I'm Kayla Kutski. I'm Daniel Williamson.
I'm Ryan Peterson
We are members of the Danielson Hustlers 4-H Club of Morrison County. We are here today to present our science of agriculture response to the issue of
fed waste. Through the engineering
design process we have researched and
taken action on the issue of fed waste. Fed Up! We are fed up with the amount of feed our
animals waste. We are fed up with the
money we lose on wasted hay. So what
are we going to do about it?
Through brainstorming as a team we
determine the biggest challenge all of
us face our farm was feed waste of our
cattle. On November 30th, 2014
we met as a team and talked about
the agricultural challenges we
face on our farms. We invited Russ Anderson and Mike Kutzke. They're both
diversified livestock farmers and they're employed at Ridgewater Community and
Technical College. Ross is an agriculture
instructor and Mike is the dean of instruction. We
wanted feedback to more clearly define our
problem. We divided up our research
responsibilities. Daniel researched digestive systems. I researched hay waste. And Kayla researched grain waste. All three of us
observed and collected data of our animals
eating. We took into account of the
environment, areas they eat, and what type of animal they were.
Through our research, we figured out that hay feeders were a main cause of feed loss.
According to Dr. Justin Saxton average
quality grass hay is $100 per ton. A
30% savings will equal what producers
paid for hay in past years.
Selecting a feeder or feeding system
designed to conserve hey can reduce the
cost.
Oklahoma State University News and Views authors Robert Wells and David Lowman
created the following scenario. A
producer with 30 cows will feed a
180 bales of hay weighing, 1,200 pounds each, in
a six-month period. They valued the hay at $70 per bale. In their example the cattle would
waste anywhere from $667.80 to $2,642
worth of hay. This is
dependant on the type of feeder that
they have. Research like the information
from Robert Wells and David Lawman led
us to define the problem in our
challenge.
We began to collect more research on a
hay loss studies and about the
amount of hay loss on our own farms. Discussion on our team with
Denel Williamson, a diversified livestock and
crop farmer we, decided to focus on hay
loss prevention. We felt like it was a
something most livestock
farmers have in common so you can
make the biggest impact in livestock
feeding. We determined we would measure the hay
loss on our own farms. So  you're probably
wondering why hay waste? Between our three farms, we
have beef cattle, horses, goats, sheep, and
other small animals. We wanted to figure
out a way for the most livestock
producers to save money and hay 
is the most common feed source.
To begin our research in this issue we
looked at how cattle digest feed, the
cost of hay, and the amount of hay lost
with each type of feeder. We looked at a
variety of hay research studies and we
narrowed it down to four main studies.
These are from the University of Missouri,
Oklahoma State University, Michigan State
University, and the University of
Arkansas. As you can see it from this
data chart comparing the hay loss
studies, the percent of a loss from
ring round bail feeders range from
5.4% to 13% and the average percent
was 9.375. This research lets us more clearly define the
problem. How do we prevent livestock from
wasting hay through
inefficient feeders? Once we knew what we
wanted to change to the feeder, we did
research different types of features we
also talked to our mentors to get
feedback on our ideas. We got feedback from
livestock producers and industry
representatives. We researched animal
behavior by collecting data from our
animals on our own farms. We observed them eating and recorded a video. If an animal can take its head
out of the feeder, they will. If their head is
out of the feeder, they will drop hay.
And if the hay is stepped on, slobbered on, or gets dirty the animal will not eat it. From
this research and our observations, we
knew that the limit the amount of waste
needed to limit the amount of movement
of the head of the animal. We made several
design attempts on paper before
deciding which elements would prevent
head movement. We utilized all components of the
engineering process as shown in our portfolio.
And we will hand them out to you. Kayla will.
We started the prototype design by presenting our design sketches to Denel Williamson.
He reviewed models with us.
He didn't discourage us, but encouraged us to look at different elements of design. We decided on the basic design and
determined what we needed for supplies.
Originally we wanted to build a prototype
from scratch, but we quickly realized
that this would be too expensive. It
would also be too expensive for most
farmers to build or buy new. Our solution
combined two of the existing feeders
together, the keyhole and chains. Chains
were added to the existing feeder to
create a deeper V at the bottom of the
feeder. We use chain because it would
make this space smaller so the animal wouldn't
pull their head out. And since the chain
moves the animal can still get their
head in and out of the feeder easily. As
you can see on our feeder there's two
openings that are created by a diagonal
chain. The larger opening is used for
cattle and larger ewes.
