{"id":881,"date":"2026-05-15T07:59:38","date_gmt":"2026-05-15T07:59:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/?p=881"},"modified":"2026-05-15T07:59:38","modified_gmt":"2026-05-15T07:59:38","slug":"hay-making-workflow-from-cutting-to-bale-storage-in-one-system","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/hay-making-workflow-from-cutting-to-bale-storage-in-one-system\/","title":{"rendered":"\u5e72\u3057\u8349\u88fd\u9020\u30ef\u30fc\u30af\u30d5\u30ed\u30fc\uff1a\u5208\u308a\u53d6\u308a\u304b\u3089\u30d9\u30fc\u30eb\u4fdd\u7ba1\u307e\u3067\u3092\u4e00\u3064\u306e\u30b7\u30b9\u30c6\u30e0\u3067\u5b9f\u73fe"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
<\/div>\n
Hay Production Systems Guide<\/span><\/p>\n

\u5e72\u3057\u8349\u88fd\u9020\u30ef\u30fc\u30af\u30d5\u30ed\u30fc\uff1a\u5208\u308a\u53d6\u308a\u304b\u3089\u30d9\u30fc\u30eb\u4fdd\u7ba1\u307e\u3067\u3092\u4e00\u3064\u306e\u30b7\u30b9\u30c6\u30e0\u3067\u5b9f\u73fe<\/h1>\n

Most hay quality problems are not caused by a single bad decision \u2014 they are caused by a sequence of small delays and missed windows that compound across the cutting-to-baling cycle. Understanding the entire workflow as a connected system, with specific decision points at each stage, lets you identify which step in your operation is responsible for the quality gap between what your crop could produce and what actually reaches the hay buyer or the bunk.<\/p>\n

See Full Workflow<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The Hay Making System: Five Stages, Each With a Decision Point<\/h2>\n

Hay making is not a sequence of independent operations \u2014 it is a system in which the quality entering each stage is the ceiling on the quality exiting it. Hay that was cut at 35% protein-stage alfalfa cannot be improved by superior raking technique. Hay that dried perfectly to 14% moisture cannot recover quality lost to a 3-hour rain event during curing. Each stage has one primary decision point that determines whether quality is preserved or degraded, and understanding those decision points is more valuable than any single piece of equipment upgrade.<\/p>\n

The five stages are: (1) cutting and conditioning, where crop quality is locked in; (2) field drying and tedding, where moisture is reduced to baling range; (3) raking, where windrow characteristics are set for baling efficiency; (4) baling, where moisture is confirmed and density is set; and (5) storage, where the quality you baled is either preserved or lost. Each stage has a timing requirement and a moisture or condition threshold that must be met before advancing to the next.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\u2702\ufe0f<\/div>\n
1. Cut & Condition<\/div>\n
Quality locked here<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\ud83c\udf2c\ufe0f<\/div>\n
2. Dry & Ted<\/div>\n
Moisture to target<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\ud83d\udd04<\/div>\n
3. Rake<\/div>\n
Windrow formation<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\ud83c\udf3e<\/div>\n
4. Bale<\/div>\n
Density & moisture<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\ud83c\udfd7\ufe0f<\/div>\n
5. Store<\/div>\n
Preserve quality<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Stage 1: Cutting and Conditioning \u2014 Where Quality Is Determined<\/h2>\n

The quality ceiling for the entire cutting is set at the moment the mower blade contacts the crop. Once cut, quality can only be preserved \u2014 never improved. Two variables at this stage determine the starting quality: cutting stage (plant maturity at harvest) and conditioning intensity (how aggressively the conditioner breaks stem cuticle to accelerate drying). Both must be optimized together, because a crop cut at optimal maturity but dried too slowly still loses quality to continued respiration in the swath.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
Alfalfa Cutting Timing Decision<\/div>\n

The quality-vs-yield trade-off in alfalfa peaks at first bloom (10% bloom): maximum yield is achieved by waiting until mid-bloom (50%), but RFV drops 8\u201312 points per day from first bloom to 50% bloom. For dairy or export markets requiring RFV 160+, cutting at bud-to-first-bloom (0\u201310%) is mandatory \u2014 there is no harvesting technique that recovers RFV lost by cutting late.<\/p>\n

Decision point: scout for bloom stage 2\u20133 days before anticipated cutting. Do not schedule cutting on a calendar date \u2014 schedule on crop condition.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Conditioning Intensity Setting<\/div>\n

