Forage Harvester System of Making Silage or Hay

New Zealand Journal of Agriculture, Volume 99, Issue 5, 16 November 1959, Page 409

Forage Harvester System of Making Silage or Hay

By

J. L. DOUTRE,

Machinery Instructor, Auckland and

B. A. GUNNING,

Farm Advisory Officer, Matamata, both of Department of Agriculture

THE forage harvester system of making silage or even hay from pastures promises some distinct advantages in actual handling and in provision of larger amounts of better supplementary feed. However, efficient operation of the system depends as much on adapting farm management practices as on the availability now of cheap forage harvesters. This article explains what the harvesting system entails on both one-man and larger units and the resulting overall advantages in the running of a property.

TVURING recent years a marked trend toward cutting increased areas of pasture for silage has been made possible by improvements in farm mechanisation. For some years

the buckrake has held the position of silage making implement “par excellence”, but it now threatens to be replaced by new, cheap forage harvesters, which are creating intense interest. The adoption of the forage harvester system allowsindeed necessitatesimprovements in farm management.

When the forage harvester is used it is possible to harvest a large area of immature crop instead of cutting a few paddocks of heavy, mature, and often stalky growth. This is desirable, firstly because the forage harvester deals better with light crops, and secondly because immature crops produce better silage and hay and cause less pasture deterioration. On some farms where a forage harvester is used no paddocks at all are closed for harvesting as silage; instead, all pastures which get beyond control by stock are topped. Instead of say 20 per cent of the farm area being cut for silage, the whole farm may be topped two or more times. Advantages With this system pastures are always well controlled and stock thrive. No pasture gets away too far, so that there is no undue opening up of the sward, smothering of clovers, or depletion of soil fertility. Aftermath production is better. No pasture is allowed to get stalky, with the result that the herbage conserved is leafy and capable of mak-

ing first-class hay and silage. The material harvested is a true surplus and there is no risk that large paddocks closed in a mood of optimism will have to be reopened when they are too mature for grazing,. Very close subdivision fencing is therefore to that extent unnecessary, as is topping for topping’s sake. The waste represented by toppings in a favourable season is often surprising. For example, on one farm near Matamata pastures are normally topped in December with the hay mower after silage harvesting is completed. Last season, a year of prolific pasture growth, a forage harvester was used to remove the toppings, which were placed in a pit as silage. One hundred l|-ton trailer loads of green material were ensiled. It was calculated that the 150 tons of green material would produce 125 tons of cured silage—enough to feed 40 lb per day per cow for five weeks to the 70-cow herd. When the forage harvester is used to advantage production from the dairy herd during spring can reasonably be expected to be higher. Normally, grazing during spring is dictated by two conflicting requirements; the herd will produce better if allowed free range over a relatively large area, but under such extensive grazing “clumpiness” will appear in the pastures, and further, insufficient areas will be available for the making of silage and hay. Consequently, when harvesting with conventional equipment it is necessary to confine the herd to some degree,

either with the electric fence or with close permanent subdivision. When a forage harvester is used, however, the herd can range more freely and any clumpiness can be removed by harvesting it. The labour requirement for electric fencing or the capital cost of intensive permanent subdivision can thus be avoided. ... .

When freer range is given the herd pastures may be grazed at a taller growth stage. Under very restricted grazing it is necessary to keep the pastures in a short, palatable growth stage so that high intake is maintained. On leniently grazed pastures, however, the total herbage output is much higher, and to the extent that a forage