This deep V caused them to leave their head
towards the bottom of the feeder
because it takes more energy to lift
their heads up and back out of the theater
in order to drop hay. And the smaller
triangle is used for goats and other
sheep. And this small space discourages
them from constantly moving their head to
drop hay. This design was created for
multiple species. We had discussed using
metal bars to make the retrofit. This had
presented many problems. First it's not
as movable for the animal so the animals'
head and animals' horns can get stuck more
easily.
Secondly if it requires welding which
makes a retrofit much harder. And thirdly
the metal bars would be more costly than
the chains. Using cahins to retrofit a ring round bale feeder is
not only cost effective, it uses tools that most farmers have on hand. Tools that we
needed to make the retrofit included a
vice, hammer, drill, drill bit, hacksaw
tape measure, and a permanent marker.
The supplies needed to purchase were
chain links, I-bolts, and nuts.
These are available at most hardware
stores. The retrofit was easy to
implement. What we did is measured out 16 chain
links from here to here by using the
tape measure to find that it has 16 inch
gap. So once we figured that out
and we cut the whole chain at 16 inches. We took the i-bolts, put them apart with the vice, put the chains in there, and put them back with the vice
so it would stay secure with the chains.
Then we drilled holes into the feeders where we put our black permanent marker mark so we knew it was 16 inches.
And once we had the i-bolts in the feeder, we tightened them up with the nuts to make sure they were firm and secure so
then were wouldn't be any problems with the goats or sheep getting their horns stuck.
And once we had the bolts secured to the nuts, then we took the hacksaw and cut off the excess amount
so then we wouldn't have any goats getting hurt or sheep or cows getting injuries from their heads.
We made our first prototype and because
the data clearly show that the amount of
hay loss was reduced by 25% we went ahead
and finish the retrofit, creating our
second prototype. Hay lost through
minimizing head movement with the
installation of chains was reduced by
50% from a 120 pounds
per 1,200 pound bail to 60 pounds per 1,200
pound around bail. This slide shows the
data from prototype studies. Williamson
Farms feed round bales that weigh 1,200 pounds.
They feed goats, sheep, and beef from a ring round
feeder. To be able to analyze this data
we averaged them out a loss per 1200 pound bail fed.
We collected a control data for six weeks and learned the
current feeder had a ten percent hay loss.
When the whole feeder was retrofitted, the 
loss went down to 5 percent loss.
To analyze our data more, we compared our source studies to the university studies that we mentioned
earlier. The average ring feeder amongst
all the hay waste studies of the university
was about 9 percent of its hay lost.
Our design is well below that with only
about 5% loss of its hay.
With our prototype, Williamson Farms should
save about 1560 pounds of hay per year. That's
just over one round bale hay which is about $200 in savings. A farmer will
not spend more money than he will save. A new feeder will cost $1000. Our retrofit
just cost $68.65. Although  building your own sounds really
awesome, in the real world
retrofit makes the most financial sense.
Once we had the data and the
investigation complete, we presented our
idea to stakeholders. Through four
presentations, we shared our idea with 79 4-H'ers,
parents,  and industry
representatives. The group presentation
included a west-central ag sales club
which is a group of agriculture
instructors and industry representatives
in west central Minnesota. Industry
representatives included everything from
ag lenders to ag engineers. We also made
a video and posted to social media with
622 views. We were
able to get feedback on our design. Based
on that feedback we've begun collecting
data on a square bail feeder and so far
it's been similar to the round bail
feeder.
Throughout this process we have met with
numerous industry representatives some
who have served officially as our mentors. A list of how these people helped
with our project is located in our
portfolio. They helped us define our
problem and provided critical reviews on
our project. Although Denel Williamson
was our main mentor and providing
reviews and facilitating the building of
our prototypes, another mentor that helped was Steve Jan. Steve answered our
questions mostly through email. He also
did the final critical review of our
project. We walked through all the steps of
the project with him. He also observed
our final prototype and asked us clarifying
questions.
