© Kondinin Group
Cropping
Grain storage
This article has been reproduced with permission from Farming Ahead.
For more information about Kondinin Group phone 1800 677 761.
Further duplication of this article is not permitted.
Bag reduces harvest time and creates market options
Farm information
Farmer
David Trethowan
Location
Holbrook, New South Wales
Property size
2120ha (85% arable)
Enterprises
Triticale, oats, Hereford
beef cattle, Merino sheep,
prime lambs
Annual rainfall
650mm
Soil type
Varies from sandy loam
to shale
Soil pH
6.5–7.0 (calcium chloride)
by
Megan Broad,
for CSIRO ENTOMOLOGY
G
rain harvest bags increased triticale
profits by $60 per hectare and saved
$2/tonne in fumigation costs on a New South
Wales family property during 2005.
The harvest bags also reduced harvesting
time by two days and were cheaper than
buying a new silo to fit the existing auger.
Holbrook operation
Holbrook farmer David Trethowan bought
an Australian demonstration grain filling
machine for $16,000 two years ago.
During 2004–2005, he filled five grain
harvest bags with about 900 tonnes of triticale
and another half a bag with 75t of oats.
One of the key functions of the bags,
made from a thick polyethylene, was to help
remove the crop as quickly as possible using
two harvesters.
While the trucks were taking the grain to the
silos, the harvesters kept filling the massive
harvest bags, which hold about 180t of grain
each, in the paddock until the trucks returned.
This, together with a bag filling rate of 250t
per hour, meant the crop was harvested
more quickly.
About half of the oats and two-thirds of
the triticale crop went into the grain harvest
bags, which were to be sold off-farm, while
the grain in the silos was for mostly on-farm
use. But because of drought the following
year, the oats was also used to feed the
Trethowans’ stock.
Increased marketing flexibility
Storing grain in bags created more
marketing flexibility for the business as the
Trethowans could sell the grain as prices
improved during the season.
Triticale worth $120/t at harvest was sold
for $180/t during winter, creating a $60/t
profit and avoiding fumigation costs of $2/t
associated with silo storage.
The Trethowans sold their triticale to a
private merchant who delivered lime to the
property and then back-loaded with the grain.
During 2004–2005 the merchant bought
four 200–250t parcels of triticale from the
grain harvest bags over three months. It took
25 minutes to load the B-double truck using
the purpose built extractor machine.
Resealing the bag after each load was
removed was a simple matter of folding it
over and placing a few old tyres on top of the
material. This had no impact on the quality of
the grain and it was not attacked by pests.
One benefit of the bags was that different
varieties of triticale could be stored in each bag,
avoiding the problem of mixing and devaluing
the grain as would be the case in a silo.
Storage quality
David stored a bag of triticale in the grain
silo bag for 11 months after harvest and
during that time he did not see any
Using grain harvest bags to store triticale made the Trethowans a $60 per tonne profit as prices increased
from 120/t at harvest to $180/t by winter 2005. Storing triticale in harvest bags also saved fumigation costs
of $2/t associated with silo storage.
50
Photos: Wendy Phillips
Grain harvest bags have lifted profits on the Trethowan family farm in Holbrook, New South Wales, by increasing
marketing flexibility and reducing storage costs.
Storing grain in harvest bags allows the Trethowans
to sell their grain when prices are attractive rather
than immediately post-harvest.
deterioration of the bag, which is only
certified to be used once. A visual appraisal
of the triticale showed no impact on the
grain quality — although David was surprised
the unloaded grain was cold. There was no
problem with pests, due to the air tight
environment created by the interaction
between the grain moisture content and the
temperature in the bags.
Effective expenditure
Adopting the harvest bag system meant
the Trethowans did not have to buy three
new silos at a cost of at least $99,000 to fit a
15-metre (51 feet) long hydraulic auger to
store the 900t of grain.
The Trethowans’ harvest bag system cost
totalled $32,225: $16,000 for the ‘inloader’
machine, $11,000 for a half share in an
‘extractor’ and $5225 for five-and-a-half 60m
bags to hold the same 900t — not to mention
$1800 in costs savings from not fumigating
the grain.
David filled four bags during the
2005–2006 harvest with triticale, while oats
were loaded in silos. The bags, which were
laid strategically in an accessible area in the
paddock, were fenced with ringlock to exclude
sheep and a hotwire to keep out cattle.
Few difficulties with the bags
Galahs cleaning up the grain residue from
around the bags and mice (which created a
few holes) have been the only difficulties with
the bags. But the holes did not invite other
pests into the bags.
David said the main limitation of the bags
was that they could not be moved, which
could make some inaccessible at key times of
the year when paddocks were wet. Another
challenge was how to dispose of the bags
afterwards. David said farmer interest in the
grain bags was significant in the Holbrook
area and many had invested in the
machinery or hired contractors.
For more information contact David
Trethowan on (02) 6036 6141.
FA R M I N G A H E A D
No. 171
April 2006