Cover Crops: Forage
alternative practice names:
Double Cropping; Grazing Cover Crop
A forage cover crop, cultivated during the main crop's non-growing periods, is harvested for livestock feed. Like traditional cover crops, it offers protective benefits, including reduced soil erosion, weed suppression, and enhanced soil fertility. However, unlike conventional cover crops that decompose or are tilled into the soil, forage cover crops are either grazed or mechanically harvested.
Harvesting or grazing cover crops for livestock forage has been identified as a key strategy for making cover crops profitable, not only in the long term to build soil health but also in the short term as producers gain value with additional high-quality forage on their existing acres. This can be particularly useful when farms need emergency forage due to low crop yields from a challenging preceding crop year.
The most common use of this practice is grazing or harvesting a fall-planted winter cereal grain like winter rye, winter triticale, or winter wheat in the spring, and then following it with corn, soybeans, sorghum, or another summer annual depending on individual farm rotations.
Some producers take advantage of the summer harvest timing of cereal grain crops to plant more diverse forage cover crops for late summer or fall harvest. These crops may include warm-season annuals, annual legumes and grasses, brassicas, other forbs, forage oats, or an early planting of winter cereals. This practice is highly adaptable and can be implemented to meet individual producers’ goals and systems.
When used, in what regions in the U.S. is the practice found:
Northwest, West, Upper Midwest, Southwest, Northeast, Southeast
FARM SIZE
When used, typically found on farms of the following sizes:
All Sizes
Practice Benefits
Increased forage yields per acre: For farms with limited acreage, harvesting cover crops can significantly boost overall farm yields without requiring additional land. Even if the primary cash crop experiences a slight yield reduction—common in northern regions due to the shorter growing season—the combined yield of the harvested cover crop and cash crop often outweighs the loss. In southern regions with longer growing seasons, this yield reduction is less of a concern.
Maximized manure utilization: Adding a second crop to the rotation and harvesting it within the same year significantly increases the total nutrients removed from the field, increasing the amount of manure that can be applied. This differs from conventional, non-harvested cover crops, which do not remove nutrients. This approach is particularly beneficial for farms with limited acreage, as it allows for more efficient manure application and justifies higher per-acre manure usage across the farm. Additionally, for farms already making fall manure applications to ensure adequate manure storage capacity for the winter, putting that manure on a growing crop is a win-win as it will reduce runoff and increase the yield and quality of the cover crop the next spring.
Removal of excess soil nutrients: In fields with a history of manure application, phosphorus levels can accumulate over time. Planting a fall or winter cover crop helps capture excess nutrients, including phosphorus, preventing further buildup. Harvesting these phosphorus-rich forages is one of the most effective ways to reduce soil phosphorus concentrations, as it removes the nutrient from the field, aiding in long-term nutrient management.
Improved soil health: Cover crops are a well-established conservation strategy that helps reduce erosion, improve nutrient cycling, and build overall soil health. Harvesting cover crops for forage does not diminish their environmental benefits. In fact, farmers aiming for successful forage production often implement practices that maximize biomass, further enhancing the ecological services provided by the cover crop.
Increased profitability: Cover crops used purely as green manure can take years to yield a return on investment due to the costs of establishment and management (e.g., seed, planting, termination). While benefits like improved soil structure and nitrogen fixation accrue over time, these returns are less immediate and tangible. However, by harvesting cover crops as forage, farmers can generate immediate value, often achieving a positive financial return in the first year. Although this may slow certain soil health improvements compared to leaving cover crops in place, the immediate economic gain can make cover cropping more financially sustainable from the start.
Extended grazing opportunities: For farms that graze livestock, cover crops offer an excellent opportunity to extend grazing days during periods when conventional pastures may be limited, such as early spring, late fall, or during summer slumps. Targeting specific animal groups for grazing can also help optimize pasture usage throughout the year.
We're always eager to update the website with the latest research, implementation insights, financial case studies, and emerging practices. Use the link above to share your insights.
Implementation Insights
Site-specific or Farm-specific requirements
Northern climates: In the northern region of the U.S., the growing season is often too short for cover crops to grow large enough for a viable forage harvest before the primary crop, like corn, needs to be planted. In colder climates, cover crops may not accumulate enough biomass during the spring, which limits their use as harvested forage before main crops are planted.