Conditioning intensity (roll gap for roller conditioners, flail aggressiveness for flail types) directly controls drying rate. A swath dried 20% faster by optimal conditioning loses less quality to field respiration and has a wider weather window before rain threatens \u2014 yet many operators leave conditioners at their factory settings indefinitely. Check: does your mowed swath dry stem-to-leaf uniformly, or do the leaves dry 4\u20136 hours before the stems? If leaves are crisp while stems are still pliable, conditioning intensity needs adjustment.<\/p>\n

Decision point: test conditioning by pulling a handful of swath \u2014 stems should show crimping marks or flail damage every 2\u20133 inches along their length.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Stage 2: Field Drying and Tedding \u2014 Speed Preserves Quality<\/h2>\n

Every hour a cut crop spends above 30% moisture in the field is an hour of continued plant cell respiration consuming carbohydrates and producing heat. Research consistently shows that hay dried from cut to baling moisture in 24 hours retains 8\u201315% more digestible energy than hay taking 48 hours in the same conditions. Tedding is the primary tool for accelerating drying, and the question is not whether to ted \u2014 it is when and how intensively.<\/p>\n

\"9LZD-9.0<\/p>\n

The timing and intensity of tedding depends on the tedder type and its operating parameters<\/a>. The general rules: ted within 2\u20134 hours of cutting to disrupt the swath while plant cells are still metabolically active and before the surface layer seals over; do not ted when wind speeds exceed 15 mph \u2014 mechanical leaf loss from aggressive tedding in high wind can exceed 8\u201312% of leaf mass, reducing RFV directly; and ted early in the morning if possible to take advantage of the full drying day rather than late afternoon when you are chasing fading light.<\/p>\n

\n
Weather Window Management: The Most Critical Workflow Variable<\/div>\n

Every field operation from cutting to baling must be bracketed within a weather window free of significant rain. A hay crop that absorbs rain after cutting and before baling loses quality rapidly \u2014 the leaching effect of rain on soluble sugars and proteins reduces digestibility by 10\u201320% per significant rain event. The practical workflow implication: never start cutting unless the weather forecast shows at least 36\u201348 hours of dry weather with relative humidity below 65% during daylight hours. The cost of waiting one day for a better window is always lower than the quality cost of a rain-event on a cut crop.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Stage 3: Raking \u2014 Setting Up the Baler for Efficient Operation<\/h2>\n

\"finger<\/p>\n

Raking is the interface between the drying operation and the baling operation, and it must satisfy requirements from both sides simultaneously. The drying side requires: raking at the correct moisture (18\u201322% for most legumes; 15\u201320% for grass hay) to minimize leaf shatter loss from mechanical impact on brittle dry material. The baling side requires: windrows of consistent density, appropriate width for the baler pickup, and positioned along the longest field dimension for minimum turn frequency. These requirements do not always align \u2014 they must be managed as competing constraints.<\/p>\n

The choice of rake type \u2014 wheel rake (V-rake), rotary bar rake, or horizontal belt rake \u2014 affects both shatter loss and windrow quality. The comparison of rake types is covered in the hay rake types comparison guide<\/a>. At the workflow level, the key raking rules are: avoid raking into the sun during the hottest part of the day when leaves are most brittle; rake to a windrow width that equals approximately 50\u201360% of the baler pickup width (allows the pickup to cleanly sweep the windrow without leaving edges); and use rake forward speed that fluffs the windrow rather than compressing it \u2014 a fluffy windrow allows residual moisture to escape after raking better than a compact windrow.<\/p>\n

Rake moisture target by end use:<\/strong> For dairy or export-quality hay, rake at 18\u201322% moisture \u2014 leaf shatter above 22% is minimal, and the additional drying before baling completes overnight or in 2\u20134 hours. For beef or horse hay with more tolerance on leaf content, raking at 16\u201318% is acceptable. Never rake below 14% moisture \u2014 at that point, alfalfa leaves are so brittle that rake tine contact causes wholesale leaf shattering regardless of rake type or speed.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Stage 4: Baling \u2014 Confirming Moisture and Setting Density<\/h2>\n

\"round<\/p>\n

The baling stage has two non-negotiable quality controls: moisture confirmation and density setting. Everything else \u2014 baling speed, field efficiency, wrap count \u2014 is secondary to getting these two parameters correct on every bale.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
Moisture Confirmation Protocol<\/div>\n

Take 5 probe readings at varied positions across the windrow before starting baling. Do not rely on a single reading at the windrow edge \u2014 moisture varies laterally across a raked windrow, with the bottom center typically 3\u20135 percentage points higher than the top edges. Use the average of your 5 readings as your go\/no-go decision. Target: below 18% for outdoor-stored round bales; below 20% for barn-stored or immediate-use bales.<\/p>\n

If moisture is above target: wait and re-test in 1 hour. Do not bale “close enough” \u2014 bales that heat above 150\u00b0F lose NFC and protein fractions that cannot be recovered.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Density Setting by Market<\/div>\n

