# Round Bale myths



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

#1.You can't get a full load on a semi.Loaded one yesterday with 34 bales.Grossed 91,000 lbs.30 ton of hay.5 x 5.5 bales.

#2 You get 35% loss in storage outside.I say BS if properly stored on high ground and bale edges not touching and not stacked.Put alot of twine on 2" apart or net wrap.A tight bale is important and the newer balers are much better.A little grass in alfalfa also helps the bales shed water,the thatched roof effect.


----------



## Waterway64 (Dec 2, 2011)

I fully agree. Got to make the bale according to the truckers needs.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

swmnhay said:


> Put alot of twine on 2" apart or net wrap.A tight bale is important


Couldn't be more right Cy. I sell all my rounds and I never tie any wider than 4". They stack better and flatten less on the bottoms. Tight wads around here will have 12" between twine and their bales look like crap and stack even worse.

Regards, Mike


----------



## hay rake (Dec 31, 2011)

swnmhay i am wondering about a few things. we have never been able to make a bale 4wx5d that weighs more than 880 lbs. i always hear about these weights from people and don't doubt them but i wonder is it the baler, the hay or the way i bale. we run a NH BR740 at 2450lbs pressure in a windrow that just fits between the tires. we bale at aprox 3 mph any faster and you over run the pickup. the high pressure for this baler is 2500 i know that the 740A runs at a higher pressure but am told if i go higher with mine i risk damage. i don;t know of any late model vermeers in the area so i have nothing to go by. i notice in reading these posts that i never see NH talked about. do vermeers put up a bale that is that much more dense. These are my questions.


----------



## hay rake (Dec 31, 2011)

swmnhay forgot the important part. we are baling timothy, orchard grass or a mixture of both at under 13 percent moisture wit no preservative. thanks


----------



## Tim/South (Dec 12, 2011)

Myth:
Do not feed round bales to horses.
Horses will colic from round bales.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

hay rake said:


> swnmhay i am wondering about a few things. we have never been able to make a bale 4wx5d that weighs more than 880 lbs. i always hear about these weights from people and don't doubt them but i wonder is it the baler, the hay or the way i bale. we run a NH BR740 at 2450lbs pressure in a windrow that just fits between the tires. we bale at aprox 3 mph any faster and you over run the pickup. the high pressure for this baler is 2500 i know that the 740A runs at a higher pressure but am told if i go higher with mine i risk damage. i don;t know of any late model vermeers in the area so i have nothing to go by. i notice in reading these posts that i never see NH talked about. do vermeers put up a bale that is that much more dense. These are my questions.


Cy is making a 5x5.5 bale. a foot wider and half a foot more diameter has A LOT more hay in it than a 4x5 bale. I normally try to keep my bales between 800-1000 lbs. Another myth is heavy round bales must have been baled wet.

13% moisture is too dry for any bale, a lot of dry matter is lost due to shatter. I've baled 19% hay with no preservative before and it kept fine. I now use hayguard on all my hay and unless rain is in the forecast quit baling and wait for dew if it gets under 16% moisture. You also lose weight once it starts to get under 17%. Ideally with preservative I like to start baling at 19% and finish at 17%.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

hay rake said:


> swmnhay forgot the important part. we are baling timothy, orchard grass or a mixture of both at under 13 percent moisture wit no preservative. thanks


I get a around 950lbs 4x5 out of my 486 and did the same out of my 466. That is grass alfalfa mix first cutting. Just grass will be under 900lbs and as it get older they can get down in the low 800s. Nice alfalfa they will get upwards of 1200lbs. if baled right.


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

Tim/South said:


> Myth:
> Do not feed round bales to horses.
> Horses will colic from round bales.


I only feed round bales to 15 horses. I don't mind hard work, but not a fanatic about it!