Southern climates: In southern climates, cover crops like winter cereals or grasses can be easily grown and harvested for forage during the cooler months. These cover crops fit more easily into farming practices in these regions and are often referred to as part of double- or triple-cropping systems.
Required Capital Expenditures (CapEx)
Planting equipment: While many farms can utilize existing equipment, some may choose to invest in specialized tools like grain drills, air seeders, or other equipment designed for planting cover crops more efficiently. These tools ensure proper seed depth and distribution, which is critical for good cover crop establishment.
Harvesting equipment: Farms that do not already own appropriate harvesting equipment (e.g., forage harvesters, balers) may need to invest in it if they plan to harvest cover crops for forage. Smaller farms might take advantage of equipment-sharing programs offered by local conservation districts or farmer cooperatives to minimize upfront costs.
Silage storage capacity expansion: If the increased forage yields strain existing storage facilities, farms may need to expand their storage capacity. Expansion could involve constructing additional T-walls in bunker silos or creating new storage areas for ag bags or wrapped bales. Some farms may invest in an ag bagger for storing the forage, especially if the harvested quantity is too small to justify using larger bunker silos. This equipment can also be rented from local organizations or cooperatives, reducing the need for a large upfront investment.
Fencing and water lines for grazing: To graze cover crops, farms will need perimeter fences and supplies like poly wire, portable fence posts, and electric fencing materials, to establish and manage rotational grazing systems. Additional watering systems or mobile water tanks may be necessary to provide water in grazing areas not previously used for animals.
Required Operational Expenditures (OpEx)
Labor: There will be additional labor costs for planting, managing, and harvesting the forage cover crop. If the farm relies on custom hiring for these tasks, labor costs may include contractor fees. For farms using cover crops for grazing, additional labor is needed to move animals between grazing areas and manage rotational grazing systems.
Input costs: The cost of purchasing cover crop seeds is an ongoing expense, and different species or mixtures may have varying costs depending on their availability and effectiveness in forage production. Cover crops intended for harvest should be managed with the same care as a primary crop, which includes planting at higher seeding rates and ensuring proper seed-to-soil contact for optimal establishment and yield. Planting, harvesting, and transporting forage cover crops will require additional fuel. Other consumables, such as bale wrap, netting, twine, ag bags, or silage tarps, add to the operational costs.
Implementation Considerations
Planting dates: To maximize yield, biomass production, and forage quality, it is crucial to plant cover crops early within the recommended window. However, delays due to cash crop harvest or wet fall conditions can impact planting timing. For more flexibility, consider methods like interseeding winter crops into corn silage which allow for earlier planting.
Field preparation: Proper field preparation is essential, especially if mowing will be used for harvesting. Farmers can ensure good seed-to-soil contact by using appropriate seeding methods such as grain drills, row crop planters, or roller harrows, to promote fast and uniform emergence.
Harvest: Timing is key to optimizing both yield and quality, particularly for winter cereals. Harvesting at the ‘boot’ stage or Feekes Stage 9/10 optimizes forage quality. Given that grasses mature quickly in the spring, it’s important to be prepared for a narrow harvest window. Feed quality will rapidly deteriorate if the crop is allowed to mature past the optimum harvest window. Starting with a smaller acreage may help in managing timing and efficiency. Additionally, using different crops like rye, triticale, and wheat can help extend the harvest period. Having a backup plan can be useful if wet spring conditions make it challenging to harvest at the ideal time. Depending on the situation, harvesting less high-quality feed may be more profitable than harvesting lower-quality feed.
Ensiling: Depending on the climate zone, cover crops harvested in spring will be ensiled at a higher-than-ideal moisture content due to high moisture in the actively growing plant at mowing. It will make excellent forage if fed out over the summer and not ensiled too long (>90 days). Ensiling at <30% DM increases the opportunity for toxic acids to build up in the feed resulting in health issues in the animals.
Crop system changes: To facilitate timely forage cover crop planting and harvest, farms can integrate shorter-season summer annuals, especially in northern regions with shorter growing seasons. Shorter-maturity corn hybrids or alternative crops such as sorghum can be planted later in the spring or harvested earlier in the fall. Both crops in the rotation should be managed cohesively to ensure that neither is compromised for the benefit of the other, and decisions should aim to optimize overall system performance.
