Final report for FNE23-063
Project Information
This project tested muka or tree hay as a feed for cattle. With the cost of feed on the rise, livestock producers need to find innovative ways to produce as much nutritious feed as possible in an environmentally and economically sustainable manner.
Tree hay and the feeding of trees during the grazing season has been a common practice historically. In recent decades it has more commonly been a practice in times of drought. To help with the cost of keeping livestock in the winter, a method of preserving and storing relatively large amounts of tree hay is needed. Because tree hay is bulky and does not readily lend itself to ordinary haying equipment (baling), this project involved processing small branches, twigs, and leaves with a wood chipper and drying the product with a modified grain dryer.
This project will tested the palatability of two tree species-- poplar and black spruce.
This project had some extremely interesting results. First we learned that an invasion of caterpillars can have a significant effect on the amount of leaves in the woods. A severe infestation meant we had to delay harvesting poplar or go to a more distant part of the woods to harvest tree hay.
Secondly we found that the grain dryer was unnecessary. The tree hay dried quite quickly and we never had to utilize the grain dryer. If anything, it dried more quickly than grass hay.
Thirdly we found that the animals fed the black spruce/hay ration found that ration somewhat less palatable than the other groups and gained less. The other groups were all roughly the same.
This project sought to develop an efficient way to dry and store relatively large amounts of tree hay (muka) on farm. This project did the following:
- Determined the labor and cost required to harvest and store muka using a wood chipper and a modified grain dryer.
- Evaluated which of three variants of muka are the best supplemental feed for beef cattle. The three variants ( poplar, black spruce, 50% poplar/50% black spruce) were tested for nutrition at DairyOne in New York. It was tested for protein, nitrogen, and trace minerals. The muka was fed in the fall and winter of 2024-2025. A control of just hay-- our normal ration-- was fed and compared to the other three feeds.
- We evaluated palatability of the feed including how much was consumed and how much was wasted.
- We evaluated cattle for weight gain and body condition while being fed the muka.
- We determined which of the three feeds is the most appropriate for beef cattle and produce a financial and nutritional analysis of the feed in comparison to other forages.
Cost of production has been on the rise for livestock farmers. All inputs-- including feed, fertilizer, fuel, and labor have gotten increasingly expensive in recent years. In addition, more erratic climate patterns have made livestock farmers more economically vulnerable. In the northeast during drought, many farmers have had to resort to trucking feedstuffs in from distant places-- an expensive practice that has a significant environmental impact. This project aimed to develop a feed that can be produced cheaply on-farm, in times of drought and at times of the year when other feedstuffs can not be harvested.
Although currently underutilized, tree hay has been fed to livestock for centuries-- particularly in Russia, where it is known as muka. (Young.) As a feed, it has several advantages. Trees are quite resistant to drought and other weather extremes and can be harvested when other forages do not produce. In the northeast, trees are plentiful. Maine, for example, is the most forested state. Most farmers own or have access to an underutilized woodlot. In addition, tree hay as produced in this project could be produced in coordination with a nearby logging operation, making a useful feed out of the twigs, leaves, and small branches that would otherwise go to waste. A cheap, plentiful, quality feed can only help productivity and economical viability for livestock farmers in the northeast.
Shipping is not going to become cheap. Having hay or other feeds shipped in from the Midwest or from Canada is not a viable financial option in the long term. Also, local feeds reduce the carbon footprint of agriculture. The closer a feed is produced to the farm it is fed on, the less environmental impact that feed has.
Tree hay also improves the economical situation for farmers because it can be produced in coordination with logging. Lumber prices are high-- a farmer could cut some trees, make the twigs, branches, and leaves into feed, and also make a profit from selling the logs or lumber.
Tree hay is the ultimate resilient crop. The forests of the northeast fortunately recover from thinning quite quickly. Tree hay can also be produced via pollarding-- cutting off selected branches of the tree while leaving the stem intact. In this way, a woodlot can produce tree hay indefinitely. Also, if a farmer were set up to easily harvest and store tree hay in volume, that farmer could make use of the inevitable blowdowns that regularly occur in any woodlot. Resistant to drought and other extreme weather, regenerative, and readily available, tree hay is bound to increase the resiliency of livestock farms in the northeast.
Another challenge livestock farmers currently face in the northeast is availability of land. Land prices have risen sharply in recent years because of the pandemic and various other reasons. Many people have chosen to move to more rural areas, sometimes changing the status of rented agricultural land. High food prices have also contributed to agricultural land being more in demand and sometimes harder to access. Using trees as feed increases the amount of cropland available to livestock producers.
In addition, tree hay diversifies the nutrition being delivered to the livestock. Several species of trees have been shown to contain minerals and other nutrients not readily available from other sources. (Dickson.) ("Underutilized Resources..")