Ralph


----------



## Waterway64 (Dec 2, 2011)

It makes a lot of difference how any of the nes balers are adjusted as to how heavy the bales are. A lot of producers here put up a bale that is easy to handle and feed. I sell most of my hay so I want a bale that max's the truck out. My third at 1500 to 1600 often causes us to leave hay a bale or two off. The same tension on second cutting yeilds about a 1400 lb. bale that makes a load slightly under max weight. The courser 1st of course is lighter yet but I feed much of it to my cows. Mel


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

Bale density too tight/too high can cause problems, especially with older livestock. Sometimes the hay gets so tight that they can work their teeth loose pulling it apart--that's were a crop cutter option can come in handy.

I try to bale my bales at 1000 lbs, 5.5x5. But this year I went smaller and looser because some people want to buy by the bale instead of by the ton. I want to make the same amount whether I sell by the bale or by the ton. Right now, good and premium quality round bale hay in my area is going for $85/bale or $170/ton.

Ralph


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

I would never worry about bales being to tight.Alot of hay is tub ground here anyway.The bigger the bales I make the less bales I have to handle.A few of my customers pickup 2 lg rd bales at atime unloading.

I make some bales 1000 lbs for horsey customers.Watch the scale on monitor it hits 850 hit the clutch and start the net.1000 lbs by time i stop,lol
.
Lighter the windrow and slower the speed and finer the hay makes for heavier bales.A little orchardgrass with alfalfa also makes heavier bales.

These bales could of been much heavier but it got to dry and i was baling at 4AM at 12% at 14 mph..Just couldn't get a dew once the drought hit here.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

My NH's that I have had (688, BR780, BR780A) all make 5' wide bales. I also make 5.5' diameter bales. Later cutting alfalfa, mixed hays will run 1600 to 1900 lbs. 1st cutting 1400 lbs. Rank, overripe fescue will be 1100 to 1200 lbs. I run pressure at 1350 to 1400 lbs. I can go tighter on the pressure but I usually sell all round bales by the bale, so I just get a few more to sell that way. I only bale junk hay now with the round baler (overripe fescue or really rained on stuff), everything else goes into 3x3's for easier transportation and storage. As far as losses on outside bales, depends on your local climate as much as anything. We get 50" of rain here in Indiana a year and by spring you have nice compost piles most years, I don't care what kind of baler or wrap was used. I agree with swmn that tighter and more wrap helps but losses are still too much. The western climates with 30" of rain or less will have a much better chance of less spoilage. As far as "grossing" out a truck, not a problem with good hay in good bales, can't be done with the junk I bale in rounds. But the same hay won't gross out a truck in 3x3's either.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

I will agree with you on storage loss being very dependent on good management. But as the value of high quality forage goes up, any loss due to storage becomes not acceptable. Round bales will always be the cheapest way to get forage harvested and put into a (somewhat) transportable package. At some point though, the cost of shrink will always exceed the expense of a better (and higher cost) harvest method. Take a look at how they do it in Europe. Land cost there is so high that no amount of waste or shrink is acceptable, so most all baled forages are wrapped for maximum return from every acre. Our land costs here are heading in that direction.

One point that you miss here with the round baler is harvest loss. By the time your hay is fit enough to bale, harvest losses start to erode away at your bottom line. And again, good management (like baling at 4AM when necessary) will help a lot. But even then the university studies tell us that minimum field loss behind round balers is 10%. Most corn farmers heads would explode if they left 60-80 bushels of corn on the ground behind the combine (they harvest one time, we do it three or four). Most people can and will overlook this problem because they can. I work among corn farmers who can gross $1500 per acre here, so no loss is acceptable behind the baler.

For lower value grasses, and especially crop residue, the round baler will always be King.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

IAhaymakr said:


> I will agree with you on storage loss being very dependent on good management. But as the value of high quality forage goes up, any loss due to storage becomes not acceptable. Round bales will always be the cheapest way to get forage harvested and put into a (somewhat) transportable package. At some point though, the cost of shrink will always exceed the expense of a better (and higher cost) harvest method. Take a look at how they do it in Europe. Land cost there is so high that no amount of waste or shrink is acceptable, so most all baled forages are wrapped for maximum return from every acre. Our land costs here are heading in that direction.
> 
> One point that you miss here with the round baler is harvest loss. By the time your hay is fit enough to bale, harvest losses start to erode away at your bottom line. And again, good management (like baling at 4AM when necessary) will help a lot. But even then the university studies tell us that minimum field loss behind round balers is 10%. Most corn farmers heads would explode if they left 60-80 bushels of corn on the ground behind the combine (they harvest one time, we do it three or four). Most people can and will overlook this problem because they can. I work among corn farmers who can gross $1500 per acre here, so no loss is acceptable behind the baler.
> 
> For lower value grasses, and especially crop residue, the round baler will always be King.


