Want to help me read my hay results?

[StaceyA]

@JB @jvanrens, is it safe to say that this is far below average for Ontario grown hay sampled in January?

I don’t understand it, I got sample # 2 from an old farming family who really knows what they’re doing. Like, 4th or 5th generation, mega money from crop farming. Mostly hay.

I wonder if I should re-sample, the surprise coming from this forum makes me wonder if perhaps my initial sample(s) were an outlier.

Anyways, just that last question then I’ll let this topic die I’m geeking out about it over here though

[Texarkana]

My experience feeding prairie grass in the past:

This kind of hay analysis is pretty typical.

It was very easy to compensate for with a few pounds of alfalfa cubes or pellets.

[foggybok]

@JB

So that’s extra weird that it was a “good growing season”

I would still be really curious to see how past years’ cuttings stack up. I just can’t believe that a one-time poor fertilization would cause these numbers from these (alleged) types of forages

My upper midwest drought season not fertilized late cutting orchard/alfalfa (with admittedly less O/A than I planned) had way better numbers than this. I was looking for the analysis, but I can’t find it right now, but as I recall the lowest RFV was 115. The protein levels were between 12 and 14 % and NSC was ~ 11. Without having fertilized, I did get a much lower yield than previously, but the quality didn’t drop that much. The numbers from the OP more closely match what I’ve seen in unmanaged fields of native grasses in western WA that can’t . be cut until July due to weather. It is a mystery… They must have really bad soil.

Would be interesting to see if all their local hay was like this.

Edited to add

Sample taken on hay from previous season (during our big drought)

First cutting
CP 16.3
DE 1.04
NSC 6.3

And the other cutting were better)

I must have a good field, my NSC never got above 11 and my protein never dropped below 14%. It is mostly grass (< 20% alfalfa at this point) and I have not been good about fertilizing. I guess that’s why farmers love the upper midwest!

[lenapesadie]

I live in an area where locally grown hay is “poor” like these samples. Some farmers do better than others. My horses have always gotten some alfalfa or comparable legume plus either a full portion of fortified grain, VMS, or RB. Anecdote =/= data but my horses seem just fine. If the horses like the “poor” locally grown hay, it’s safe to feed, it’s affordable and better for the environment because it hasn’t been trucked across the continent … I’m satisfied with feeding this way.

[jvanrens]

@JB

So that’s extra weird that it was a “good growing season”

I would still be really curious to see how past years’ cuttings stack up. I just can’t believe that a one-time poor fertilization would cause these numbers from these (alleged) types of forages.

It was an excellent growing season for the first time in a few years. At least in my part of the province. I can’t speak for the OPs part, it’s about 4 hours drive from me.

I never said it was a one-time poor fertilization. Some hay farmers still feel you don’t want too high nutrition hay for horses, the suppliers of this hay maybe two of them.

[jvanrens]

A sample tested in January really shouldn’t test much lower than if it was done after harvesting.

Maybe if you can grab some different samples, maybe you got some off samples, like bales from an edge of a field where the fertilizer wasn’t applied at the needed rate? I feel like that’s a stretch, but often farmers don’t fertilize to the edge of their fields.

[JB]

@StaceyA

@JB @jvanrens, is it safe to say that this is far below average for Ontario grown hay sampled in January?

I have no idea what’s typical for there, all I know is this is pretty low quality hay. It is unusable? No, but you’d need to do a little leg work (with the link I provided) to see how the whole current diet stacks up, and if it falls short of requirements, looking at other options to plug in to see how that improves things.

@StaceyA

I wonder if I should re-sample, the surprise coming from this forum makes me wonder if perhaps my initial sample(s) were an outlier.

The fact that 2 samples came back with similar results, from the same growing area, suggests it’s the growing situation, not a sampling issue

@jvanrens

I never said it was a one-time poor fertilization.

Right! Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply you said that. I don’t know anything about how those fields were taken care of in the past, only that I can’t imagine just slacking off 1 time would cause this, meaning, this is likely a function of that specific area rather than field management.

@jvanrens

A sample tested in January really shouldn’t test much lower than if it was done after harvesting.

Right (for the benefit of the OP) Once it’s been hay for a few weeks, what you have is what you have for a couple years. That’s why it’s best to sample after a few weeks, especially from the sugar/starch perspective as those are the ones most likely to keep going down a little

[Small_Change]

@jvanrens

Ontario is nowhere near the mid-west, and while there were a couple of dry weeks, droughts weren’t a problem anywhere in the province that I can recall, though the OP can correct me if I’m wrong. The farm owner of the farm I kept my dearly departed boy at was almost cursing the amount of hay he took off this year, he has hundreds of round bales stacked around the place. After the previous years rotten hay season, people are almost giving hay away this year.

