| Rank |
County |
Subtotal, Farming Subsidies
1995-2011 | Pct of
Total | Running
Percentage |
| 1 | Orangeburg County, South Carolina | $103,183,936 | 10.0% | 10.0% |
| 2 | Lee County, South Carolina | $83,486,657 | 8.1% | 18.2% |
| 3 | Williamsburg County, South Carolina | $72,751,703 | 7.1% | 25.2% |
| 4 | Darlington County, South Carolina | $72,595,579 | 7.1% | 32.3% |
| 5 | Calhoun County, South Carolina | $67,627,035 | 6.6% | 38.9% |
| 6 | Marlboro County, South Carolina | $61,795,632 | 6.0% | 44.9% |
| 7 | Florence County, South Carolina | $58,545,282 | 5.7% | 50.6% |
| 8 | Dillon County, South Carolina | $53,751,514 | 5.2% | 55.8% |
| 9 | Sumter County, South Carolina | $53,388,706 | 5.2% | 61.0% |
| 10 | Clarendon County, South Carolina | $51,895,901 | 5.0% | 66.1% |
| 11 | Horry County, South Carolina | $50,531,237 | 4.9% | 71.0% |
| 12 | Hampton County, South Carolina | $39,743,965 | 3.9% | 74.8% |
| 13 | Allendale County, South Carolina | $28,239,592 | 2.7% | 77.6% |
| 14 | Barnwell County, South Carolina | $26,818,877 | 2.6% | 80.2% |
| 15 | Bamberg County, South Carolina | $24,779,061 | 2.4% | 82.6% |
| 16 | Marion County, South Carolina | $24,590,986 | 2.4% | 85.0% |
| 17 | Dorchester County, South Carolina | $20,280,702 | 2.0% | 87.0% |
| 18 | Aiken County, South Carolina | $17,796,930 | 1.7% | 88.7% |
| 19 | Colleton County, South Carolina | $13,344,371 | 1.3% | 90.0% |
| 20 | Lexington County, South Carolina | $10,138,334 | 1.0% | 91.0% |
| 21 | Newberry County, South Carolina | $9,698,940 | 0.9% | 91.9% |
| 22 | Richland County, South Carolina | $8,801,458 | 0.9% | 92.8% |
| 23 | Chesterfield County, South Carolina | $8,435,833 | 0.8% | 93.6% |
| 24 | York County, South Carolina | $7,739,263 | 0.8% | 94.4% |
| 25 | Saluda County, South Carolina | $7,277,889 | 0.7% | 95.1% |
| 26 | Anderson County, South Carolina | $6,919,634 | 0.7% | 95.7% |
| 27 | Georgetown County, South Carolina | $6,687,803 | 0.7% | 96.4% |
| 28 | Kershaw County, South Carolina | $5,292,683 | 0.5% | 96.9% |
| 29 | Berkeley County, South Carolina | $5,123,179 | 0.5% | 97.4% |
| 30 | Chester County, South Carolina | $4,694,413 | 0.5% | 97.9% |
| 31 | Edgefield County, South Carolina | $3,447,011 | 0.3% | 98.2% |
| 32 | Laurens County, South Carolina | $3,339,107 | 0.3% | 98.5% |
| 33 | Spartanburg County, South Carolina | $2,817,409 | 0.3% | 98.8% |
| 34 | Jasper County, South Carolina | $2,147,222 | 0.2% | 99.0% |
| 35 | Beaufort County, South Carolina | $2,016,983 | 0.2% | 99.2% |
| 36 | Abbeville County, South Carolina | $1,417,184 | 0.1% | 99.3% |
| 37 | Cherokee County, South Carolina | $1,182,315 | 0.1% | 99.5% |
| 38 | Oconee County, South Carolina | $1,148,932 | 0.1% | 99.6% |
| 39 | Lancaster County, South Carolina | $1,139,514 | 0.1% | 99.7% |
| 40 | Greenville County, South Carolina | $953,338 | 0.1% | 99.8% |
| 41 | Charleston County, South Carolina | $808,910 | 0.1% | 99.9% |
| 42 | Greenwood County, South Carolina | $535,557 | 0.1% | 99.9% |
| 43 | Fairfield County, South Carolina | $320,461 | 0.0% | 99.9% |
| 44 | Pickens County, South Carolina | $259,879 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 45 | Union County, South Carolina | $248,898 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 46 | McCormick County, South Carolina | $133,763 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from USDA data.
Note: The information on conservation spending for 2011 is incomplete due to missing data from USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service. In addition some payments made in 2010 were not assigned to recipients in the data received from NRCS. Those payments are also not included.
The information provided for the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP) provides an inaccurate picture of how WRP payments are distributed. USDA's Natural Resource Conservation Service uses title companies as intermediaries to finalize wetlands easements under the Wetlands Reserve Program. As a result, the data provided to us shows large sums of money going to these title companies. In reality, the payments are ultimately distributed to landowners participating in the WRP.
Unfortunately, NRCS has not provided the data to show where these farms and wetlands are located or which farmers or landowners are enrolling in the program, so EWG is unable to allocate these large sums of money to individuals beyond the title companies. Therefore, these companies skew the conservation rankings and payment concentration, which EWG cannot avoid unless and until NRCS makes available the additional farm attribution data. Therefore, we have not included WRP payments in the 2011 data update.
We have separated data on farm commodity, disaster and conservation payments in order to provide a more accurate picture of top recipients and concentration of payments among the three main categories of USDA programs.
Finally, EWG works hard to ensure the accuracy of the information it provides through its products and services, but obtains data for the Farm Subsidy Database from the U.S. Department of Agriculture pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. Therefore, EWG cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information USDA provides or any analysis based thereon. If you find an error or discrepancy on the site, please contact your local USDA Farm Service Agency office to check its records before contacting EWG.