Managing complexity: Double-cropping adds complexity, particularly in labor and timing. Planting and harvesting cover crops often coincide with other busy periods on the farm. Utilizing no-till methods can reduce labor demands, but strategic labor planning is essential. Creative solutions such as applying manure after cover crop establishment or hiring custom contractors for planting and harvesting can ease labor pressures during peak seasons.
Pesticide restrictions: Many pesticides used in crop rotations have replant or harvest intervals that may conflict with harvesting cover crops for forage. Farmers should carefully review pesticide labels to avoid violations and adjust their practices as needed. This also applies to herbicide use before, during, or after forage cover crop termination.
Feed storage: Adequate and segregated storage is essential to preserve the quality of harvested forage. Depending on the scale of production, additional storage capacity or alternative storage methods may be required.
Grazing harvesting: Grazing cover crops requires significant infrastructure, including fencing and water systems. Preventing compaction or pugging in wet soil conditions is critical, particularly in fall and spring. Starting grazing early—before crops reach the boot stage—helps maintain high forage quality. Managing livestock movement to avoid soil damage, especially in reduced or no-till systems, is important for long-term soil health. If tillage is used, fields can be smoothed out during cash crop planting. However, in reduced or no-till systems, it is crucial to minimize livestock traffic during wet conditions to prevent soil from becoming uneven (bumpy) and compact.
Financial Considerations and Revenue Streams
FEDERAL COST-SHARE PROGRAM
Funding is available for this practice through USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).
Related EQIP Practice Standard: Cover Crop (340).
Notes:
Check with the local NRCS office on payment rates and crop rotations relevant to your location.
Check both cost-share and crop insurance requirements specific to your area and program.
CARBON MARKETS
This practice is commonly credited in carbon markets. The practice can generate both offset and inset credits.
Notes:
To participate, operators generally need at least three years of management data prior to implementing a new practice. Common management data requirements cover planting, tillage, harvest, grazing, fertilization, liming, and residue management.
This practice would need to be new to the producer or expanded to additional acres to qualify for most programs.
In offset projects, producers have to guarantee soil carbon storage for 50-100 years, though avoided emissions (for example, from nitrous oxide reductions) do not carry risks of reversals (see Verra methodology and Climate Action Reserve's Soil Enrichment Protocol).
Producers typically are protected against natural disasters or unintended carbon reversals when they contribute to a carbon insurance or "buffer" pool. Intentional reversals, from intensive tillage or land sales, may require operators to return proceeds from the project.
The length of inset commitments would vary based on the opportunity with the corporate partner.
Credit amounts varies widely based on past management, location, weather, and the interaction between practices. A high level estimate can be calculated using USDA Comet Planner.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES, TOOLS, AND CASE STUDIES
Additional Resources
Article: Are Cover Crops a Good Alternative Feed Source for Dairy Cattle? (Decode 6)
Article: Can Cover Crops & No-Till Reduce Dairy Greenhouse Gas Emissions? (Decode 6)
Article: Can Dual-Use Cover Crops & No-Till Make Dairy Farming More Sustainable? (Decode 6)
Fact Sheet: Cover Crops as Forage Crops...A Look at Winter Rye and Triticale (University of Vermont)
Fact Sheet: Winter Triticale Forage (Cornell University)
Guide: Comprehensive Guide To Aerial Cover Crop Seeding (North Jersey RC&D)
Guide: Grazing Cover Crops: A How-To Guide (Pasture Project and Wallace Center)
Report: 2016 Short Season Corn Silage Variety Trial (University of Vermont)
Report: Cover Crops for Grazing Systems (University of Minnesota)
Webinar Series: Combining Livestock, Manure and Cover Crops (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education)
Cover Crop Selection Tools:
Environmental Impacts
REDUCES FARM GREENHOUSE GAS FOOTPRINT
The greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of cover crops harvested for forage is complex and influenced by various factors, including crop management practices and local environmental conditions. One of the primary benefits of double-cropping is the reduction in spring soil nitrate levels, which helps lower nitrous oxide emissions. Additionally, when cover crops are harvested, their root biomass supports soil carbon sequestration. Forage cover crops, such as cereal rye or legumes, typically have a lower GHG footprint compared to input-intensive crops like corn. This is primarily due to the reduced need for synthetic fertilizers, which are significant contributors to GHG emissions in conventional cropping systems. When cover crops replace other forages in animal rations or reduce the use of high-input feeds like concentrated grains, they can further lower the GHG emissions associated with feed production. A life-cycle assessment (LCA) or process-based model can provide a comprehensive evaluation of the GHG impact of double-cropping, taking into account all stages of production, from inputs and field operations to emissions and end-use.