Harvest Loss;

I think 10% harvest lost would be extreme.I think the newer rd balers have a lot less field loss then balers of 20 yrs ago.Yhe big thing is spacing between the belts.If managed correctly I wonder if there would be much if any difference in field loss between a rd baler and a lg sq baler?

Yep I've seen some guys raking alfalfa hay in middle of aftrnoon with leaves flying and baling 10% hay a few hrs later and you can't see the baler and I just cringe.Just baling sticks.

I've checked wieghts of bales at 12% and comparing at 18% side by side same length of windrow.Baling after some dew and gain 200 lbs per bale.So about 15% difference.I figure about 1/2 is H2O and 1/2 harvest loss.

I wonder on lg sq what harvest loss is at 12% compared to 18%?


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> I wonder if there would be much if any difference in field loss between a rd baler and a lg sq baler?


The key here is "if managed correctly". First cutting of 2011 (alfalfa) got much too dry for us, below 10% on the Harvest Tech. I baled 10 acres with the round baler at night, still much too dry. The leaf loss was alarming. A day and a half later did our own 75 acres with the big square, starting around noon. Leaf loss was there, but not a cause for panic. The bottom line, I think, is that round balers are less forgiving of low moisure conditions than a big square, and therefore require more managment.



> I wonder on lg sq what harvest loss is at 12% compared to 18%?


That depends on leaf moisture. I've seen leaf loss at 18%. All else being equal I don't think the loss would be a point or two more at 12%.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

Many university studies have been conducted that have taken the time to precisely measure harvest losses. They suspend a tarp under the baler to catch everything that falls off while running. While the difference in loss between round bales, small squares, and big squares decreases as conditions improve toward ideal, round balers always show the greatest loss. The big square balers have the least, and small squares are somewhere in between. At 12% or less moisture round balers have been shown to shell off over 30% of the crop (the best part of the crop, thus affecting quality as well). The question to answer here is, how much can you afford to lose before switching to a more expensive, but also more effective system? Other factors usually always help make these decisions, especially weather and availability of big square balers when you need them.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

IAhaymakr said:


> Many university studies have been conducted that have taken the time to precisely measure harvest losses. They suspend a tarp under the baler to catch everything that falls off while running. While the difference in loss between round bales, small squares, and big squares decreases as conditions improve toward ideal, round balers always show the greatest loss. The big square balers have the least, and small squares are somewhere in between. At 12% or less moisture round balers have been shown to shell off over 30% of the crop (the best part of the crop, thus affecting quality as well). The question to answer here is, how much can you afford to lose before switching to a more expensive, but also more effective system? Other factors usually always help make these decisions, especially weather and availability of big square balers when you need them.


Too many university test are lets just say "suspect"

Head loss I would think would be close to a constant between all balers. Not to say some heads aren't better than others, just that the same head on different style machines would produce the same loss at the same volume of crop going over it.

I would think a big sq baler has less loss than a small sq baler just for the fact that the surface area of the bale is less. Bale exterior losses in the chamber would be less Now take into account that a big sq will have way more capacity than a small sq and a smaller windrow will have more loss. That leads me to believe that a large sq also has less loss than a small sq because of the capacity to take in a larger windrow.

Round balers for the most part have an open bottom so when in lighter windrows the outside layer has a lot of exposure to "falling back out" of the machine which I think is where the main difference is comparing them to a sq baler.

