27 



effect is more difficult to determine than the average cost per ton on a single 

 cut basis as experience with the two-cut method is limited. 



Cutting the meadows twice affects very little the total fixed costs of 

 , producing hay. The only fixed cost that might be increased is depreciation 

 of machinery The fact that machinery must cover 200 acres twice instead 

 of once will influence its useful life to some extent. However obsolesence 

 and aging of machinery is relatively more important in these areas because 

 wouM r eTe-e" lO^rc'e^t.^'^'^'"^^- '''' ''°''^''' ^^ ^ ^" -P-^^tL 



^r- a -r^rin^al-^- - -- ^ ^ ^ 



estimate They are about the same as under the single-cut harvest with 

 comparable yields per cutting. ^ narvest with 



It has been estimated that on a single-cut basis, it costs $12 48 to pro- 

 duce a ton of hay from a 200-acre meadow when production per acre averages 



under a two-Lt harvest^^g s^^em !s l^ZlZTnT^ff^^^^^n:: T 



pTdurofpr a^cTeTy^rffonsr ''' '"''' "'^ '--"' "-^Lst t^reTs^ 



reduced. The increase VjrZ^r °'" '"°"'' " *^ '=°^' P^'' '°" i« '<> be 



. xiie increase in production necessary to comnensaf^ fr^r> fi,« • 



cost of an additional cutting varies from 0. 34 ton per X when ^L "^"^^^^ 

 production is 1 50 tons ner =,,-,.» t„ n en I P "®" "^® single-cut 



auction is 2. 40 tons per acre S. l^' '" '°" ^^ "^''^ "'^«^" "^^ ^-§1—' P™- 



HAY COST ANALYSIS 



of prTducinL hav T jVn^ ' °' management practices on the cost 



because, if ^ T nianagement practices are not treated separately 



wo or morrof ;r ^' .'"" '°" ^"^ °' ^'"^" ^""^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ combining'^ 

 .wo or more of the practices under consideration. For simplicity, hays with 



