No attempt was made to appraise the financial gain or loss from 

 the use of hay drying equipment. Very little quantitative data were 

 obtained that can be used in such an analysis. The operators were 

 following conservative practices in the use of equipment new to 

 them. The hay hauled to the mow driers was usually pretty well 

 field cured. Thus, on one farm the handling of hay in the field, in- 

 cluding the length of time of field curing, was the same whether 

 hauled to the ordinary mow or to the mow drier. Hay which had been 

 rained on was usually completely field cured before putting in the 

 drier. Thus full advantage may not have been taken of the avail- 

 ability of the special equipment. 



On the other hand, there is some evidence of a qualitative nature 

 that the availability of the drier tended to speed up harvesting. While 

 the operators were cautious about putting very damp hay on the 

 drier, it is thought, based on observations, that some of them did begin 

 hauling a little earlier and at times continued operations a little 

 longer when faced with decisions as to the proper stage of drying 

 to store. Also, it is thought that the operators were more willing to 

 take risks in mowing down a larger acreage of hay at one time. 



The mow driers may not have altered the total man hours in- 

 volved in harvesting hay, but they may have enabled the operators 

 to use their available labor and equipment to greater advantage. 

 Thus they may have started haying at an earlier date, pushed haying 

 more continuously, and completed the harvest a few days earlier. 



In the 1951 season the study was limited to observations on two 

 large dairy farms. The two operators had made considerable progress 

 in adjusting to the new facilities. Both stored roughage in three ways : 

 as grass silage, as mow dried hay, and as field cured hay. Both were 

 equipped with field balers but not field choppers, and this should be 

 taken into account when appraising the differences in man hours 

 spent in harvesting grass silage as compared to hay. It should be noted 

 that the grass silage was made in the early season when hay drying 

 would be difficult. More labor was used per ton (dry hay equivalent), 

 but the grass was harvested in a slack period before the usual hay 

 haryest and was accomplished by available labor and equipment. 

 Both men thought they had sufficient volume of hay to warrant the 

 ownership of a baler. The important factor is that both operators 

 used their available labor, equipment, and facilities to harvest and 

 store their roughage with a combination of practices: grass silage, 

 mow dried hay, and field cured hay. One operator completed the har- 

 vest of his first crop of 157 tons by July 15. The other had harvested 

 63 percent of his first crop of 220 tons by that date. Descriptions of 

 the harvest on these two farms follow. 



Hay Harvest Management on Farm No. 1 



THIS FARM has 58 acres in heavy legume hay. In the 1951 season 

 57 acres were cut twice. The total yield, including 15>^ acres of the 

 first crop harvested as grass silage, was approximately 225 tons dry 

 hay equivalent or 3.9 tons per acre. The first crop yielded 157 tons 

 and the second crop 68 tons. Fifty-seven tons of the first crop and 

 41 tons of the second crop were mow cured. Fifty-five tons of the 



