Ryegrass was harvested as balage at the Hill Farm to be used for the dairy herd in the spring of 1988, 1999, and 2000. The procedures used are described in this article. It is written in a question and answer format to be similar to questions producers might ask.

What methods of planting were used to establish ryegrass stands and how did they affect yield?
In 1998, balage was harvested from two prepared seedbeds and one volunteer field in a bermudagrass sod. In 1999, two prepared seedbed fields and one sod seeded field were used while in 2000 one prepared seedbed field and two volunteer stand fields that were prepared seedbeds in 1999 were used. Yields were similar between fields within the same year so planting method had little effect.

When were cows pulled off ryegrass fields and how was fertilization managed?
Dairy cows and heifers grazed all ryegrass fields until the first or second week of March, depending on grass height. Fertilizer was applied the middle of March. One to two hundred pounds of ammonium nitrate (34-0-0) were applied in all three years, and in 1999 and 2000 an additional one to two hundred pounds of ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) were used.

How long did ryegrass grow after cows were pulled off and what stage of growth was it in at cutting?
Cutting was initiated around the middle of April so there would be four to five weeks of growth after removal of cows. Most ryegrass was cut in the boot stage. A few fields had begun seedhead development by the time of cutting. The sod seeded fields in 1999 matured faster than the prepared seedbed or volunteer stands.

What types of equipment were used for cutting, raking, baling and wrapping the ryegrass?
Ryegrass was cut using a New Holland Haybine or a Vicon disc mower, depending on how wet the fields were, density of the ryegrass stands, etc. In most cases, ryegrass cut with the haybine was not raked before baling because a four foot windrow was left behind the machine at cutting. Most of the forage cut with the disc mower and some cut with the haybine was raked into four foot windrows with a Vermeer Twinrake.

The exception was in 1998 when all the forage was cut with a disc mower and not raked. It was baled with a New Holland standard five foot round baler. The wrapper was mounted on the three point hitch of a tractor.

In 1999, Vermeer Manufacturing Company and Scott Tractor Company provided the Station with a silage baler / wrapper that combined both process. The Vermeer baler baled the 50 to 60 % moisture ryegrass with no difficulty, and the wrapper wrapped the four foot bales adequately. However, there was some difficulty combining the ejection and wrapping processes when the bales were ejected into the cradle of the wrapper. It appeared the uneven or sloping fields affected some of the automatic and magnetic switches required to coordinate the baling and wrapping operations and the wrapping cycle was disrupted numerous times.

In 2000, Ruston Farm Implements, Inc. provided the Station with a standard four foot New Holland round baler and a separate trailer-mounted New Holland wrapper to be pulled with an additional tractor. The standard dry hay baler performed well in the high moisture ryegrass and the hydraulic-driven wrapper performed well under the various field conditions. It did require one additional tractor and operator than in 1999.

How long was the ryegrass wilted and how wet was it when baling began?
Depending on drying conditions and stand density, ryegrass was wilted twenty-four to forty-eight hours before baling. However, in most fields, baling was initiated during the afternoon of the day following cutting. Unless the balage was to be baled at a specific, predetermined dry matter, the ryegrass was baled to be about 40% dry matter (DM) or 60% moisture. A microwave oven was used to estimate dry matter at the time of baling.

What about differences in bale quality and storage losses between the wrapping systems?
There were no significant differences in bale quality or storage losses that could be linked
to either the different balers or wrappers in 1999 and 2000. Baling ryegrass outside the 40 to 60% moisture window resulted in the most spoilage problems. Another factor contributing to spoilage was improper taping of bales where plastic film was torn or punctured. It was felt that all pieces of equipment used these two years achieved comparable results.

In 1998 the problem with bale spoilage was greater due to more deterioration of the plastic wrap. Some of the problem was due to the use of treated twine when untreated could not be found in the area. However, the largest reason may have been inexperience with the wrapper or the fact that the five foot bales were not baled tight enough or both. The ryegrass was not raked so picking up a full swath of material led to bales of uneven size that also made wrapping difficult.

What kind of feeding values can be achieved with either of these harvesting systems?
The table below is from different moisture levels baled in 1999. Analyses in 2000 were similar to these while those in 1998 were not determined due to poor ensiling. The values are ranked by the anticipated DM at baling. The DM was varied by harvesting different fields or areas within a field at varying times after cutting. This was done to evaluate the ability of the baler to handle different moisture levels. While most of the values at baling were similar to the lab DM values, some notable exceptions can be found.
 

dry matter at baling	lab dry matter	crude protein, DM basis	NDF,  DM basis	ADF, DM basis	In vitro digestibility, DM basis	subjective feeding potential*
25	18.5	20.0	42.7	31.7	89.2	-
30	29.8	21.6	42.9	30.4	90.7	o
30	24.0	19.5	44.5	31.3	88.8	-
38	not sampled					x
39	43.9	15.0	51.6	30.0	86.1	+
39	43.5	16.7	48.4	28.7	87.6	+
39	43.7	21.1	42.9	28.6	90.7	o
49	55.1	14.4	56.0	30.7	84.9	+
50	39.8	16.7	51.1	31.3	87.7	+
54	49.3	16.6	56.3	33.8	84.7	+
85	77.9	16.5	64.9	34.8	78.4

* + = good; o = mostly good; - = poor; x = rotten

As was expected, balage has to be above about 30% DM (lab value) or less than 70% moisture to have a reasonable chance for the material to be preserved. This DM level is typical of that reported in the literature and what producers use. Bales with a DM value in the teens and twenties were baled at that moisture to determine how well the baler handled wetter forage. For unknown reasons, none of the bales wrapped at a field DM of 38% ensiled. It is likely that the DM was much lower than 38%.

Differences in crude protein, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber and in vitro total digestibility can not be related to any moisture level and are more related to the field from which the balage was harvested. Differences in the analyses were mainly due to differences in maturity and fertilization in each field as would be expected. Ryegrass balage protein values of 15 to 20 % can be expected as indicated in the results and would be an acceptable forage for a dairy and probably more than needed for a cow-calf operation.

The subjective feeding values were observations made as the balage was fed from August through November. These are subjective observations on how well the bales preserved and how readily they were consumed by the lactating dairy herd. The 85% dry matter bales were not fed and were just used to compare balage nutrient values to similar forage stored under a barn as dry hay. Facilities were not available to determine if there was a difference in milk production with or without the balage. However, it did appear that the balage helped maintain milk production during hot weather.

Pictures of Balage Operation in 2000