Farms.com Home   News

Wisconsin Hay Prices Rise As Demand Increases

There have been more hay buyers than sellers in recent weeks at Tim Slack Auction and Realty in Lancaster, WI.

That means prices are starting to creep up, especially on the higher-quality hay, reports its owner and auctioneer, Tim Slack.

At his Oct. 17 sale, large squares of third-cutting alfalfa, at 20.9% protein and 160 relative feed value (RFV), sold for $205/ton. Large squares of second-crop alfalfa, at 21.9% protein and 146 RFV, fetched $185/ton.

Large squares and large rounds of fair-quality, first-crop grass hay went for $110-127/ton, and large squares of straw, $40-45/bale.

Because more hay is available throughout Wisconsin this year vs. last year, prices have lowered, Slack reports. Top-quality alfalfa is currently priced about $50-60/ton less and grass hay slightly lower than what was paid last year at this time.

“There’s a lot of hay that’s been made, but I’m not going to say there’s a lot of high-quality hay made,” he says. “There’s a lot of 130-140 relative feed value around here.” Last year’s hay crop averaged 155-170 RFV, he says.

“For a while we couldn’t hardly give some of that stuff away. But now that fellas are starting to bring their cattle in from pasture, the grassy rounds and squares are selling fairly well.”

Click here to see more...

Trending Video

Michigan Cover Crop Decision Tool Update 2026

Video: Michigan Cover Crop Decision Tool Update 2026

Abigail Smith, NRCS State Agronomist, Monica Jean, MSU Extension Field Crops Educator, and Madelyn Cleovsky, MSU Extension Conservation Agronomist Educator, discuss 2025 updates made to MCCC’s Cover Crop Decision Tool for Michigan.

This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under agreement number 2023-38640-39573 through the North Central Region SARE program under project number ENC23-226. USDA is an equal opportunity employer and service provider. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.