O'Meara Family Farm started in 1999. John O'Meara has been farming since 1990. We currently sell, beef, lamb, pork and grow some grain and some other crops. In the winter we log with oxen on the 100 acres of woods we own. This project used our oxen to produce muka to be fed to our triple purpose herd of cattle.
Cooperators
- - Technical Advisor
Research
This project will begin in March of 2024. The first step will be to construct a modified grain dryer based on one built at Butterworks Farm in Vermont, where I worked in 1991. The grain dryer consists of corrugated metal rings and a screened floor on a small trailer. It is fitted with a fan and connected to a small wood stove. (See diagram) It differs from a grain dryer mostly in the size of screen used-- Larger holes are more appropriate for muka. Relatively cheap to construct, this grain dryer-- now a muka dryer-- is portable and well within most farm budgets. It holds roughly two tons of muka. For us, the dryer only reqquired labor. We used an old trailer on the farm. A farming friend gave us an old grain silo which we cut down for the body. We had mesh and an old wood stove. The labor to build it was roughly 40 hours. If the materials had to be purchased, the grain dryer could be constructed for under $1000. In any case, once we got making the tree hay, we discovered that the grain dryer was ultimately unnecessary.
Leaves are out on the trees in late May in Aroostook County. We had planned on making the tree hay in the spring but because of severe catepillar infestation, we delayed production until the summer.
We own 100 acres of mixed woodlot which has had very little logging done on it in the past forty years. It is dominated by spruce and fir with white birch, poplar, yellow birch, brown ash, and white cedar. For this project we focueds on thinning some of the spruce and poplar. I am experienced in sustainable forestry -- I use a team of oxen along with trucks and tractors. The oxen hauled the branches to a landing where the branches were chipped.
The system worked, although it took more time than we had anticipated. We enjoy working with oxen but a more mechanized way of moving the branches may be more efficient for many farmers. Our method of doing it was cheap.
We found that it was relatively easy to get the muka to 15% moisture. The key was to cut in the morning, haul the branches to rows at the landing, and leave them there until day three. The branches continued to transpire and dry. We chipped them on day three. We ended up not using black plastic as planned. We had several large hay tarps from when we used them to cover dry hay. They shed the rain and worked well to store the muka. In the few instances when were experienced unanticipated rain, we used hay tarps to cover the drying tree hay.
We used a three point hitch wood chipper behind a massey ferguson tractor to chip.
The trees ranged in dbh from 10 to 14 inches, with 12 inches being the average for both poplar and black spruce. On average, the poplar yielded 180 pounds of dry muka per tree while the black spruce yielded 150. It took six hours of labor to produce a ton of poplar muka and eight hours of labor to produce a ton of black spruce muka. The difference is accounted for by the growth habit of black spruce-- it often has a long stem with no branches until the very top. Poplar has a much more open and branched form.
We ended up producing 20 tons of muka-- it took longer in hours and also more of the summer than we had anticipated.
The goal will be to produce roughly 20 tons of muka before hay season gets into swing in July.
We started feeding the muka in October. We had four groups of eight. Feeding the animals went as planned.
We fed a herd of thirty-two beef animals ( dexters) born in the spring of 2023. The animals were evaluated for body condition and scored prior to feeding. The animals were also taped to determine weight before feeding starts. Group one was fed 80% hay, 20% poplar muka. Group two was fed 80% hay, 20% black spruce muka. Group three was fed 80% hay, 20% muka which was half poplar and half black spruce. Group four was the control and fed our normal ration-- clover and timothy hay. (Initially, the animals were gradually transitioned from all hay to 20% muka over a two week period so they didn't experience any digestive problems.)
Feeding this ration proceeded for the duration of the winter (roughly 200 days) at which time the animals were evaluated, taped, and scored for body condition again.
Throughout the course of the project we recorded how much of the muka was consumed daily and how much was wasted. Body condition and weight gain was also recorded for each animals each month.
2023 was an exceptionally rainy year in northern Maine. Because the adverse weather made all operations on the farm more time consuming, we asked for an extension of the project. The goals and objectives of the project remain the same but we have now concluded the project at the end of May, 2025.
As of January 2025, we had constructed the grain dryer, created the muka, and begun our feeding trial. Results are not yet finished, although all three types of feed are being consumed in the trial and seem to be a viable addition to a feeding regimen. Partially because of relatively dry weather in 2024, we found the grain dryer to be not necessary for the production of muka. Anecdotally, yields on poplar were lower than expected because of heavy caterpillar infestation in the woods in 2024. The caterpillars prefer poplar.
