Environmental Quality Incentives Program in Ness County, Kansas, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 93
Recipients of Environmental Quality Incentives Program from farms in Ness County, Kansas totaled $427,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Environmental Quality Incentives Program 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Stenzel Living Trust | Bazine, KS 67516 | $30,503 |
2 | Ilene Norton Trust | Ness City, KS 67560 | $29,264 |
3 | Eric M Slagle | Castle Rock, CO 80104 | $27,568 |
4 | Marilyn R Fisher | Welsh, LA 70591 | $24,590 |
5 | Gerald Barnes | Mc Cracken, KS 67556 | $15,880 |
6 | Melford Dewald Trust | Wichita, KS 67226 | $15,199 |
7 | B & C Vogel Revocable Trust | Ness City, KS 67560 | $12,821 |
8 | Mike J Fritzler | Ness City, KS 67560 | $12,036 |
9 | Todd A Horchem | Ness City, KS 67560 | $11,376 |
10 | Bill Whitley | Ness City, KS 67560 | $11,210 |
11 | Mark Kerr | Ness City, KS 67560 | $10,752 |
12 | Prairie Farms | Ness City, KS 67560 | $10,480 |
13 | Mishler Land & Cattle | Arnold, KS 67515 | $10,351 |
14 | Paul E Beck | Ness City, KS 67560 | $9,408 |
15 | Gary Barnes | Mc Cracken, KS 67556 | $8,852 |
16 | Larry Yaeger | Wichita, KS 67205 | $8,534 |
17 | Tom Whipple | Canon City, CO 81212 | $6,836 |
18 | Jerry Schuler | Ness City, KS 67560 | $6,700 |
19 | Brent A Whitley Living Trust | Ness City, KS 67560 | $6,497 |
20 | Fritzler & Sons Ranch Inc | Ness City, KS 67560 | $6,067 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”
Next >>