IMPROVES WATER QUALITY
Cover crops act as nutrient scavengers, absorbing residual nitrogen and other nutrients that remain in the soil after the primary crop is harvested. By taking up these nutrients, cover crops prevent them from leaching into groundwater or running off into surface water. By covering the soil surface, cover crops protect it from the erosive forces of wind and water. This reduces the amount of sediment that gets carried away by runoff, helping to prevent soil particles, along with attached nutrients and pesticides, from entering streams and rivers. The root systems of cover crops, especially deep-rooted species, break up compacted soil layers and create channels for water infiltration. This improves water percolation into the soil, reducing surface runoff and helping to replenish groundwater supplies. Lastly, harvested cover crops contribute organic matter to the soil, enhancing its structure and water-holding capacity. This allows the soil to retain more moisture, reducing the risk of surface runoff during heavy rainfall.
SUPPORTS BIODIVERSITY
Double-cropping can enhance biodiversity by providing habitat and food sources for various organisms. Many cover crops, such as clover, attract and support pollinators like bees and butterflies.
REFerences
Contents
We're always eager to update the website with the latest research, implementation insights, financial case studies, and emerging practices. Use the link above to share your insights.
Alignment with FARM Program
FARM Environmental Stewardship (ES) V2-V3 Alignment
FARM ES Version 3 captures the benefits of cover crops in the optional crop module. FARM ES users are able to designate crops planted as cover crops so the model can account for the various benefits. The optional FARM ES Conservation Practice Questionnaire (CPQ) also includes opportunities for farms to indicate planting of cover crops.
A forage cover crop, cultivated during the main crop's non-growing periods, is harvested for livestock feed. Like traditional cover crops, it offers protective benefits, including reduced soil erosion, weed suppression, and enhanced soil fertility. However, unlike conventional cover crops that decompose or are tilled into the soil, forage cover crops are either grazed or mechanically harvested.
Harvesting or grazing cover crops for livestock forage has been identified as a key strategy for making cover crops profitable, not only in the long term to build soil health but also in the short term as producers gain value with additional high-quality forage on their existing acres. This can be particularly useful when farms need emergency forage due to low crop yields from a challenging preceding crop year.
The most common use of this practice is grazing or harvesting a fall-planted winter cereal grain like winter rye, winter triticale, or winter wheat in the spring, and then following it with corn, soybeans, sorghum, or another summer annual depending on individual farm rotations.
Some producers take advantage of the summer harvest timing of cereal grain crops to plant more diverse forage cover crops for late summer or fall harvest. These crops may include warm-season annuals, annual legumes and grasses, brassicas, other forbs, forage oats, or an early planting of winter cereals. This practice is highly adaptable and can be implemented to meet individual producers’ goals and systems.
Practices and technologies
Cover Crops: Forage
alternative practice name:
Double Cropping; Grazing Cover Crop
REGIONALITY
When used, in what regions in the U.S. is the practice found:
Northwest, West, Upper Midwest, Southwest, Northeast, Southeast
COMPARABLE FARM SIZE
When used, typically found on farms of the following sizes:
0 - 100 cows, 100 - 500 cows, 500 - 2500 cows, 2500 - 5000 cows, Over 5000 cows
Practice Benefits
Increased forage yields per acre: For farms with limited acreage, harvesting cover crops can significantly boost overall farm yields without requiring additional land. Even if the primary cash crop experiences a slight yield reduction—common in northern regions due to the shorter growing season—the combined yield of the harvested cover crop and cash crop often outweighs the loss. In southern regions with longer growing seasons, this yield reduction is less of a concern.
