Learning from the Land: A Forage Stockpiling Study at Greenacres
Research often begins with a simple question.
Can we decrease the overall number of hay bales needed through the fall and winter by increasing stockpiled grass ahead of the non-growing season?
At Greenacres Michaela Farm, we wanted to test if feeding our cattle hay earlier in the fall, while allowing other pastures to rest and grow, would create enough stockpiled forage to reduce the total amount of hay needed throughout the fall and winter when pasture growth slowed.
We put the idea to the test from September 2024 through April 2025.
What we found was not exactly what we expected, but that is one of the reasons we do research. The results gave us a better understanding of how timing, rainfall, pasture growth, and grazing management work together. They also gave us ideas about what we might do differently in the future.
Putting Stockpiling to the Test
Stockpiling is a grazing practice that allows forage to grow and accumulate in a pasture before it is needed. Instead of grazing specific fields in the fall, livestock are grazed elsewhere while the grass continues to grow. That stockpiled forage can then be grazed later, during the winter when pasture regrowth is slowest.
In September 2024, the fields at Greenacres Michaela Farm were divided in half for two treatment groups. The cattle were also divided into two groups of approximately 40 head each.
One became the Stockpiled Group. The other became the Grazed Group.
From September 1 through November 22, the Stockpiled Group stayed in one pasture and was fed bales. This allowed the Stockpiled Group’s portions of each field to rest and accumulate grass. During the same timeframe, the Grazed Group rotated through its portion of each field.
Beginning November 23, the Stockpiled Group began grazing its portions of the fields that had been allowed to accumulate forage and continued rotating through them until April, aside from the period when snow and frozen ground prevented grazing.
After completing its first rotation, the Grazed Group returned to those fields during the winter, from December 3 through March 10, for a second rotation. During this second rotation, the fields were bale grazed, meaning the cattle continued to utilize the available grass but relied primarily on hay.
Throughout the study, we tracked how many bales each group consumed, forage quantity, and forage quality.
What Happened?
After tracking the two groups from September 2024 through April 2025, we found that the Stockpiled Group used more hay, rather than less.
The Stockpiled Group consumed 260 round bales during the study, while the Grazed Group consumed 232.
For the Stockpiled Group, 78 of those bales were fed between September 1 and November 22 while the animals remained in one field and the other fields were allowed to stockpile.
The Grazed Group took a different approach, continuously grazing its available fields with two full rotations during the fall and winter.
That difference in management gave the Grazed Group the opportunity to utilize pasture regrowth after two grazing periods, rather than relying on one period of stockpiled forage.
Across the study, the Grazed Group’s portions of the fields produced 175 tons of forage, compared with 96 tons in the Stockpiled Group’s portions.
Before each pasture was grazed, we measured the amount of available forage using a rising plate meter. This allowed us to collect forage quantity data for each pasture and compare forage production between the two treatment groups and across grazing periods.
The forage yield data showed a statistical difference between the first time the fields were grazed in the fall and the second time they were grazed during the winter. Overall, the portions of the fields used by the Grazed Group produced more total forage during the study than the portions reserved for the Stockpiled Group.
Under the conditions we experienced that year, continuing to graze and returning to those fields later allowed us to make better use of the forage that grew throughout the season.
But there was an important part of the story that we could not overlook.
The weather.
A Dry Fall Made Stockpiling Difficult
We were attempting to build a forage stockpile during one of the worst droughts our region had experienced in decades. October 2024 was the second-driest October in Indiana since 1895.
Stockpiling forage works best when there is enough growth to stockpile. Without rain, growth rates slow significantly, leaving much less grass to save for later.
From August through November, Oldenburg, Indiana, received just 4.46 inches of rain, compared with a historical median of 11.04 inches. The pasture simply did not have the moisture it needed to produce the amount of forage we had hoped to stockpile.
Earlier Stockpiling May Have Been Beneficial
Because of logistical challenges, we could not begin stockpiling forage until September. The general recommendation for stockpiling in our area is to begin in early August.