harvester makes lenient grazing possible, it also contributes to total herbage production. In leniently grazed pastures also the clovers seldom become aggressive, with the result that bloat is less prevalent. Troublesome pasture weeds become less of a nuisance with a harvesting system which involves topping of large areas once or more often during spring and summer. Unpalatable weeds may be turned into palatable silage, and though the feed value of this may not be high, at least the weeds are prevented from reseeding and most of the seed that is harvested will be destroyed in the ensiling process. In brief, by the alteration of farm management practices the forage harvester could be made to replace conventional equipment such as buckrake and mower with little or no extra capital cost and could be operated with less labour. The change could make increased production possible by allowing or even necessitating improved management. However, to make the changeover worth while it is necessary to adopt the forage harvester as an integral part of a system of farming, not just as an alternative to the buckrake. The feasibility of adoption of the system depends also on the availability of relatively cheap, one-man forage harvester units for use by individual farmers or of dearer, two- or threeman units, with a correspondingly higher output, mainly for contract work. Silage Making ’ The relative merits of silage and hay are often debated but, though both have their place, most farmers agree that silage is the more useful material. The increasing popularity of silage is certainly due in large part to the fact that it has a greater range of usefulness: For dairy cows it can be used in early spring to supplement autumnsaved pasture; in late spring to counteract an outbreak of bloat; in late summer for maintaining milk production; and in winter as a maintenance ration. Silage is cut early, thereby encouraging a greater production of pasture aftermath than after late-cut hay, and there is less damage to pastures through opening up of the sward. Silage making can also be proceeded with without risk from the weather. The factor which detracts from the attractiveness of silage making, however, is the high labour requirement, both for harvesting and for feeding out. Machinery can be used to replace labour, the use of the forage harvester type of machine being the extreme in mechanisation. All forage harvesters chop and lacerate the material they harvest,

which assists in obtaining better compaction of the material. Air is excluded and overheating, which destroys protein and carbohydrate, is eliminated. The bleeding of grass leaves also perhaps assists in the production of a desirable type of silage; the forage harvester seems to make better silage than can usually be made with other implements. During observations on a number of properties it has been uncommon to see poor silage produced by a forage harvester. Because of the compaction produced in the mass good silage can be produced late in the season from material which is otherwise considered too dry to pack sufficiently to prevent excessive heating. The compaction extends right to the top of the stack or clamp, so that the commonly observed dark, overheated zone on tops of stacks seldom occurs on those built with a forage harvester. The compaction of the top layers produces a seal on top which gives considerable protection from the weather. Storage of the silage either in pits or trenches or in above-ground clamps is possible, though the latter are more laborious to build with the short chopped material and require either hydraulically operated high-tip trailers or curtain elevator unloaders which will operate even when going down the wedge slope. Wooden or more permanent, concrete bunker sides reduce waste and make filling and compacting safer and much easier. Provision of a concrete floor and feeding apron permits self-feeding, which is becoming increasingly popular. The forage harvester system,

since it places heavy loads on very mobile trailers, facilitates transport of material to such permanent sites. Chopped material is easily extracted from the feeding face by stock and little is wasted on the ground. There is no need for cutting with a knife, as chopped material is easily forked for feeding out in the orthodox way or for the loading of trailers with front-end loaders or rear-mounted silage forks. Haymaking Harvesting with the forage harvester is not confined to the saving of silage. Forage harvesters have been used successfully for cutting hay crops, which are baled the same day as cutting or the day after. The forage harvester cuts, bruises, lacerates, and aerates the material while spreading it like a carpet on the sward. Drying is accelerated so that in suitable weather light crops cut in the morning have been baled the following afternoon. The quicker hay is dried the greater is the saving of its food value, and the quality of the hay produced by the forage harvester appears extremely high. Hay produced by this method probably has a food value equal or superior to that of silage and hence would be very useful. Since the hay may be dried in 24 hours, it is possible to harvest at any time when the weather seems fairly certain to remain fine for 24 to 36 hours. Thus haymaking could be carried out in November, when the weather is normally considered to be too unreliable, by the same machine