Group One(p) Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
- 320 330 355 360 370 385 400 420
- 300 330 355 360 370 390 420 440
- 300 335 350 370 385 400 420 440
- 305 320 345 355 365 380 410 440
- 320 340 355 375 385 400 420 440
- 305 325 345 365 380 400 430 450
- 310 330 350 360 375 390 425 450
- 290 325 350 360 375 395 420 440
Group Two(bs)
- 365 380 400 405 420 425 430 440
- 350 365 380 390 400 405 410 420
- 325 345 365 380 390 400 410 420
- 315 330 355 370 380 385 400 410
- 340 350 360 370 375 380 385 400
- 345 360 370 375 375 380 385 395
- 320 340 355 360 365 380 385 395
- 345 350 360 365 365 375 380 385
Group three (p/bs)
- 295 325 355 370 380 400 420 440
- 300 330 355 365 375 390 420 450
- 290 315 330 340 350 370 400 430
- 290 315 330 345 350 370 375 410
- 290 310 345 355 360 370 395 410
- 305 310 335 345 350 375 390 420
- 310 315 330 345 350 370 390 420
- 300 320 340 350 355 365 380 410
Group Four(c)
- 330 350 370 370 370 375 380 390
- 315 325 340 345 350 360 375 390
- 320 340 350 360 365 370 375 390
- 330 345 355 360 365 370 375 390
- 315 330 350 350 355 360 370 385
- 300 325 350 355 355 360 370 385
- 295 310 330 330 340 350 360 370
- 330 340 350 355 360 370 385 390
Dexters are small cattle and are relatively slow growing. The winter in northern Maine is harsh. Average weight gain for group one-- fed hay and 20% muka-- was 135lbs. Average gain for group two-- fed hay and 20% black spruce muka-- was 70 lbs. Average gain for group three-- fed hay and 20% poplar/black spruce muka-- was 126 lbs. Average gain for the control group-- fed hay-- was 70lbs.
Waste for groups one, three, and four were minimal-- under 5%. Waste for the black spruce was more-- we estimate that roughly 20% of the black spruce was not consumed. This indicates that there was a palatability issue.
Poplar
272 EAST RD |% Crude Protein | 7.6 | 8.0 |
NEW SWEDEN, ME 04762 |% Available Protein | 7.0 | 7.4 |
|% ADICP | .6 | .6 |
|% Adjusted Crude Protein | 7.6 | 8.0 |
------------------------- |Soluble Protein % CP | | 36 |
ENERGY TABLE - NRC 2001 |Degradable Protein%CP | | 57 |
------------------------- |% NDICP | 2.2 | 2.4 |
Mcal/Lb Mcal/Kg |% Acid Detergent Fiber | 36.8 | 39.0 |
------- ------- |% Neutral Detergent Fiber| 59.4 | 62.9 |
DE, 1X 1.16 2.55 |% Lignin | 8.7 | 9.1 |
ME, 1X 0.96 2.12 |% NFC | 21.1 | 22.4 |
NEL, 3X 0.54 1.19 |% Starch | 8.6 | 9.1 |
NEM, 3X 0.56 1.24 |% WSC (Water Sol. Carbs.)| 7.3 | 7.8 |
NEG, 3X 0.30 0.67 |% ESC (Simple Sugars) | .2 | .2 |
------------------------- |% Crude Fat | 2.7 | 2.8 |
TDN1X, % 58 |% Ash | 5.88 | 6.23 |
------------------------- |% TDN | 55 | 58 |
|NEL, Mcal/Lb | .48 | .51 |
|NEM, Mcal/Lb | .50 | .53 |
|NEG, Mcal/Lb | .26 | .27 |
|Relative Feed Value | | 87 |
|% Calcium | .41 | .43 |
|% Phosphorus | .15 | .16 |
|% Magnesium | .16 | .17 |
|% Potassium | .86 | .91 |
|% Sulfur | .17 | .18 |
|% Chloride Ion | .18 | .19 |
| | | |
|% Lysine | .22 | .24 |
|% Methionine | .11 | .12 |
| | | |
|Horse DE, Mcal/Lb | .91 | .97 |
Black Spruce
|% Moisture | 6.1 | |
JOHN O MEARA |% Dry Matter | 93.9 | |
182 EAST RD |% Crude Protein | 6.5 | 6.9 |
NEW SWEDEN, ME 04762 |% Available Protein | 5.3 | 5.6 |
|% ADICP | 1.2 | 1.3 |
|% Adjusted Crude Protein | 6.5 | 6.9 |
------------------------- |Soluble Protein % CP | | 37 |
ENERGY TABLE - NRC 2001 |Degradable Protein%CP | | 68 |
------------------------- |% NDICP | 2.3 | 2.4 |
Mcal/Lb Mcal/Kg |% Acid Detergent Fiber | 43.5 | 46.4 |
------- ------- |% Neutral Detergent Fiber| 62.4 | 66.4 |
DE, 1X 1.04 2.29 |% Lignin | 10.7 |11.3 |
ME, 1X 0.85 1.87 |% NFC | 20.4 | 21.7 |
NEL, 3X 0.46 1.02 |% Starch | 2.0 | 2.1 |
NEM, 3X 0.47 1.04 |% WSC (Water Sol. Carbs.)| 8.0 | 8.6 |
NEG, 3X 0.22 0.49 |% ESC (Simple Sugars) | 1.8 | 2.0 |
