The Economic Case for Soil Health: Engaging Producers with Scientific Evidence and Real-World Case Studies

Breakout session Monday, February 10 at 3:45 p.m.

Need evidence on costs and benefits of soil health practices for crop and livestock producers? Learn about six 2-page research summaries and 20+ 2-page case studies from American Farmland Trust.

Speaker: Chellie Maples, American Farmland Trust

1. The Economic Case for Soil Health Engaging Producers with Scientific Evidence & Real-World Case Studies Collaborators: Chellie Maples, Jen Tillman, & Michelle Perez 9-way cover crop mix ( Ifft Yorkshire Farms, IL) Feb. 10, 2025 NACD Annual Meeting Salt Lake City, UT Thank you to USDA NRCS for their collaboration & funding for the creation of these resources

2. Motivation for AFT’s Soil Health Economics Work L imited info on the economics of implementing soil health (SH) practices & few resource for producers about economics of SH practices So, AFT has produced: Summaries of scientific literature around SH practice adoption Addresses accessibility issues for producers and other professionals … Paywalls Not the target audience Farmers’ Guides to Soil Health Personal stories + economic budget analyses for individual farms Provides a more accessible alternative to peer-to-peer learning ; relatable examples. Soil Health Economic Case Studies

3. Farmers’ Guides to Soil Health: Row Crop and Grazing Editions Chellie Maples Source: Maples Stock Farm Source: AFT

4. Soil Health Information For Everyone! Target audience: Conservation professionals Producers 2-page summaries of relevant literature ( 79+ studies ) Row crop Intensive grazing management Includes “Key Takeaways” Includes linked sources

5. Three Row Crop Farmers’ Guides Different info conveyed through each analysis Soil health practices: Reduced tillage & NT Nutrient management Cover crops Crop rotation

6. Key Take-Aways from Each Guide Net Income SH practices may provide economic gains Indication that some systems may see larger increases/ac Long-term investment Incentives matter: Can be the difference between a ̶ or + net income change Budget Analyses Yield Production Cost All 7 long-term trials (5+ years) found <1 soil health practice treatment resulted in increased net income Location matters Studies showed farmer experience with SH practices impacts success Economies of scale aid in practice adoption Environmental benefits matter Research Trials Other Yield changes may not be observed immediately (building SH is a commitment) Incentives do matter, but may not be a huge limitation Combinations of practices are more popular than single practice adoptions (e.g., no-till + cover crops) National Surveys

7. Farmers’ Guides to Grazing: Clarifying Terminology Conventional (Continuous) Grazing Simple Rotational Grazing Adaptive Multi-Paddock, Mob

8. Key Economic, Forage and Soil Health Considerations 1. May improve forage quality and increase forage availability potentially increasing long-term profitability Largely through increase forage utilization Monitor stocking rates Increased short-term costs (could be a barrier) Low impact on weight gain (rotation frequency & stocking density) 2. Larger operations may benefit more than smaller operations ​ Spread costs over more head of cattle​ 3. May increase soil organic carbon in some areas Currently no evidence of this in semi-arid rangelands Could increase nutrients in soil (SE)  Decreased fertilizer usage 4. May reduce phosphorus loss Source: Maples Stock Farm

9. Key Seasonal Grazing Considerations 1. Potential for improved soil health and forage quality: I mproved nutrient cycling in soils I ncreased nutrient density of forages on pastures 2. Potential for increased cattle weight gains: I mproved cattle weight gains under seasonal practices Improved soil health and forage quality 3. Potential for reduced feeding costs: May improve profitability of cattle operations. Extends the grazing season Potentially reduces the amount of supplementary feeding Labor costs may increase Introduction of Seasonal Practices Bale Grazing Patch Burn Grazing

10. Soil Health Case Studies Featuring “soil health successful” farmers Jen Tillman Planting corn into terminated 4-way cover crop mix (Springhill Farms, KY) Healthy soil in rye cover crop sample (Piedmont Ag, VA)

11. Overview: AFT Soil Health Case Studies Since 2020, AFT has published 26 Soil Health Case studies , co-branded with NRCS 23 row crop : cover crops, reduced/no-till, nutrient management, conservation crop rotation 3 almond : nutrient management, conservation cover, mulching, compost Estimated net economic & environmental benefits based on interviews & data Compares previous practices to current practices AFT, in collaboration with NRCS, developed the Retrospective Soil Health Economic Case Study Toolkit so others can create Soil Health Case Studies - https://farmlandinfo.org/rshec-toolkit/ Case studies were funded through grants from USDA-NRCS.

12. Example Case Study: B&R Farms, PA Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (FRPP) easement: 2012 ​ Farm overview: Schuylkill County PA ​ , 424 acres ​ Study area: 360 ac total (150 corn, 150 soybean, 60 hay) ​​ Soil health practices: ​ 2008 – No-till on 360 acres ​ 2018 – Rye cover crop after all 150 acres soybean ​ 2019 – Rye cover crop after all 150 acres corn ​ ROI = 42% R eturn O n I nvestment

13. Motivation: B&R Farms, PA B & R Farms says the reason they put the farm under an easement and the reason they adopted soil health practices is one in the same​: They want the next generation to be able to make a living farming this land​ The easement ensures that the land will be available to farm and the soil health practices ensure that the land will provide for the next generation​

14. Increases in Net Income: B&R Farms, PA Increased Income 10% yield increase in corn & soybeans ​ Decreased Costs Fewer machinery passes due to no-till Hay 5→1​ Soybeans 4→1​ Corn 3→1​ New drill allows for consolidation of parts with existing machinery