Density setting affects transport economics (more tons per load at higher density), storage loss (denser bales have lower surface-to-volume ratio, less weathering per ton), and elevator acceptance (minimum weight requirements in some markets). Set density to meet the minimum elevator weight specification plus a 5\u20138% buffer for normal day-to-day moisture variation. Bales that just meet minimum weight in good conditions fail the specification on a slightly drier day.<\/p>\n

Cross-check density performance with PTO shaft torque capacity \u2014 see gearbox and PTO driveline specs<\/a> for sustained HP at density load.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n

Stage 5: Storage \u2014 Preserving What You Harvested<\/h2>\n

Storage loss is the last point at which quality can be destroyed after all the care invested in stages 1 through 4. Round bales stored outdoors on native soil without cover lose 5\u201330% of their DM over a 6-month storage period depending on climate, bale density, and ground moisture. The same bales stored on gravel with a quality cover lose 3\u20136% over the same period. The gap represents invested production cost that is simply discarded.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Storage method<\/th>\nDM loss range (6 months)<\/th>\nPrimary loss mechanism<\/th>\n\u6700\u9069<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Barn \/ covered building<\/td>\n2\u20134%<\/td>\nNormal respiration only; no rain or UV<\/td>\nPremium alfalfa, export hay, dairy quality hay<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Outdoor on gravel pad, tarped<\/td>\n4\u20138%<\/td>\nCondensation cycling under tarp; minimal direct precipitation<\/td>\nCommercial beef or horse hay in dry climates<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Outdoor on gravel, untarped<\/td>\n8\u201315%<\/td>\nSurface spoilage from rain and UV; shoulder zone degradation<\/td>\nCow hay and bedding quality; humid climates \u2014 use covered storage instead<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Outdoor on soil, no cover<\/td>\n15\u201330%<\/td>\nGround moisture wicking, rain, UV, spoilage all compounding<\/td>\nNot recommended for any hay of commercial or feed value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

The most cost-effective single storage improvement for most operations is elevating bales from direct soil contact \u2014 placing them on gravel, crushed rock, used tires, or wooden pallets. Ground contact allows soil moisture to wick upward into the bale base, creating a permanently wet zone at the bale bottom that supports mold and generates heat. University research on round bale storage shows that ground-contact bales lose 4\u20138% more DM from the base zone than elevated bales in the same outdoor setting \u2014 simply by keeping the bale off the soil surface.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Workflow Integration: Managing the Whole System Simultaneously<\/h2>\n

On a commercial hay operation making multiple cuttings across significant acreage, all five workflow stages may be running simultaneously in different fields \u2014 cutting in one location while tedding a previous cut in another, raking a third field while baling a fourth, and hauling and storing bales from a fifth. Managing this multi-stage operation requires explicit tracking of where each field is in the workflow and what the next action threshold is for each.<\/p>\n

\n
Simple Field Status Board: Track Where Every Field Is<\/div>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\u5206\u91ce<\/th>\nCurrent stage<\/th>\nHours since last op<\/th>\nCurrent moisture<\/th>\nNext action \/ threshold<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
North 40<\/td>\nCut \/ tedded<\/td>\n6 hrs<\/td>\n~30%<\/td>\nRe-test at 18 hrs; rake at 20% or below<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
East 60<\/td>\nRaked<\/td>\n14 hrs<\/td>\n18\u201320%<\/td>\nBale tomorrow morning when at 15\u201317%; do not bale today<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Home 25<\/td>\nBaling now<\/td>\n\u2014<\/td>\n15%<\/td>\nStack and cover immediately after baling today<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