------------------------- |% Crude Fat | 2.4 | 2.5 |
TDN1X, % 53 |% Ash | 4.57 | 4.87 |
------------------------- |% TDN | 50 | 53 |
|NEL, Mcal/Lb | .41 | .44 |
|NEM, Mcal/Lb | .41 | .44 |
|NEG, Mcal/Lb | .18 | .19 |
|Relative Feed Value | | 74 |
|% Calcium | .62 | .66 |
|% Phosphorus | .18 | .19 |
|% Magnesium | .15 | .16 |
|% Potassium | 1.03 | 1.10 |
|% Sulfur | .13 | .14 |
|% Chloride Ion | .18 | .19 |
| | | |
|% Lysine | .19 | .20 |
|% Methionine | .10 | .10 |
| | | |
|Horse DE, Mcal/Lb | .88 | .94 |
Poplar/Black Spruce Mixed
|% Moisture | 4.8 | |
JOHN O MEARA |% Dry Matter | 95.2 | |
272 EAST RD |% Crude Protein | 6.1 | 6.4 |
NEW SWEDEN, ME 04762 |% Available Protein | 5.5 | 5.8 |
|% ADICP | .6 | .6 |
|% Adjusted Crude Protein | 6.1 | 6.4 |
------------------------- |Soluble Protein % CP | | 37 |
ENERGY TABLE - NRC 2001 |Degradable Protein%CP | | 61 |
------------------------- |% NDICP | 2.5 | 2.7 |
Mcal/Lb Mcal/Kg |% Acid Detergent Fiber | 38.9 | 40.9 |
------- ------- |% Neutral Detergent Fiber| 62.9 | 66.1 |
DE, 1X 1.14 2.51 |% Lignin | 5.7 | 6.0 |
ME, 1X 0.95 2.08 |% NFC | 21.3 | 22.4 |
NEL, 3X 0.53 1.16 |% Starch | .8 | .9 |
NEM, 3X 0.55 1.21 |% WSC (Water Sol. Carbs.)| 12.4 | 13.1 |
NEG, 3X 0.29 0.64 |% ESC (Simple Sugars) | 1.6 | 1.7 |
------------------------- |% Crude Fat | 2.3 | 2.5 |
TDN1X, % 58 |% Ash | 5.11 | 5.37 |
------------------------- |% TDN | 55 | 58 |
|NEL, Mcal/Lb | .46 | .48 |
|NEM, Mcal/Lb | .49 | .52 |
|NEG, Mcal/Lb | .25 | .26 |
|Relative Feed Value | | 80 |
|% Calcium | .34 | .36 |
|% Phosphorus | .13 | .14 |
|% Magnesium | .18 | .19 |
|% Potassium | .77 | .81 |
|% Sulfur | .17 | .18 |
|% Chloride Ion | .15 | .16 |
| | | |
|% Lysine | .18 | .19 |
|% Methionine | .09 | .10 |
| | | |
|Horse DE, Mcal/Lb | .90 | .95 |
The numbers on the nutrient values were better than expected and show that tree hay in general is a viable feed.
The objective of producing a stored cattle feed out of tree fodder has been met. We learned that drying the muka with a dryer was not as necessary as we anticipated. We learned that caterpillar infestations can significantly impact the yield of tree fodder.
Weight gain averages indicate that the poplar and poplar/black spruce feed is a much better choice than just hay and black spruce. Palatability also indicates that the poplar and the mixed muka are a better choice. In addition, the black spruce costs more in labor to produce.
However, the black spruce has the advantage that it can be harvested in winter, when one is not making hay.
Overall, poplar tree hay seems the best of what was tested. Because of the ability to harvest black spruce in winter and mix it with poplar, thereby achieving similar weight gains and palatability, that is also a viable option. The results of this project indicate that feeding black spruce at 20% rate should only be done in a feed emergency. It would be better to just feed hay if hay were available.
Education & Outreach Activities and Participation Summary
Participation Summary:
12 people attended an informal field demonstration of the process and quality of muka.
One article summarizing the project has been submitted for publication. muka article 1
A more general article on Tree Hay, with interviews, explaining tree hay as an under-utilized forage was written but has not been submitted. Tree Hay
Learning Outcomes
People have great interest in this topic. I have talked to many farmers who have heard about this project and my writing on the topic and have expressed interest in trying it.
Project Outcomes
This has made me think about how black spruce can be used as a feed. Harvest in winter and mix with poplar.
Grain dryer is not needed. Black spruce should only be used with poplar mixed if possible.