United States Department of Agriculture

National Agricultural Statistics Service www.nass.usda.gov

Cropland Conservation 

Practices

Of the respondents who reported 

using specific conservation practices 

on their farm/ranch, the top two most 

widely used cropping conservation 

practices were tillage practices 

(86.5%) and irrigation management 

and system improvements (86.4%), 

respectively. (Fig. 2)

The two most motivational factors in 

the decision to utilize tillage practices 

were confidence in following plan 

successfully (77.0%) and anticipated 

saving time or effort (72.8%). 

Anticipated benefits greater than cost 

(81.1%) and confidence in following 

the plan successfully (80.7%) were the 

two most motivational factors in using 

irrigation management and system 

improvements (Fig. 3)

The National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), in cooperation with the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation 

Service (NRCS), conducted the Conservation Practice Adoption Motivations Survey (CPAMS) to ascertain farmers’ 

and ranchers’ conservation practices adoption behaviors and adoption motivations on cropland, grazing land, 

forest land and concentrated livestock feeding operations. 

The survey includes two phases. The first phase included cropland and confined livestock. The second phase will 

include forestland on farms and farm and ranch grazing land and rangeland, which will be released in 2024.

Among respondents 

who reported using 

specific cropping 

conservation 

practices, 86.5% used 

tillage practices. 

Among respondents 

who reported using 

a specific cropping 

conservation practice, 

tillage practices were 

applied to 83.4% of 

cropland.

Fig. 2 Cropland Conservation Practice (% of survey respondents utilizing)

TillagePractices 86.5

Irrigation ManagementandSystemImprovements 86.4

Pest Management 78.2

Drainage WaterManagement 74.7

Nutrient Management 74.5

CoverCrops 61.3

Runo ManagementPractices 49.6

WetlandConservation Practices 7.8

Fig. 1 Cropland Conservation Practice (average % of cropland*)

Tillage Practices 83.4

Irrigation Management and System Improvements 86.9

Pest Management 88.9

Drainage Water Management 69.1

Nutrient Management 81.9

CoverCrops 40.5

Conservation Practice Adoption

Motivations, 2021

NASS Highlights October 2022 • No. 2022-8

Cropland and Confined Livestock Practices

Fig. 3. Top Motivations by Conservation Practice, Cropland (% of survey respondents utilizing)

Tillage Practices: Condence in following plan successfully 77.0

Tillage Practices: Anticipated saving time or eort 72.8

Irrigation Management and System Improvements: Anticipated benets greater than cost 81.1

Irrigation Management and System Improvements: Condence in following plan successfully 80.7

Pest Management: Condence in following plan successfully 77.1

Pest Management: Anticipated benets greater than cost 71.8

Drainage Water Management: Received technical assistance 79.7

Drainage Water Management: Anticipated benets greater than cost 79.2

Nutrient Management:Condence in followingplan successfully 74.2

Nutrient Management: Anticipated benetsgreater than cost 69.1

CoverCrops:Condence in followingplan successfully 74.0

CoverCrops: Anticipated saving time or eort 60.0

Runo ManagementPractices:Condence in followingplan successfully 61.0

Runo ManagementPractices: Anticipated meetingan on-farm conservation need 55.6

Wetland Conservation Practices: Anticipated meetingan on-farm conservation need 89.8

Wetland Conservation Practices:Condence in followingplan successfully 69.4

*among survey respondents who reported using a conservation practice
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

About the Survey

In 2022, approximately 34,000 producers across the nation received a survey for either the cropland or confined livestock version of CPAMS. Data 

collection was conducted from May through September 2022. 

CPAMS is a joint project between NASS and NRCS aimed at better understanding conservation practice adoption and the role of technical and 

financial assistance. CPAMS collected data on conservation practices in the United States. The resulting state and regional level data will be used by 

NRCS to help promotion and education to customers. The response rates for the Cropland and Confined Livestock versions were 33.5% and 40.3%, 

respectively.

Fig. 5. Top Motivations by Conservation Practice, Confined Livestock (% of survey respondents utilizing)

Diversion of Runo: Anticipated benets greater than cost 69.9

Diversion of Runo: Anticipated saving time or eort 59.6

Stabilization of Heavily Used Areas: To reduce repetitive maintenance activities 83.7

Stabilization of Heavily Used Areas: To reduce animal health problems 74.0

Waste (Manure) Storage Facilities: More storage required for expansion of operation 51.7

Waste (Manure) Storage Facilities: Availability of technical assistance 41.4

Waste Utilization: Facilitated better use of manure nutrients/livestock waste 85.2

Waste Utilization: Addressed a waste management or storage problem 73.2

Comprehensive Nutrient Management: Facilitated better use of manure nutrients/livestock waste 71.5

Comprehensive Nutrient Management: Received technical assistance 55.4

Animal Mortality Facilities: Anticipated saving time or eort 59.0

Animal Mortality Facilities: Anticipated benets greater than cost 50.3

Waste (Manure) Separation Facilities: Addressed a waste management or storage problem 78.4

Waste (Manure) Separation Facilities: Facilitated better use of manure nutrients/livestock waste 64.3

Confined Livestock Conservation 

Practices

Of the respondents who reported using specific 

conservation practices on confined livestock operations, 

the top two most widely used confined livestock 

conservation practices were runoff control and diversion 

of runoff structures (34.9%) and stabilization or protection 

of heavily used areas (28.3%), respectively. (Fig. 4)

The two most motivational factors in the decision to 

utilize runoff control and diversion of runoff structures 

were anticipated benefits greater than cost (69.9%) and 

anticipated saving time or effort (59.6%). Reduction of 

repetitive maintenance activities (83.7%) and reduction 

of animal health problems (74.0%) were the two most 

motivational factors for using stabilization or protection 

of heavily used areas. (Fig. 5)

Fig. 4. Confined Livestock Conservation Practice 

(% of survey respondents utilizing)

Diversion of Runo 34.9

Stabilization orProtection of Heavily Used Areas 28.3

Waste (Manure) StorageFacilities 23.9

Waste Utilization 23.5

Comprehensive Nutrient Management 17.9

Animal MortalityFacilities 13.0

Waste (Manure) Separation Facilities 2.7

85.2%

The proportion of respondents who 

reported using waste utilization because 

the practice facilitated better use of 

manure nutrients/livestock waste.