Maximized manure utilization: Adding a second crop to the rotation and harvesting it within the same year significantly increases the total nutrients removed from the field, increasing the amount of manure that can be applied. This differs from conventional, non-harvested cover crops, which do not remove nutrients. This approach is particularly beneficial for farms with limited acreage, as it allows for more efficient manure application and justifies higher per-acre manure usage across the farm. Additionally, for farms already making fall manure applications to ensure adequate manure storage capacity for the winter, putting that manure on a growing crop is a win-win as it will reduce runoff and increase the yield and quality of the cover crop the next spring.
Removal of excess soil nutrients: In fields with a history of manure application, phosphorus levels can accumulate over time. Planting a fall or winter cover crop helps capture excess nutrients, including phosphorus, preventing further buildup. Harvesting these phosphorus-rich forages is one of the most effective ways to reduce soil phosphorus concentrations, as it removes the nutrient from the field, aiding in long-term nutrient management.
Improved soil health: Cover crops are a well-established conservation strategy that helps reduce erosion, improve nutrient cycling, and build overall soil health. Harvesting cover crops for forage does not diminish their environmental benefits. In fact, farmers aiming for successful forage production often implement practices that maximize biomass, further enhancing the ecological services provided by the cover crop.
Increased profitability: Cover crops used purely as green manure can take years to yield a return on investment due to the costs of establishment and management (e.g., seed, planting, termination). While benefits like improved soil structure and nitrogen fixation accrue over time, these returns are less immediate and tangible. However, by harvesting cover crops as forage, farmers can generate immediate value, often achieving a positive financial return in the first year. Although this may slow certain soil health improvements compared to leaving cover crops in place, the immediate economic gain can make cover cropping more financially sustainable from the start.
Extended grazing opportunities: For farms that graze livestock, cover crops offer an excellent opportunity to extend grazing days during periods when conventional pastures may be limited, such as early spring, late fall, or during summer slumps. Targeting specific animal groups for grazing can also help optimize pasture usage throughout the year.
Implementation Insights
Site-specific or Farm-specific requirements
Northern climates: In the northern region of the U.S., the growing season is often too short for cover crops to grow large enough for a viable forage harvest before the primary crop, like corn, needs to be planted. In colder climates, cover crops may not accumulate enough biomass during the spring, which limits their use as harvested forage before main crops are planted.
Southern climates: In southern climates, cover crops like winter cereals or grasses can be easily grown and harvested for forage during the cooler months. These cover crops fit more easily into farming practices in these regions and are often referred to as part of double- or triple-cropping systems.
Required Capital Expenditures (CapEx)
Planting equipment: While many farms can utilize existing equipment, some may choose to invest in specialized tools like grain drills, air seeders, or other equipment designed for planting cover crops more efficiently. These tools ensure proper seed depth and distribution, which is critical for good cover crop establishment.
Harvesting equipment: Farms that do not already own appropriate harvesting equipment (e.g., forage harvesters, balers) may need to invest in it if they plan to harvest cover crops for forage. Smaller farms might take advantage of equipment-sharing programs offered by local conservation districts or farmer cooperatives to minimize upfront costs.
Silage storage capacity expansion: If the increased forage yields strain existing storage facilities, farms may need to expand their storage capacity. Expansion could involve constructing additional T-walls in bunker silos or creating new storage areas for ag bags or wrapped bales. Some farms may invest in an ag bagger for storing the forage, especially if the harvested quantity is too small to justify using larger bunker silos. This equipment can also be rented from local organizations or cooperatives, reducing the need for a large upfront investment.
Fencing and water lines for grazing: To graze cover crops, farms will need perimeter fences and supplies like poly wire, portable fence posts, and electric fencing materials, to establish and manage rotational grazing systems. Additional watering systems or mobile water tanks may be necessary to provide water in grazing areas not previously used for animals.
Required Operational Expenditures (OpEx)
Labor: There will be additional labor costs for planting, managing, and harvesting the forage cover crop. If the farm relies on custom hiring for these tasks, labor costs may include contractor fees. For farms using cover crops for grazing, additional labor is needed to move animals between grazing areas and manage rotational grazing systems.