As our team worked on our Science of
Agriculture Challenge we became more
familiar with the eight step engineering process. We gained skills such as public speaking,
created reviews of the literature, and finding
incredible professional sources of research.
We also have used these skills in the
past spring in completing projects. Ryan and
I will continue to use the engineering
process as we work on our Rube Goldberg machine.
We are able to implement these skills
that we have learned for our Science of
Agriculture response to project in our
everyday lives. A more detailed description of our project and how
we used the engineering process and what we
learned is included in our portfolio. So
the next time you're fed up with hay waste, who you gonna call?
I'm impressed with your ingenuity what I
am wondering about his have you
reached out to manufacturers about maybe
pattening or selling adapting kits?
My name is Ruth and I'm with 
the Minnesota Farm Bureau.
Right now we haven't reached out yet to any manufacturers. We are looking
to test our prototype on other people's
farms. So we've talked to a couple dairy
farmers and a couple other be farmers so
you wanna make sure that our data is
correct with another person's farm
before you go ahead to manufacturers and
ask them to your pattned your prototype. This
past week we also had a person asking us- cause they have a similar round bail feeder
to this one so they asked us for the measurements or something so they can implemented on their own farms. And in reality we kind
didn't implemented it ourselves
but we just kind of jumped off of
another chain design but this time it
was in key holes.
Mark, Minnesota Corn Growers. So in your waste 
reduction studies was that with multiple studies?
What was involved?
It was with multiple species. It was beef cattle, goats, sheep.
And also in our portfolio it kind of
breaks down what seasons the animal are
used with the round bail feeder. We didn't
want to mess the Williamsons Farm
feeding schedule up. So usually the goats are on goats are on the feeder
all year round but they also have access
to a pasture in the spring. The sheep are
on it in the early spring and in the
winter I believe too. And then the
beef cattle are only on it for one hour a
day in the early spring. So we kind of
gotta test it more or less with the goats and the ewes. And we did test it with the cattle
more in the winter and early spring.
So just to clarify did you feel as
though you've got a pretty-how long were
you able to do that study? How long did that
last and you feel as though you got a
pretty complete cycle then?
Well basically on our farm, it showed how
much hay loss you really had. It looked like it was
about cut in half. And also we 
collected our baseline data for
six weeks and then we did each
prototype for four weeks after that. So
our first prototype was for four weeks
in our second prototype was another four
weeks. And there's more information on
depth of our information in the portfolio as
well. So if you're interested in that,
it's in engineering process I believe.
I am curious how you collected your data
up on loss. Did you rake it up?
How did you measure that loss? So what we
basically did is we kind of use the volume
method and mass where we measured base and the
width and the highth of how much was
lost. And we calculated our answer by
that. And so on our farms we all did a
little different baseline data. We ended
up using Daniel's, the volume, just
because we tested it on his farm. But
went in volume and then I just kind of
observed mine just to see how much hay I
thought they were losing. And Ryan used
like the height-wise of how much
they're losing and the percents.
So that question made me think of this one. Was there any significance in the
quality of the hay, that you're aware of,
and and if so did you notice any
difference? I mean with higher quality hay is there 
generally less loss? Did that have any
affect or was there really no
difference?
Well with our feeder, I'd say if it's
higher quality than they'd probably end
up eating more.
So there probably is a difference.
And we didn't totally test the different
types of hay yet. That is another thing
that was brought up in some of the
presentations we did to our local ag
clubs. So we have decided to try a
different products in our feeder such
as corn stocks, straw, and also the
different types of hay. And also in the
future we're looking at using square
bales. So like this following year we're
going to test it using square bales and
see if how tight hole used to bail
is determines how much hay wastes there
is.
Adam, Minnesota Corn Growers. So
as I understand it, to measure those
efficiencies you use different methods, right? You used volume. Did you use of each of those
methods on each of the farms? Or
different methods for each location?
The percent volume? That part?
Well we just collected baseline data
on all of ours, but both of
our fathers had just gotten new feeders.
So they weren't too excited about
letting us retrofit our own. So we just
used Daniel's feeder to retrofit. So we kept
all of our data on the presentation as well as
in our portfolio in the volume that we
did with his farm.