I try to keep the head as full as possible but often it isn't enough to prevent the losses caused by under feeding a round baler


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

man of steel said:


> Too many university test are lets just say "suspect"
> 
> Head loss I would think would be close to a constant between all balers. Not to say some heads aren't better than others, just that the same head on different style machines would produce the same loss at the same volume of crop going over it.
> 
> ...


I agree.30% loss would be insane.They would have to be trying to make loss.

How to make 30% loss.Make a itty bitty windrow and make it bone dry and bale in middle of afternoon.Then drive real slow at high RPM,s

How not to.Make a large windrow and bale with a dew,the bottom of windrow will remain tougher as the top dries but the bottom of windrow is on the outside of bale as it is made there fore very little leaf lossMight have to bale in early morning but you do what you have to to save leaves.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

swmnhay said:


> Might have to bale in early morning but you do what you have to to save leaves.


Not around here. You guys out west have it easy.

Baling hay here at night happens never. Baling in the early morning starts at noon or after and gets dryer as the day goes till evening comes around and the hay goes from too dry to too wet in three bales worth of time.


----------



## hay rake (Dec 31, 2011)

thank you i was starting to think i was nuts. early baling is 10 in the morning and ends when the dew sets. if we baled at the numbers these guy are talking we would be out of business after one shipping. but i still wonder if you ask a farmer in iowa what is the moisture to store corn at he will say 15. if you ask a farmer in maine the same question you will get the same answer. so why is hay so much different. i would think that grass hay would be the same no matter where it is baled. When we bought our big baler i had the operators manual sent ahead of the baler and after reading it i was scared to death that i was going to have to learn to bale all over again. called the dealer and he asked how long i had been baling hay. i told him and he said "throw it out it's made for out west not for you". at the time i didn't understand but after my first summer i did. after reading these posts i see that it still can confuse me.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

man of steel said:


> Not around here. You guys out west have it easy.
> 
> Baling hay here at night happens never. Baling in the early morning starts at noon or after and gets dryer as the day goes till evening comes around and the hay goes from too dry to too wet in three bales worth of time.


I'm not realy out west.Kinda in the middle as far as hay baling goes.Every day is different here,you might have to bale at 4am or it maybe noon like the eastern guys.You just do what you gota do to make it right.So the women hate it,you can not make plans because you don't know when you will be baleing.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

swmnhay said:


> I'm not realy out west.Kinda in the middle as far as hay baling goes.Every day is different here,you might have to bale at 4am or it maybe noon like the eastern guys.You just do what you gota do to make it right.So the women hate it,you can not make plans because you don't know when you will be baleing.


our biggest thing is that humitity generator called Lake Michigan. It can be our greatest friend and our worst enemy. All in the same day


----------



## hay rake (Dec 31, 2011)

Try the atlantic ocean for a humidity generator.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

hay rake said:


> Try the atlantic ocean for a humidity generator.


Yup! But you get the salt for free preservative


----------



## mulberrygrovefamilyfarm (Feb 11, 2009)

Since everyone was talking about U studies, you can't throw them out there without mentioning the profitability studies when talking about round baler myths. I haven't seen any studies where a round baler isn't the most profitable setup when comparing all costs and income. Why? Relatively low purchase cost, low cost to operate and a good salable hay product mean profitability sooner. Large square, because the high initial cost and operating costs/maintenance are so high they don't pencil out unless a super premium price can be had for the large squared hay. And small square due to handling and labor make profitability difficult. Even with a perceived loss of leaf for a round baler, the net net is that on average a round baler setup makes the most profit. Not to say that there aren't guys that are killing the market with super high quality large squares pulling in premium profit that the round bale guy can't touch, or the same for the small square guy. But on average when real numbers are put to paper, the large round baler wins the profitability contest.