Input costs: The cost of purchasing cover crop seeds is an ongoing expense, and different species or mixtures may have varying costs depending on their availability and effectiveness in forage production. Cover crops intended for harvest should be managed with the same care as a primary crop, which includes planting at higher seeding rates and ensuring proper seed-to-soil contact for optimal establishment and yield. Planting, harvesting, and transporting forage cover crops will require additional fuel. Other consumables, such as bale wrap, netting, twine, ag bags, or silage tarps, add to the operational costs.
Implementation Considerations
Planting dates: To maximize yield, biomass production, and forage quality, it is crucial to plant cover crops early within the recommended window. However, delays due to cash crop harvest or wet fall conditions can impact planting timing. For more flexibility, consider methods like interseeding winter crops into corn silage which allow for earlier planting.
Field preparation: Proper field preparation is essential, especially if mowing will be used for harvesting. Farmers can ensure good seed-to-soil contact by using appropriate seeding methods such as grain drills, row crop planters, or roller harrows, to promote fast and uniform emergence.
Harvest: Timing is key to optimizing both yield and quality, particularly for winter cereals. Harvesting at the ‘boot’ stage or Feekes Stage 9/10 optimizes forage quality. Given that grasses mature quickly in the spring, it’s important to be prepared for a narrow harvest window. Feed quality will rapidly deteriorate if the crop is allowed to mature past the optimum harvest window. Starting with a smaller acreage may help in managing timing and efficiency. Additionally, using different crops like rye, triticale, and wheat can help extend the harvest period. Having a backup plan can be useful if wet spring conditions make it challenging to harvest at the ideal time. Depending on the situation, harvesting less high-quality feed may be more profitable than harvesting lower-quality feed.
Ensiling: Depending on the climate zone, cover crops harvested in spring will be ensiled at a higher-than-ideal moisture content due to high moisture in the actively growing plant at mowing. It will make excellent forage if fed out over the summer and not ensiled too long (>90 days). Ensiling at <30% DM increases the opportunity for toxic acids to build up in the feed resulting in health issues in the animals.
Crop system changes: To facilitate timely forage cover crop planting and harvest, farms can integrate shorter-season summer annuals, especially in northern regions with shorter growing seasons. Shorter-maturity corn hybrids or alternative crops such as sorghum can be planted later in the spring or harvested earlier in the fall. Both crops in the rotation should be managed cohesively to ensure that neither is compromised for the benefit of the other, and decisions should aim to optimize overall system performance.
Managing complexity: Double-cropping adds complexity, particularly in labor and timing. Planting and harvesting cover crops often coincide with other busy periods on the farm. Utilizing no-till methods can reduce labor demands, but strategic labor planning is essential. Creative solutions such as applying manure after cover crop establishment or hiring custom contractors for planting and harvesting can ease labor pressures during peak seasons.
Pesticide restrictions: Many pesticides used in crop rotations have replant or harvest intervals that may conflict with harvesting cover crops for forage. Farmers should carefully review pesticide labels to avoid violations and adjust their practices as needed. This also applies to herbicide use before, during, or after forage cover crop termination.
Feed storage: Adequate and segregated storage is essential to preserve the quality of harvested forage. Depending on the scale of production, additional storage capacity or alternative storage methods may be required.
Grazing harvesting: Grazing cover crops requires significant infrastructure, including fencing and water systems. Preventing compaction or pugging in wet soil conditions is critical, particularly in fall and spring. Starting grazing early—before crops reach the boot stage—helps maintain high forage quality. Managing livestock movement to avoid soil damage, especially in reduced or no-till systems, is important for long-term soil health. If tillage is used, fields can be smoothed out during cash crop planting. However, in reduced or no-till systems, it is crucial to minimize livestock traffic during wet conditions to prevent soil from becoming uneven (bumpy) and compact.
Financial Considerations and Revenue Streams
FEDERAL COST-SHARE PROGRAM
Funding is available for this practice through USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).
Related EQIP Practice Standard: Cover Crop (340).
Notes:
Check with the local NRCS office on payment rates and crop rotations relevant to your location.
Check both cost-share and crop insurance requirements specific to your area and program.
CARBON MARKETS
This practice is commonly credited in carbon markets. The practice can generate both offset and inset credits.
Notes:
To participate, operators generally need at least three years of management data prior to implementing a new practice. Common management data requirements cover planting, tillage, harvest, grazing, fertilization, liming, and residue management.