A simple whiteboard or notepad version of this tracking system prevents the most common multi-field workflow error: baling a field before it reaches moisture target because the schedule pressure from another field overrides the quality threshold decision.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Hay Making Workflow FAQs<\/h2>\n
\n
\nWhat is the fastest I can realistically go from cutting to baling in good weather?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
Under ideal conditions \u2014 low humidity (below 40%), high temperature (above 85\u00b0F), light wind (5\u201310 mph), and good conditioning \u2014 alfalfa cut in the morning can be ready to bale the following morning: approximately 18\u201324 hours from cut to bale. Grass hay typically takes 24\u201336 hours under the same conditions. These are best-case numbers in exceptional drying weather for well-conditioned material spread in wide swaths. The average across a full cutting season in most U.S. regions is 28\u201340 hours for alfalfa and 36\u201356 hours for grass. Planning for the average rather than the best case ensures you do not start cutting without sufficient weather window to complete the baling cycle safely.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n
\nMy hay always tests lower than expected for RFV. Which workflow stage is most likely the problem?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
The most common workflow cause of consistently below-expected RFV is cutting at the wrong maturity stage \u2014 cutting when bloom is visible rather than at bud stage. This is a Stage 1 problem and cannot be corrected at any later stage. The second most common cause is leaf loss at raking (Stage 3) \u2014 if you rake at below 15% moisture in warm conditions, leaf shatter alone can reduce apparent RFV by 8\u201315 points versus correctly timed raking. The third most common cause is excessive field drying time (Stage 2) due to inadequate tedding, which allows continued plant cell respiration to consume non-structural carbohydrates and reduce NFC. To diagnose which stage is your bottleneck: check your typical cutting stage at bloom, measure leaf content in a bale sample vs. the standing crop, and compare your cut-to-bale time to the 18\u201336 hour target for your region.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n
\nShould I cut all my acreage on one day or spread cutting over several days?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
Spreading cutting over 2\u20133 days is generally the better workflow approach for operations with enough acreage that all fields cannot be baled in a single day. The reason: if you cut all acreage on day 1 and a rain event occurs on day 3, all your hay is at risk simultaneously. Spreading cutting staggers the drying windows so that some fields are already baled when the rain arrives. The practical rule: cut no more acreage in a single day than you can bale within 2 days under average conditions. Cutting faster than your baling rate can follow creates a bottleneck where multiple fields are all at baling moisture simultaneously and cannot all be serviced \u2014 some will inevitably be baled above target moisture or held one more day and risk another weather window.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n
\nDoes the order of baling within a field matter for quality?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
Yes \u2014 in fields with moisture variation between sections (lower-lying wet areas vs. higher well-drained areas), bale the drier sections first. Low spots in the field dry 2\u20135 hours later than elevated sections in the same field due to higher initial soil moisture and lower sun angle reaching the low windrow areas. If you bale uniformly across the field in row order, you will bale some sections at 14% and others at 22% in the same day, producing an inconsistent product that averages to a lower-quality result than if you sequenced the drier sections first. Develop a mental map of the moisture gradient in each field and adjust baling sequence accordingly.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n
\nHow soon after baling should bales be moved to storage?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
Bales should be moved to storage within 48 hours of baling under normal conditions \u2014 sooner in wet weather, in direct sun on soft ground, or when baling at the higher end of the acceptable moisture range. The first 72 hours after baling are when the greatest internal bale temperature spike occurs as remaining plant respiration generates heat in the compressed bale. During this period, moving bales is fine and does not affect their internal quality trajectory. What you want to avoid is leaving bales on the ground surface in a field for more than 5\u20137 days \u2014 the ground contact moisture absorption and the sun exposure on the exposed bale surface both begin producing measurable DM losses beyond this window. Get bales off the field, off the soil, and into their final storage configuration within 3\u20135 days of baling.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n
\nIs it better to produce more bales at lower quality or fewer bales at higher quality?+<\/span><\/summary>\n
The economic answer depends entirely on your market channel. For operations selling to a hay elevator with a premium structure (paying $15\u2013$30\/ton more for Supreme vs. Good), producing fewer tons of Supreme quality hay is virtually always more profitable than producing more tons of Good or Fair \u2014 the quality premium more than offsets the yield sacrifice from earlier cutting. For operations feeding their own livestock, the feed value equivalency calculation matters: 1 ton of RFV-150 alfalfa is nutritionally equivalent to approximately 1.25 tons of RFV-120 alfalfa, meaning you need 25% more bales of lower-quality hay to meet the same nutritional requirement. Optimizing for quality and accepting the yield trade-off is the correct strategy in almost all commercial and on-farm hay production scenarios.<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\"foragebaler.com<\/p>\n

Get Equipment Configured for Your Hay Making System<\/h3>\n

Tell us your acreage, primary crop, target market, and current equipment. We help you identify the workflow stage with the highest quality loss potential and the equipment configuration that addresses it directly.<\/p>\n

Get Workflow Support<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u7de8\u96c6\u8005: Cxm<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Hay Production Systems Guide Hay Making Workflow: From Cutting to Bale Storage in One System Most hay quality problems are not caused by a single bad decision \u2014 they are caused by a sequence of small delays and missed windows that compound across the cutting-to-baling cycle. Understanding the entire workflow as a connected system, with specific decision points at each stage, lets you identify which step in your operation is responsible for the quality gap between what your crop could produce and what actually reaches the hay buyer or the bunk. See Full Workflow The Hay Making System: Five Stages, Each With a Decision Point Hay making is not a […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-881","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-forage-baler"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/881","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=881"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/881\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":882,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/881\/revisions\/882"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=881"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=881"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/foragebaler.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=881"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}