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

mulberrygrovefamilyfarm said:


> Since everyone was talking about U studies, you can't throw them out there without mentioning the profitability studies when talking about round baler myths. I haven't seen any studies where a round baler isn't the most profitable setup when comparing all costs and income. Why? Relatively low purchase cost, low cost to operate and a good salable hay product mean profitability sooner. Large square, because the high initial cost and operating costs/maintenance are so high they don't pencil out unless a super premium price can be had for the large squared hay. And small square due to handling and labor make profitability difficult. Even with a perceived loss of leaf for a round baler, the net net is that on average a round baler setup makes the most profit. Not to say that there aren't guys that are killing the market with super high quality large squares pulling in premium profit that the round bale guy can't touch, or the same for the small square guy. But on average when real numbers are put to paper, the large round baler wins the profitability contest.


That's not going to start an argument:eek:


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

swmnhay said:


> You just do what you gota do to make it right.So the women hate it,you can not make plans because you don't know when you will be baleing.


BOY, if that ain't the truth!!!!! My wife and I have the biggest stress arguments at baling time. "Well, how long is it going to take you? What time will you be finished? How should I plan lunch (supper)? You said you'd be done by 5! Supper's cold!"

But, around here, I'm always done baling by 7:30--when that dew comes down, the hay gets tough, end of day.

Ralph


----------



## man of steel (Feb 1, 2010)

rjmoses said:


> BOY, if that ain't the truth!!!!! "Well, how long is it going to take you? What time will you be finished? How should I plan lunch (supper)? You said you'd be done by 5! Supper's cold!"


"Patience" Seldom in a man, never in a woman!


----------



## mulberrygrovefamilyfarm (Feb 11, 2009)

man of steel said:


> That's not going to start an argument:eek:


Thought it might


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> I haven't seen any studies where a round baler isn't the most profitable setup when comparing all costs and income.


How about when you have to add the cost of hiring or buying the equipment to process round bales? I don't know of anyone that does not grind rounds before dumping them in their TMR mixer wagon. We use all the hay we produce ourselves, and without question squares are the most efficient way of handling, storing and feeding dairy quality hay. Now for bedding, the picture is somewhat different, depending on the facilities.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

rjmoses said:


> BOY, if that ain't the truth!!!!! My wife and I have the biggest stress arguments at baling time. "Well, how long is it going to take you? What time will you be finished? How should I plan lunch (supper)? You said you'd be done by 5! Supper's cold!"
> 
> Ralph


"Your supper is in the fridge and I ate without you"(grump grump)followed by silence.

Oh well thats what they make microwaves for.And now it will be nice QUITE evening.


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Gearclash said:


> How about when you have to add the cost of hiring or buying the equipment to process round bales? I don't know of anyone that does not grind rounds before dumping them in their TMR mixer wagon. We use all the hay we produce ourselves, and without question squares are the most efficient way of handling, storing and feeding dairy quality hay. Now for bedding, the picture is somewhat different, depending on the facilities.


Not sure of the brand name here, but I've seen several that is a TMR wagon and grinder in one unit, can be used strictly as one or the other or both. Guys also grind their round bales of straw up in em for bedding.



rjmoses said:


> BOY, if that ain't the truth!!!!! My wife and I have the biggest stress arguments at baling time. "Well, how long is it going to take you? What time will you be finished? How should I plan lunch (supper)? You said you'd be done by 5! Supper's cold!"
> 
> But, around here, I'm always done baling by 7:30--when that dew comes down, the hay gets tough, end of day.
> 
> Ralph





swmnhay said:


> "Your supper is in the fridge and I ate without you"(grump grump)followed by silence.
> 
> Oh well thats what they make microwaves for.And now it will be nice QUITE evening.


I got lucky I guess, if the wife knows I'm working, she doesn't say a word about it and my supper is automatically in the microwave. She spent a LOT of time on her uncles farm growing up and is used to the wonky time schedule.


----------



## hay wilson in TX (Jan 28, 2009)

*small square due to handling and labor make profitability difficult. Even with a perceived loss of leaf for a round baler, the net net is that on average a round baler setup makes the most profit.*

My *cost per ton of hay *in the barn with small squares, including the cost of the barn is equal to my cost to stacking RB's in the hay yard.

Most of that is due to using a pull type NH bale wagon to pickup and stack the hay in the barn.