This practice would need to be new to the producer or expanded to additional acres to qualify for most programs.
In offset projects, producers have to guarantee soil carbon storage for 50-100 years, though avoided emissions (for example, from nitrous oxide reductions) do not carry risks of reversals (see Verra methodology and Climate Action Reserve's Soil Enrichment Protocol).
Producers typically are protected against natural disasters or unintended carbon reversals when they contribute to a carbon insurance or "buffer" pool. Intentional reversals, from intensive tillage or land sales, may require operators to return proceeds from the project.
The length of inset commitments would vary based on the opportunity with the corporate partner.
Credit amounts varies widely based on past management, location, weather, and the interaction between practices. A high level estimate can be calculated using USDA Comet Planner.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES, TOOLS, AND CASE STUDIES
Additional Resources
Article: Are Cover Crops a Good Alternative Feed Source for Dairy Cattle? (Decode 6)
Article: Can Cover Crops & No-Till Reduce Dairy Greenhouse Gas Emissions? (Decode 6)
Article: Can Dual-Use Cover Crops & No-Till Make Dairy Farming More Sustainable? (Decode 6)
Fact Sheet: Cover Crops as Forage Crops...A Look at Winter Rye and Triticale (University of Vermont)
Fact Sheet: Winter Triticale Forage (Cornell University)
Guide: Comprehensive Guide To Aerial Cover Crop Seeding (North Jersey RC&D)
Guide: Grazing Cover Crops: A How-To Guide (Pasture Project and Wallace Center)
Report: 2016 Short Season Corn Silage Variety Trial (University of Vermont)
Report: Cover Crops for Grazing Systems (University of Minnesota)
Webinar Series: Combining Livestock, Manure and Cover Crops (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education)
Cover Crop Selection Tools:
Research
REFerences
REDUCES FARM GREENHOUSE GAS FOOTPRINT
The greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of cover crops harvested for forage is complex and influenced by various factors, including crop management practices and local environmental conditions. One of the primary benefits of double-cropping is the reduction in spring soil nitrate levels, which helps lower nitrous oxide emissions. Additionally, when cover crops are harvested, their root biomass supports soil carbon sequestration. Forage cover crops, such as cereal rye or legumes, typically have a lower GHG footprint compared to input-intensive crops like corn. This is primarily due to the reduced need for synthetic fertilizers, which are significant contributors to GHG emissions in conventional cropping systems. When cover crops replace other forages in animal rations or reduce the use of high-input feeds like concentrated grains, they can further lower the GHG emissions associated with feed production. A life-cycle assessment (LCA) or process-based model can provide a comprehensive evaluation of the GHG impact of double-cropping, taking into account all stages of production, from inputs and field operations to emissions and end-use.
IMPROVES WATER QUALITY
Cover crops act as nutrient scavengers, absorbing residual nitrogen and other nutrients that remain in the soil after the primary crop is harvested. By taking up these nutrients, cover crops prevent them from leaching into groundwater or running off into surface water. By covering the soil surface, cover crops protect it from the erosive forces of wind and water. This reduces the amount of sediment that gets carried away by runoff, helping to prevent soil particles, along with attached nutrients and pesticides, from entering streams and rivers. The root systems of cover crops, especially deep-rooted species, break up compacted soil layers and create channels for water infiltration. This improves water percolation into the soil, reducing surface runoff and helping to replenish groundwater supplies. Lastly, harvested cover crops contribute organic matter to the soil, enhancing its structure and water-holding capacity. This allows the soil to retain more moisture, reducing the risk of surface runoff during heavy rainfall.
SUPPORTS BIODIVERSITY
Double-cropping can enhance biodiversity by providing habitat and food sources for various organisms. Many cover crops, such as clover, attract and support pollinators like bees and butterflies.
Alignment with FARM Program
FARM Environmental Stewardship (ES) V2-V3 Alignment
FARM ES Version 3 captures the benefits of cover crops in the optional crop module. FARM ES users are able to designate crops planted as cover crops so the model can account for the various benefits. The optional FARM ES Conservation Practice Questionnaire (CPQ) also includes opportunities for farms to indicate planting of cover crops.