Sugarcane is one of the most economical alternatives for off-season roughage feeding, which, whenever corrected, can become a feeding solution for animals with average production, even with the managerial difficulties of daily harvesting, regrowth handling, need for extra labor or specialized machinery, need to complete harvest within the same cycle, in addition to the risk of fire in the crop fields, all of which can be corrected. A correction alternative is sugarcane ensiling and nutritional enrichment. Thus, the objective of this project was to evaluate the fermentative profile of sugarcane silage added with soybean hulls, bacterial inoculant Lactobacillus buchneri and urea, and the forage intake and performance of lactating cows (milk quantity and composition). Eight mixtures were compared, using IAC86-2480 sugarcane. As additives were used: Lactobacillus buchneri (strain NCIMB 40788), urea - 0.5% of the original material and 10 or 20% of soybean hulls in the original material. In the first experiment, mini silos were used, with the following treatments: (1) sugarcane without additives; (2) sugarcane + inoculant, (3) sugarcane + 0.5% urea, (4) sugarcane + 0.5% urea + inoculant, (5) sugarcane sugar + 0.5% urea + 10% soybean hulls, (6) sugarcane + 0.5% urea + 20% soybean hulls, (7) sugarcane + inoculant + 0.5 % urea + 10% soybean hulls, and (8) sugarcane + inoculant + 0.5% urea + 20% soybean hulls. Nine periods of opening of the experimental silos were studied (respectively, 1, 2, 3, 7, 15, 30, 60, 120, and 180 days after closing). Total, gaseous and effluent losses were evaluated, in addition to the percentages of dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber. No effects of inoculant or urea were detected on silage characteristics, such as pH, dry matter content and losses through effluents or gases. Urea and inoculant increased the lactic acid content and reduced the ethanol content of the silages. The addition of soybean hulls improved the silage composition with a reduction in losses, but did not affect the ethanol or lactic acid contents of the silage. In the second experiment, four cows were used to evaluate milk production and milk composition. They were fed the following treatments: (1) sugarcane silage without additives, (2) sugarcane silage + inoculant, (3) sugarcane silage + inoculant + 10% soybean hulls, and (4) sugarcane silage + inoculant + 20% soybean hulls. The bacterial inoculant negatively affected the consumption of dry matter, NDF and crude protein, while the addition of soybean hulls increased the consumption of dry matter, NDF and milk production. The addition of soybean hulls provided weight gain, with the 20% level yielding higher values than the 10% level. While the addition of soybean hulls provided weight gain, sugarcane silage without additives and sugarcane silage + inoculant caused weight loss. The addition of soybean hulls to the sugarcane mass to be ensiled is recommended at levels between 10 and 20%.