The most interesting work are the results that are found by manufactures of inoculants of other peoples products, quite an eye opener.Remember all trail work is sponsored I trust very little these days
Didn't you say earlier that you only had 1 ton of waste in a 1000? Now you're saying that waste is on the top shoulders so doubt 1 ton of waste there will pay for a lot of additive.What are our additives doing? Promotion of a quick fermentation by either adding bacteria or by adding products that will encourage the bacteria already there? If you have the ideal conditions - good quality grass with high sugars and low contamination then why use an additive? (or so the argument goes). Now spend some time and money to completely exclude any air ingress that might counteract the above. What more are we paying for in an additive?
Now back to my earlier point - waste is going to be on surface and shoulders so could I reasonably reduce my costs by just adding additive to these areas of the clamp?
Didn't you say earlier that you only had 1 ton of waste in a 1000? Now you're saying that waste is on the top shoulders so doubt 1 ton of waste there will pay for a lot of additive.
Isn't being a farmer also include being a salesman at some point?Fancy I might trust an independent telling me I dont need to buy something than a sales rep telling me I do
There is NO way an inoculant is going to increase the ME or protein for that matter of the ensiled grass silage not even if it's sprinkled with fairy dust. The best you can hope for is for the inoculant to keep the quality of the grass as close to that that was cut. You can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear!I do believe additive does a good job, there's some good and bad ones out there. My ideal situation is if you already have a good 70 D Value silage for example but the additive helps convert it to say a 72 D Value silage. Over a winter that is a lot of milk extra from forage. Plus less waste and better DM intake because the forage hasn't warmed up the same as it would untreated.
That's blumin good going, I would say this warm back end would test any Additive on the market.No, I said less than a ton of waste on that 100o t clamp - I was suggesting that if we stopped using additive then the most likely area that we would perhaps get waste was the top and shoulders
I disagree, I believe if you stop the secondry fermentation you arnt going to loose the energy hence getting more energy than you might have done if you didn't use an additive.There is NO way an inoculant is going to increase the ME or protein for that matter of the ensiled grass silage not even if it's sprinkled with fairy dust. The best you can hope for is for the inoculant to keep the quality of the grass as close to that that was cut. You can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear!
Always strikes me strange that anything but dairy animals don't deserve good quality forage . If your going to feed your maize over winter I wouldn't bother treating it.We don't at home but I'm starting to think it might be worthwhile using some on the maize, get bugger all waste on the silage usually so I can't really see much point especially as its not dairy cow silage.
I think you may have your wording wrong, you are right in that you will help prevent the lose of energy, so for example keeping a ME as close as possible to the cut grass but your never going to increase the initial figure (it's impossible).I disagree, I believe if you stop the secondry fermentation you arnt going to loose the energy hence getting more energy than you might have done if you didn't use an additive.
Let's just say it's dear one so cutting back is attractive, maize was late nov harvest good yield but starch is well down as is the DM total ME is ok it looks better in the clamp than expectedWhich additive do you use? How was your maize this year?
@scholland did such a trial this past season once he's recovered from hogmanay he may give us his thought's .That's what got me thinking, is it a real gain ?you can get abit of kit that measures the sugar in grass and make a judgment. I wish I had a second small clamp to try it out
What would be "dear"?Let's just say it's dear one so cutting back is attractive, maize was late nov harvest good yield but starch is well down as is the DM total ME is ok it looks better in the clamp than expected
How much is dear?Let's just say it's dear one so cutting back is attractive, maize was late nov harvest good yield but starch is well down as is the DM total ME is ok it looks better in the clamp than expected
We make good quality but there's no need to feed rocket fuel to dry suckler cows it's a job to stop them getting fat as it is. Especially heifers.Always strikes me strange that anything but dairy animals don't deserve good quality forage . If your going to feed your maize over winter I wouldn't bother treating it.
So at the moment you have virtually no waste. How many tons of waste silage would equal your spend on additive? And that's without any additional losses in the quality of your silage from not using an additive.No, I said less than a ton of waste on that 100o t clamp - I was suggesting that if we stopped using additive then the most likely area that we would perhaps get waste was the top and shoulders
When you first started using an inoculant did you see an increase in voluntary intake, I've had many a comment over the years by new users that they ran out of silage quicker than in previous years.So at the moment you have virtually no waste. How many tons of waste silage would equal your spend on additive? And that's without any additional losses in the quality of your silage from not using an additive.
It's easy to see the amount we spend on additive, not so easy to see any gains we get from using it or losses from not using it.