The first cut of grass has been over for a while and most dairy farmers have now also finished the second cut. However, the quality of that second cut is significantly less. How is that possible?
The reactions to the first cut of grass were: purely positive; High yields and good quality were discussed. However, for the second cut, that positive sentiment does not apply everywhere. "The conditions for the second cut were much less favorable than for the first cut of grass," says Gerard Abbink, advisor at Groeikracht.
'Conditions too dry'
Where the first cutting of grass was blessed with rain in mid-April, the circumstances mainly dry for the second cut. "It was actually too dry, which caused drought stress," says Abbink. In addition, the advisor stated that the conditions were very dependent on the subsurface (much/little groundwater). "Our customers had a lot of groundwater in the north of the country, so the quality could be maintained better there."
Edward Ensing, roughage specialist at Barenbrug, also says that the second cut of grass was related to drought. "This made it more difficult for the grass to grow, which meant that the grass was less tall than in other years and was the case with the first cut."
Big differences in quality and yield
According to Abbink, it is difficult to give a clear picture of the quality and yield of the second cut. This is because the differences locally can be very large. "We have a test field in the Achterhoek. There, the second cut was harvested in several places at the same time (with the same substrate and fertilization), but the yield varies greatly: from just under 1 to 3 tons per percent dry matter. These differences are unprecedented. "
Abbink reports that the nutritional value and protein content are good. "The protein content is sometimes even very high." According to Ensing, this is also because dairy farmers have harvested at the right time. "Mowing at the right time is very important for quality and yield; waiting before harvesting can yield 70 to 150 kilograms of dry matter per day. There has also been no stem formation."
Ensing also states that the second cut is always slightly smaller compared to the first cut. "However, this year the quality is much better than last year. I also think that the absorption of the second cut is better, provided that good grasses have been used; examples of this are perennial ryegrass and tall fescue." Ensing further states that nitrogen uptake was good, but that the moisture supply is still somewhat variable here and there. The biggest and most important question, however, is whether the fertilizer has been sufficiently dissolved, because that is essential for the protein content."
Central Netherlands has the least quality
According to Abbink, major differences are also visible in the Netherlands. "The south of the country has harvested the best quality. This is because there has been sufficient rainfall there. However, the center of the country (Utrecht region) has had a hard time. This means that the quality of the second cut here is very poor. is bad. It was simply way too dry."