15. Decreases in Net Income: B&R Farms, PA No Decreases in Income​ Increased Costs​ Broadcasting rye after corn is cheaper ($41/ac) compared to drilling rye after soybean ($67/ac) due to machinery & seeding rate differences 16 hr /yr spent researching tillage and 4 hr /yr spent researching cover crops

16. Net Income Increases Exceed Decreases: B&R Farms, PA

17. Observed & Estimated Environmental Benefits : B&R Farms, PA Observed less soil running off their fields & increased resilience to extreme weather conditions .  In 2018, torrential rains did not wash out their fields. In dry years, their fields have not become dangerously dry. USDA’s Nutrient Tracking Tool estimated no-till & cover crops reduced N loss by 85%, P loss by 96%, and sediment loss by 99% USDA’s COMET-Farm Tool estimated a 200% reduction in total greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions (1 car off the road for 1 year based on a 7-acre field) No-till corn field

18. Soil health economic resources from AFT Take our quick survey to give us feedback & connect with us about future collaboration and training ! Next up: Predictive Soil Health Economic Calculator Tool Kit Goal: Provide unique & value-added information to help farmers make more informed decisions on soil health practices The tool will help farmers, conservation planners, & ag advisors predict the potential year 1 and cumulative 10-year costs & benefits from adopting SH practices More Case Study Materials Email us to receive 6-powerpoint slide decks for each case study to make it easy to discuss them with a farmer one-on-one or presenting them at a meeting with farmers.

19. Questions? Thank you! The Farmers’ Guides and B&R Farms case study was based on work supported by a USDA NRCS grant NR203A750013G023 Dr. Chellie Maples , Ag. Economist [email protected] Jen Tillman , Research Scientist [email protected] Dr. Michelle Perez , Water Initiative Director [email protected]

20. BONUS SLIDES

21. Why Soil Health Practices? Because they Offer Numerous Water Quality/Quantity, Climate, & Economic Benefits Healthy soils can: Reduce runoff & erosion Improve water storage & plant-available water while protecting water quality Improve resilience to drought, heavy rainfall events, & temperature extremes Store carbon & nutrients in soil organic matter Improve farm/ranch resiliency & profitability 1

22. What role does economics play in farmer-decision-making? Economics is “ the study of scarcity, the study of how people use resources and respond to incentives, or the study of decision-making” – American Economic Association Farmers base their decisions on their economic bottom line, but they consider other factors too : Short term vs Long term outcomes Riskiness Environmental benefits Personal and Community values 2

23. Soil health economic resources from AFT Thanks to a CIG grant, & 2 NRCS Cooperative Agreements, & the Mosaic Fdn 19 AFT-NRCS Soil Health Economic Case Studies in 8 states ( CA, ID, IL, OH, OK, PA, VA, NY) 3 Farmers’ Guides for Soil Health Economics: Retrospective Soil Health Economic Calculator Tool Kit Next up: Predictive Soil Health Economic Calculator Tool Kit Next up: 9 more case studies (ID, VA, 2-MD, 2-KY, & 2-WI) Trains conservation professionals to quantify the costs and benefits fo r already “ soil health successful ” producers in their area & produce case studies 3

24. The Economic Case for Soil Health: Engaging Producers with Scientific Evidence & Real-World Case Studies February 10, 2025 NACD Annual Meeting Salt Lake City, UT Collaborators: Chellie Maples, Jen Tillman, Michelle Perez

25. Notes: Presentation Length: 20 mins? + 5 for Q’s Confirmed Split: Equal split? Presentation has to be uploaded to NACD sharepoint page by 1/31 Abstract: NACD conference Feb 2025 submission.docx

26. Place-holder slide Why people in this audience should be interested in making the economic case for soil health Scientific vs. case study type of evidence influencing adoption? Cite something?

27. Motivation for AFT’s Soil Health Economics Work All have been funded by NAL-13, 1 intro slide explaining what the guides are/why we made them… cover them broadly (key takeaways only) Scientific evidence exists that implementing soil health practices may: Improve soil health Increase water holding capacity Reduce runoff Lower climate emissions Sequester carbon Less information on the economics of the implementing SH practices… Accessibility issues for producers and other professionals … Paywalls Not the target audience

28. Key Economic Considerations: 1. Potential long-term increased profitability ​ Increased forage utilization ​ 2. Larger operations may benefit more than smaller operations ​ Spread costs over more head of cattle ​ 3. Increased short-term costs ​ Upfront costs can be a barrier ​ 4. Low impact on cattle gains ​ Careful management of stocking density and rotation frequency can protect against adverse cattle performance

29. Key Forage and Soil Health Considerations 1. May improve forage quality and increase forage availability Monitor stocking rates 2. May increase soil organic carbon in some areas Currently no evidence of this in semi-arid rangelands 3. May reduce phosphorus loss 4. Mixed results regarding hydrologic responses of soils Better water holding capacity, improve water infiltration Vary regionally 5. Could increase nutrients in soils (Seen in SE) Decrease fertilizer inputs

30. Key Findings from Budget Analyses Net Income Range of change: $-/ to $+/ac Indication that corn systems may see larger increases/ac Incentives matter! Can be the difference between a negative or positive net income change. Yield Increased yield stability (SHI) Increased yield revenues in some cases: Range: $14-$151/ac (AFT) Avg. $31/ac corn (SHI) Avg. $29/ac soybean (SHI) Other No-Till generated higher net returns vs. conventional till Cover crops are normally the largest change in expense (economically “worth it”?) Cost of production was usually lower under SH practices Long-term investment Net Income Yield Take-Aways