RB's sell for a third less per ton than small squares. Most of that is due to having a different market for each bale type.

*university studies tell us that minimum field loss behind round balers is 10%*.

I do not have the capability to compare the losses in dry matter using any of the balers. This past year, 2011, for the first time I had my square baler and neighbor's Round Baler running in the same field at the same times. Baled on two separate occasions with the same results.
Both started at the same time, when the humidity at the windrow was 65%and both finished at the same time. At finish the humidity was down to 55%.

Visually where the RB ran there was a little more leaves on the ground than for the square baler. The last of the baling it was obvious to the most casual observer that more was being left behind the round baler. He uses net wrap and has very little leaf loss during tying than if he were using string to tie the bales. 
I sent off hay samples for each baler for the hay first baled and again for the last windrow. When baled at 65% RH the Round Bales tested 1% less in Crude Protein. Even more enlightening the last windrow baled at 55% RH the Round Bales tested a full 2% less for CP. 
The hay test showed on the square baler baled at 65% humidity was 0.5% higher CP than that baled at 55% RH. 
You might be interested to know this was coastal bermudagrass hay, which has a good tight thatch in the RB's and looses very little in feed value. I like to store my hay on a 4" layer of rocks both out in the yard and in the barn. RB's two years old sell as well as RB's less than a year old, but showing some bleaching.

I see little or no leaf loss from handling RB's to at the time of sale, while square bales shed leaves when loading in a customer's PU or tandem trailer. 
For square bales I see more leaf loss baling bermudagrass than I see baling alfalfa. The same goes for handling the hay in the barn and loading on the customers truck or trailer. 
HERE RB's of alfalfa do not store well at all out in the weather. RB's of wheat or oats, one of the sorghum nor alfalfa stores well exposed to the WX, HERE.

Note: 
This year we had only an hour to bale hay rather than the usual three hours we have during a more typical hay season. That was the reason for the round baling. That is starting when it is close to too damp and finishing before excessive leaf loss.

Normally I only round bale hay when the barn is too full for more square bales.

All my hay sold at normal prices not drought induced shortage pricing. All my hay goes to long time repeat customer, no the idiot down the road who habitually overstocks and ran out of grass last March.

I have one neighbor who will make money on his cattle again this year. He never feeds hay, though he does sell surplus forage as hay.
There is a large ranch manager near Fort Worth who still has good looking grass, but has purchased some hay just incase. First hay he has bought in 11 years.


----------



## FCF (Apr 23, 2010)

rjmoses said:


> BOY, if that ain't the truth!!!!! My wife and I have the biggest stress arguments at baling time. "Well, how long is it going to take you? What time will you be finished? How should I plan lunch (supper)? You said you'd be done by 5! Supper's cold!"
> 
> But, around here, I'm always done baling by 7:30--when that dew comes down, the hay gets tough, end of day.
> 
> Ralph


I shouldn't tell you guys this but my wife helps with the baling so there isn't the question of when do I make lunch (supper). We bale with a kicker and she leaves to start meals before the last loads for the day. They are stored inside and unloaded the next morning. She is the best help I have! Guess I am just lucky.


----------



## stickney farm (Jan 17, 2011)

Gearclash said:


> How about when you have to add the cost of hiring or buying the equipment to process round bales? I don't know of anyone that does not grind rounds before dumping them in their TMR mixer wagon. We use all the hay we produce ourselves, and without question squares are the most efficient way of handling, storing and feeding dairy quality hay. Now for bedding, the picture is somewhat different, depending on the facilities.


 You can also buy a baler with a crop cutter, cutting the hay down to 2.5 inches long or a bale slicer on the baler.