that makes silage making in January also attractive. Some forage harvesters cannot compete with the hay mower for speed in a heavy crop. In light crops forage harvester speed compares favourably with that of the hay mower and it is recommended that light crops be harvested. The time-consuming sharpening of knives that slows up mowing has been mostly eliminated in the forage harvester, and because of this and less other maintenance the ultimate speed of harvesting can even exceed that of the mower. . A difficulty where hay is harvested as described may be arranging for contract baling. Forage Harvester Development The forage harvester has developed in the past four years from a chopper that picked up windrowed material from a mower and rake to the present flail-type, which does all these operations at once. It cuts, chops, elevates, and loads the material into a following or side-fitted trailer or truck. When the trailer has been filled it can be replaced by another and the forage harvester continues to work as the first trailer is unloaded by another operator. With one-man operation the entire unit is taken to the trench ,or pit and unloaded, either by backing up the unit to the side or taking it through the trench or over a doubleended clamp. The silo site should be planned carefully to reduce to the minimum possible the distance of haul from paddock to silo. The speed with which silage is handled leads to greater overall efficiency in silage making. Tractor Power Requirements Fully effective use can be made of power available only when the tractor is used with a suitably matched forage harvester. Overloading a small tractor

soon leads to overheating, power failure,and costly repairs. However, purchase of a bigger tractor to operate a 5 ft or larger forage harvester would be uneconomic on a small farm unless contract work is to be done also. To operate a large forage harvester and pull a' fully laden trailer over a farm requires about 7 h.p. per foot of cutting width. More power would be needed for work on rolling country or hills or: with a heavy trailer. It is important either to have a tractor of sufficient power for forage harvesting or to buy a forage harvester within the limits of the tractor’s power; otherwise it is better to rely on a contractor if a change to forage harvesting is to be made. Tractors with live power take-off and a reasonable selection of gears have distinct advantages. Farmers should be fully aware of the power requirements before launching into the new system. The Forage Harvester The present forage chopper replaces the mower, the side rake, and usually the buckrake. It uses a rotary type cutter fitted with pendant knives. Centrifugal force and wind action similar to that of a fan are used to cut and elevate the material up through the delivery chute into a following trailer. There are few moving parts and little wear, except to the linkage of the knives. The knife blades can be sharpened, but seldom are. Balance is most important; when the cutter rotor is turning at 1,450 to 1,700 revolutions per minute one ounce out of balance can cause severe vibration with damage to bearings and framework. The rotor should be in balance when revolving at any speed. Farmer engineering projects are often out of balance and can be dangerous. If a

knife is bent or lost, it should be replaced immediately to maintain balance. Forage Harvester Trailers Probably as important as any other feature of the system is a serviceable trailer which can be readily adapted to hauling silage as well as to fulfil its other purposes on the farm. It must be versatile to justify its cost. Usually the most versatile trailer is a hydraulic-tip type having a tipping angle of 65 degrees or more so that it will tip when going down hill through a trench. Such a trailer should bear heavily on the tractor with the wheels well to the back. If further support is required, a small wheel can be adapted to swivel under the tongue. A cage framework that is readily removed from the deck is desirable. This should be wider at the back than at the front so that material will drop clear of the sides as soon as the load begins to move. Forage harvester trailers should have two gates at the back which can be quickly swung round the sides out of the way so as not to interfere with any tipping operations. Such a trailer has many uses on the farm and can be readily adapted to others, thereby reducing the cost chargeable to silage making. Some trailers have drawbar tongues at front and rear with the wheels near the centre of the load when the trailer is full. This prevents the loaded trailer lifting the forage harvester up. When the trailer has been filled a second tractor is hooked on to the rear hitch to take the trailer to the pit. The trailer is wider at the front so that the load tips easily when the trailer is drawn in the reverse direction when taken over by the second tractor. A cable and snatch block may be fitted to pull the empty trailer into place.