Starting earlier could have given the pastures more time to take advantage of late-summer rainfall and warmer temperatures before growth slowed in November. We cannot know how much of a difference that change would have made under the drought conditions we experienced, but beginning earlier would have given the pasture more time and opportunity to grow.
Winter Brought Another Challenge
The dry fall was followed by a three-week period of heavy snow and frozen ground. During that time, neither group could effectively graze, so we exclusively fed bales to both groups.
This increased hay consumption for both groups and contributed to the Stockpiled Group’s overall total.
It was a good reminder that pasture management does not happen in a vacuum. Rainfall, temperature, ground conditions, and even a few weeks of unusual winter weather can significantly change the outcome of a grazing plan.
We Also Wanted to Know About Forage Quality
In addition to quantity, we also wanted to know what happened to the quality of the forage when we grazed the fields at different times.
Before the animals entered each field, the team collected forage samples. The forage samples allowed us to look at characteristics including crude protein, relative forage value, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, dry matter, moisture, and total digestible nutrients.
The Grazed Group grazed its portions of the fields twice: first in the fall and again in the winter. In all but one field, crude protein increased from the first grazing period to the second.
We saw a similar pattern with relative forage value, or RFV. In all but one field, RFV increased between the first and second grazing periods.
The most likely explanation for the differences between the Grazed Group’s first and second rotations is the age of the pasture regrowth. After the first grazing period, the fields had time to regrow. When the cattle returned during the winter, that regrowth was younger and more tender than the forage available during the first grazing period.
That may have contributed to the increase in crude protein and RFV we observed between the two grazing periods. The results suggest that, under these conditions, returning to pasture after a period of regrowth may improve forage quality.
Looking More Closely at the Forage
Our forage samples gave us an even more detailed picture of what was happening in the pastures. We measured several characteristics, including crude protein, available crude protein, ADF, NDF, dry matter, moisture, RFV, and TDN.
The data show that forage quality varied from field to field and across the grazing season. Looking at the individual samples also shows the difference between the Grazed Group’s first and second rotations. Generally, crude protein and RFV increased, while ADF and NDF decreased, showing improved forage quality in the more tender regrowth.
Total digestible nutrients, or TDN, gave us another way to look at the nutritional characteristics of the forage.
What Did We Learn?
The results of this study showed us that stockpiling does not always mean using less hay. During the dry fall of 2024, the Stockpiled Group consumed 260 bales compared with 232 for the Grazed Group.
But the results also showed us where we might adjust our approach in the future:
Start earlier. We would begin stockpiling in August to give pastures more time to grow before winter.
Watch the weather. When rainfall is limited, there may not be enough forage growth to build a useful stockpile.
Stay flexible. In a dry year, continuing to graze available pasture and returning to those fields later to bale graze may be more effective in reducing the total amount of bales fed than holding pasture back for an extended period.
Look at forage quality, too. In most fields, crude protein and relative forage value increased during the second grazing period, showing that when pasture is grazed can influence its nutritional value.
For us, the biggest lesson is that there is no single grazing strategy that will work the same way every year. Weather, pasture growth, timing, and livestock needs all play a role. The value of research is in learning from those conditions and using what we learn to make thoughtful decisions in the future.
Learning From What the Land Tells Us
Research does not always confirm what we expect. Sometimes, the most valuable findings come from understanding why something worked differently than we anticipated.
That was the case with this study. We set out to see if stockpiling could reduce our hay use through the winter. Under the conditions we experienced in 2024–2025, it did not. Instead, we learned more about how rainfall, timing, pasture growth, and grazing management work together.
Those lessons will help inform future grazing decisions at Greenacres. They may also be useful to other farmers considering stockpiling on their own farms.
Every farm is different, and what works in one year or one place may not work the same way in another. Our goal is not to prescribe one approach, but to ask questions, measure what happens, and share what we learn.