----------



## jdhayboy (Aug 20, 2010)

Oh good thread! 
Lets see... outside storage loss, 35%, yeah right! Maybe an inch or two on top and around the sides. The bottom of course is gonna draw moisture. I know people will disagree with this but I leave a space between our bales. Horse customers especially dont want to see any mold from seeping water down the bale. Note... I bale with a rakehand, sometimes its harder to make bales straight across top, which will cause water seepidge.
Moisture and bale weights .... if Im questioning if its ready, I will square up a few and pick them up. If they are heavy let it lay. I would willing to bet, hay at 18% would be at least 10% heavier. Just my theory, no proof. If im buying square bales and unloading with the grapple, with our 5625 JD. I can tell without picking a bale up by hand if the hay wasn't ready to bale. The tractor does not want to rare back the loader because its to heavy.
Wifes and summer time planning... its March and she wants know if we can go on a week vacation in August. Umm, not sure, the weather man cant tell me whats going on tomorrow much less for the next six months. She knows this now but at first it was hard to understand that I didn't know what I was gonna be doing tomorrow. We, as in all of you, know that you can go from having the next week off, to having it on real quick.
As haywilson always makes clear, this is in my own little corner of the world and is not always true for rest of Yall.


----------



## Nitram (Apr 2, 2011)

There is no way I could afford the machinery or the help or buildings to put up squares big or small to feed to my beef cows. Not to mention the time it would take to feed them after work hell its dark by the time i get home as it is. There are many aspects when evaluating efficiency of any process for me Time is my most valuable asset. The ability to roll them up and move them when "convenient" to rows. One thing I've noticed is that even the outside of the bale is eaten as long as its not moldy as in the bottom. If I were a BTO then I would adjust to my customers desires and increase profitability to the best of my ability. So tractor(s), mower conditioner, rake(s), baler, bale spear, trailer, truck, bale fork and round feeder(s). Bare essentials in my corner.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

We have a wet climate, we get 35-60% loss if we store rounds outside 1 season, not touching. 100% loss if you try to store a full year outside. We tried the round bales for a few years and sold the baler to go back to squares. Even stored inside on pallets the bottom rows are 50%+ losses. In the field the leaf loss was terrible, watching the pile of chaff at each tie stop was disheartening.

They were only 4x4's which skews the loss % higher but it didn't pencil out for us.


----------



## carcajou (Jan 28, 2011)

Fed some round bales this past spring that were put up 6 years ago. They were stacked tube style, rows 2 ft apart on high sloping ground. Good tight bales with lots of string. Where the grapple teeth went into the bales there was a 6 to 8 inch cylinder of waste hay, otherwise 6" to 8" spoilage on the bottom, maybe 3 inches on the top and sides. I,m not sure on the math but would doubt i had 20% spoilage overall. Any bales i have stacked mushroom style or pyramid style have been a wreck, never do that again. Love grapples to much to go completely back to bale spears but will definately use them stacking carryover hay from now on.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

carcajou said:


> Any bales i have stacked mushroom style or pyramid style have been a wreck, never do that again. .


It is pretty common here for people to stack mushroom style.I frown on it.








They basicaly sacrifice bottom bale and have a good bale on top.Some THINK the top bale protects the bottom one but in reality it runs around the top one and soaks into the bottom one.I make a windbreak around cattle yard with stalks mushroom style but use them up by sring when the rains come.

Nieghbor just told me had a few yr old bales stacked this way and bottom bale was total crap.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

Here in the South, most folks that pyramid stack outside tarp their rolls so rot is not an issue. But...we do not have accumulations of snow to deal with like our Northern friends receive. I just cant imagine going out to retrieve stacked bales out from under a tarp with 3+feet of snow on the tarp. The vast majority that stack outside uncovered here do not pyramid stack....like swmnhay says we just line up with a little air between.

Regards, Mike


----------



## RockmartGA (Jun 29, 2011)

carcajou said:


> Any bales i have stacked mushroom style...


Mushroom style. That's a new one on me. What is that?


----------



## Nitram (Apr 2, 2011)

Bottom one on end and one bale sitting ontop normal position. I'm guessing


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

Nitram said:


> Bottom one on end and one bale sitting ontop normal position. I'm guessing


Correct.

It makes a good windbreak 11' tall.But need to use them up by spring or bottom bales will turn to crap.If i have some left in spring i will take down and put them correct way with spacing all around or cornstalks will be crap.Stalks don't shed water well.


----------