This type of unloading restricts the trailers to one purpose and would therefore ■ not be suitable on a small farm, The cost of curtains and transmission gear would also increase the annual cost of this type. Such trailers are suitable for contractors or farmers making a large amount of silage. Considerable interest is also being taken in hopper-type trailers which Can be ! filled from the top or front. They are of steel and a trip line disengages a lock and allows the material to fall out the back. When the trailer is empty the gate falls back into position, thereby saving the tractor operator from dismounting. A trailer of this type can be made more versatile by having a tray which replaces the hopper and makes a wide, low, flat farm trailer. '.. For. one-man operation on the. average small dairy farm a small to medium-sized tractor is suitable for operating a forage harvester 3 to 4 ft wide. Under these circumstances a system employing one trailer would be most economical. One operator would cut and: transport the material to the trench or pit, dump it,. and then use the tractor alone for consolidating. . Overseas studies suggest that the most efficient system is to: 1. Use one tractor and forage harvester-trailer unit to cut and transport to the pit. 2. Use another tractor fitted with a buckrake or front-end loader to fill the trench, pit, or. bunker and consolidate it in a non-stop operation. No time is then lost in connecting or unhooking trailers. System of Operating Probably, no other crop on the farm lends itself to mechanisation as well as : does grass for silage. Mechanisation is successful only when it fits into the farming pattern; it must conform to a desirable system in which no effort is wasted or time is lost. The forage harvester has ushered in a completely new system of operation.

Regardless of the method of operating with a forage harvester considerable planning ,is essential. Farmers considering adoption of the new system should be prepared to spread their costs to cover all aspects of machinery and facilities to ensure efficient conservation. The purchase of a forage harvester is only the beginning; if better silage is to be made, it must also be better conserved, and time and money will have to be spent to provide better facilities from paddock to pit and from pit to livestock. The small dairy farmer will probably adopt the one-man system of operation whereby he does not have to unhook the forage harvester from the tractor or trailer during cutting and unloading. The material is cut and hauled to a site nearby or, if possible, unloaded directly into the pit or trench. Later, when further consolidation is necessary, he may have to unhook the tractor and. use it for compacting. A buckrake may have to be used to push the material into place or fill holes. Two hours’ cutting, one hour’s cleaning up, and a repeat of this process may well be the method adopted. Neighbouring farmers may choose to work as a team or a farmer may hire a man to assist. On larger holdings use of two tractors and two : trailers with rapid hitch and unhitch linkage would probably be the best arrangement Forage ; harvesting lends . itself very well to contracting, as it is little affected by the weather. Contractors in the Auckland district have begun harvesting in October and continued until mid March. Some use powered forage harvesters which they tow by trucks. Storage Facilities Improved storage facilities are a real need in efficient silage making. It is not uncommon to see up to 40 per cent of the material wasted by poor conservation. On flat country where open clamps have been usual many

farmers are now turning to walled silos, because of the ease with which material can be ensiled and because there is little waste at the sides due to oxidation of conserved material.

When the material is to be stored until late winter or for another year covering is most important to conserve the material on top and at the sides. In the Auckland Province sawdust has been found the most useful cover.

Several types of silos can easily be built with available farm labour. Where ground is stable, drainage is good, and rolling country can be taken advantage of, the trench is the easiest and cheapest. In unstable ground trenches must have concrete sides and hard bottom. On flat ground the bunker type can be readily constructed at a reasonable cost. Tower silos are not suitable, mainly because they are expensive to build and to fill and empty because of the special machinery needed.

Disease Control Appointment

DR S. JAMIESON, who has been appointed to the new position of Chief Advisory Officer (Infectious Diseases Control) in the Department of Agriculture. He was Senior Lecturer in Agricultural Bacteriology, University of Aberdeen, before joining the New Zealand Department of Agriculture in 1952 as Veterinarian, Wanganui. Dr Jamieson was appointed Supervisor of Tuberculin Testing in 1956.

During the outbreak of mucosal disease early this year Dr Jamieson was in charge of the special control organisation established in the Wairarapa and later at Waipukurau. In the United Kingdom he had wide experience in diagnosis and control of animal diseases and did a considerable amount of research.

Dr Jamieson is a Doctor of Philosophy (University of Aberdeen), a Member of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, and holds a Diploma in Veterinary State Medicine.