We had a super first cut here in Southern Ontario, and people got very excited, assuming that hay prices would plummet. Then second cut barely happened, and prices went higher… We brought in 2200 bales from first cut, and 260 from second, off the same fields. It was heart breaking. We have enough to feed our own, but none of the surplus we usually sell. Locally, first cut timing was wet, and many people left hay standing until it was overmature as they missed the few windows we had to get it cut and dried. Then we literally had NO rain the rest of the summer - people were being begged to not water their lawns, etc.

[jvanrens]

That is hard! We were lucky around eastern Ontario that we got enough rain for second cut to come up well. The dairy farmers got at least 4 cuts off their alfalfa, but they weren’t baling it.

[Small_Change]

Yeah, the guys taking haylage off did well! Alfalfa grew back decently, even when those of us with grass hay were staring at crispy, empty fields. I did hear of people watering their alfalfa though, and even one watering soybeans, which is completely unheard of in our area.

[goodhors]

Some things come to mind, reading the remarks. For the OP, did you use a bale coring tool for your samples? Did you sample 20-30 bales from various locations in bale storage, mix results, to send in as the sample? This is the best way to get a good hay sample tor testing. Alternatively “hand grabs” from middle of 20-30 bales, mixed together, is a good way to make a sample for analysis. I do not have a hay bale core tool, so went with the hand grab method. Them had to run my hay handfuls thru the blender to reduce volume so it would fit in an envelope. But mixing the chopped pieces did give me a good representative sample! I do not think samples from a few bales (10 or less) is enough for a good sample for analyzing.

Fertilizing is tricky. Tamara from Tennessee wrote a lot of REALLY GOOD posts on hay in the past. They were “extreme” hay farmers, held thing to a very high standard in hay production. They soil sampled , applying fertilizer as needed by test. Then tested soil after cutting, fertilized AGAIN. This was all hayfields, after every cutting. They had hay analysis for each cut of hay, from every field, for the buying customer to to see.

I learned a great deal from her sharing of information. One of which was that the field loses nutrients with hay cutting and removal. This was why fertilizing is so important, you have to put nutrients back in the soil to get nutritious hay.

We had terrible ground when we purchased the land. Soil test was the WORST fertilizer guy had ever seen, no nutrients to speak of! All the minerals were black. So we worked up the soil, planted seed and fertilized. We spread fertilizer in small quantities, several times, to finish with the huge total needed as a start. Doing the big amount would have been too much for the land to absorb at once, wasting the fertilizer and money it cost.

Year 2, we again spread out fertilizer applications, just mowed the grass to encourage root growth. Third year, third soil test, numbers for minerals, nutrients were up where they needed to be, so we made hay that year, with good hay test results. Since then, we only need to apply fertilizer once yearly to have good soil test results and good hay test results.

We had terrific spring rains this year, could not cut until later in June. Tall and thick, though a bit mature. Got 1150 off 10 acres. Then almost no rain/no growth until about mid August. Second cutting was Labor Day weekend, trying to get length on plants. We got about 50 bales off those same acres. North and south of us, 15-20 miles, got rain, 2nd and 3rd cutting of decent quantities of hay.

Soil sample is taken from at least 6-8 locations of the field, spade deep. Plant roots go deep, that is the deep dirt that feeds plants, not the top layer of soil. Dirt is dried, all samples mixed well, then a couple handfuls taken or sent in for testing. If field is big, maybe test 2-3 samples of the 6-8 shovels full of dirt. This is to see if field areas vary much in fertilizer needs.

So my point is that soil testing, regular (yearly) application of fertilizer helps a lot MOST of the time for good growth, good quantity of nutritious production. Not fertilizing, not soil testing, both regularly, means less nutrition in analysis results. Yes a field will still grow grass to harvest, just won’t be as good as it could have been. You cannot tell if hay is nutritious by looking!! Color, feeling hay or by quantity or lack of dust in hay, is not really a good indicator!! You get dust tedding, raking and baling the hay. We learned this buying beautiful hay of good color, soft, no dust and almost zero nutrients! We did not know nearly as much as we THOUGHT we did.

So lack of nutrients in both hay samples could be from a poor sample. Or maybe poor with no fertilizing, lack of soil testing before fertilizing. Lots of reasons for poor test numbers. Hay testing tells what hay lacks in nutrients, that you can supplement to horse. You hate paying for poor hay, but better than no hay. If this hay is all you can find, then that is what you buy until another source of hay is found. Horse won’t die eating it, just more work for you adding supplements.