a cradle-type hay feeder with slanted vertical bars so cows could access hay, but not place their heads inside the feeder;
  3. 3. a silage feeder-type wagon; and
  4. 4. a cone-type hay feeder similar to feeder No. 1, but with a solid panel at the bottom to keep any loose hay in the feeder.

Dry matter hay waste was 3.5%, 6.1%, 11.4% and 14.6% for the cone, ring, feeder wagon and cradle feeders, respectively. If a farm currently estimates hay waste of 20% from using a bale ring without a solid panel, by switching to a cone-style ring feeder, they could reduce overwinter hay costs by $53 per head (hay = $100 per ton). For a 20-head cow herd this would result in a total feed savings of $1,069 for the winter.
The researchers also shared the following observations regarding hay feeder design that may help reduce feed losses:

  • Provide enough distance between the outside of the feeder and the feed. Feeders that allow cows to comfortably keep their heads within the feeder perimeter reduce feed losses.
  • Avoid bars or dividers between feeding stations. Design features that allow more access to the hay by reducing a cow's inclination to push or butt another cow to get access to the hay will reduce hay losses.
  • Provide a comfortable feeding height. Cows prefer to eat with their ears lower than the top of their shoulders, similar to how they eat grazing. Cows that reach over the top of the feeder to get hay also tend to waste more.
  • Use a hay-saver panel. Feeders designed to sit on the ground will benefit from having a solid panel at the bottom to keep hay inside the feeder. In the study, the ring feeder had a hay-saver panel, whereas the cone feeder did not. The cone feeder could be improved by placing a hay-saver panel at the bottom.

A final tip to help reduce feed losses is to place a new bale in the feeder when only 10% of the bale is left. This will force the cows to eat a majority of the bale and make sure there is adequate room for the new bale.




comment on this story





[Click here to go to the top of the page.]