home ▶ practices and technologies
Practices and Technologies
This page features summaries of over 80 practices, offering practical insights into their economic and management impacts and an overview of each practice's environmental effects. The content is supplemented with links to further technical and scientific resources.
To learn more about how this content was developed, see About Us.
HOW TO USE
Explore the library by scrolling through the full practice list below
Filter by area of interest using filters on the left
Click on the practice name to view full practice details
Name of the practice goes here
Name of the practice goes here
Name of the practice goes here
TABLE KEY | Hover over the icon to see a brief description
MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
CAPEX
OPEX
COMPLEX
FUNDING
FARM ES
EMERGING PRACTICE
Emerging Practices are not widely adopted in U.S.Dairy Farms.These practices are either exceptionally innovative, lack substantial scientific evaluation of their effects, or may not yet be commercially feasible.
* Lighter shade indicates there is currently less scientific evidence for environmental impact.
Filter
Filter by Implementation Needs
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Exclude Emerging Practices
Included in FARM ES Assessment
Filter by Environment Benefits
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Filter by Funding Opportunities
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Improve Resource Use Efficiency
Table Key
The information presented in the table is based on insights from experts and professionals.
It should not form the basis for decisions with financial ramifications without first obtaining appropriate professional, scientific, engineering and/or legal advice specific to your organization. Dairy Management Inc. and Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy makes no representations, warranties, or guarantees related to the information provided in this document.
Emerging Practices
"Emerging Practices" are not widely adopted in U.S. Dairy Farms. These practices are either exceptionally innovative, lack substantial scientific evaluation of their effects, or may not yet be commercially feasible.
PRACTICE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
REDUCES FARM GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) FOOTPRINT
Practice reduces whole-farm greenhouse gas emission intensity and/or absolute emissions AND/OR sequesters soil carbon.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
SUPPORTS SOIL HEALTH AND REGENERATIVE FARMING
The practice protects and improves soil health, biodiversity, climate, and water resources while supporting farming business development.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
IMPROVES WATER QUALITY
Practice reduces risk nutrients (i.e. nitrogen and phosphorous), sediments, and other contaminants from entering water bodies either by reducing erosion, run-off, and leaching, improving soil and water nutrient holding capacity, minimizing nutrient overapplication, and/or intercepting runoff before it reaches surface water.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
SUPPORTS BIODIVERSITY
The practice is associated with positive effects, such as maintaining or enhancing the biodiversity of the area and the surrounding ecosystems, promoting the health of pollinators, ensuring the diversity of genetic material (wild and commercial), and hindering invasive species.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
CONSERVES WATER
Practice enables farmers to reduce net agricultural freshwater use per unit of production either by minimizing irrigation water evaporation, overspray, deep percolation, and runoff, optimizing soil water holding capacity, and increasing water use efficiency.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
INCREASES RESOURCE USE EFFICIENCY
The practice reduces the amount of resources required to produce a given product by reducing waste and losses and minimizing yield and production gaps.
Moderate to strong scientific evidence of positive impact.
Practice is hypothesized to have a positive impact, but there is little to no scientific evidence of a positive impact.
PRACTICE IMPLEMENTATION NEEDS
CAPEX - CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
Capital expenditures (CapEx) are primarily a one-time investment in non-consumable assets used to maintain existing levels of operation within a company and to foster its future growth. Capital expenditures include tractors, trucks, autos, machinery, buildings, land improvements, and miscellaneous capital expenditures.
Negligible
Most farmers could implement the practice without upfront costs.
Minimal
Practice will require minimal investment.
Some
Practice will require some investment but less likely to require substantial external resources and planning.
Substantial
Practice will require substantial investment and some technical know-how and planning or implementation costs.
Major
The practice will require a major multi-year investment and could have prerequisites, consulting, or other implementation costs. It may be considered a separate business unit.
OPEX - OPERATING EXPENSES
Operating expenses (OpEx) can also be called 'overhead' or 'fixed costs.' They include custom work, contract work, machine hire expenses, and the rental and leasing of farm machinery, equipment and vehicles.
Negligible
Insignificant expenses, minimal impact.
Low
No new expense categories, but the practice may require low, but incremental costs.
Medium
Expense categories like labor, utilities, supplies and maintenance could increase by a factor compared to current run-rates.
High
Substantial spending, likely new expense categories, and ongoing costs to achieve productivity targets.
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLEXITY
Implementation complexity is a subjective rate of the technical complexity of practice implementation and maintenance. Practices with higher implementation complexity will require increased levels of skilled labor and/or specialized equipment.
Simple
Practice implementation does not require specialized skills beyond those available at most farms and little to no new equipment or technology.
Moderate
Practice implementation will require some technical or skilled labor and industry standard equipment.
Highly
Complex
Practice implementation will require substantial dedicated skilled labor, specialized equipment and experts.
PRACTICE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
FEDERAL COST-SHARE PROGRAMS
Practice is widely eligible for funding through federal cost-share programs such as the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP).
OTHER CONSERVATION FUNDING PROGRAMS
Practice is widely eligible for federal conservation funding through the Farm Services and Rural Development Agency.
CARBON MARKETS
Practice is commonly eligible for funding though carbon markets (inset and/or offset)
REVENUE POTENTIAL
The practice has the potential to create new revenue streams and/or increase farm profitability. Farms may need to obtain carbon credits and/or outside funding to realize revenue potential.
FARM ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
Practice is either (1) included in the FARM ES V3 Model or the impact of the practice is indirectly captured by the model, or (2) included in the FARM ES Conservation Practice Questionaire (CPQ).