Market Loss Assistance Program in Cass County, Minnesota, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 238
Recipients of Market Loss Assistance Program from farms in Cass County, Minnesota totaled $1,079,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Market Loss Assistance Program 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Michael J Frank | Pillager, MN 56473 | $47,048 |
| 2 | Gary Humphrey | Pine River, MN 56474 | $42,519 |
| 3 | Conrad Clyde Bristow | Backus, MN 56435 | $41,188 |
| 4 | Frank Farms And Livestock Inc | Pillager, MN 56473 | $40,780 |
| 5 | Randall Eugene Norman | Pine River, MN 56474 | $40,542 |
| 6 | Bill Alan Tulenchik | Pillager, MN 56473 | $36,172 |
| 7 | Calvin Marc Bristow Jr | Backus, MN 56435 | $33,799 |
| 8 | Gary Tulenchik | Pine River, MN 56474 | $30,270 |
| 9 | Bruce G Martin | Pillager, MN 56473 | $28,160 |
| 10 | Thomas Bristow | Backus, MN 56435 | $23,250 |
| 11 | Ervin Birkholtz | Motley, MN 56466 | $21,720 |
| 12 | Keith Melby | Backus, MN 56435 | $19,190 |
| 13 | Roy Digiovanni | Motley, MN 56466 | $17,923 |
| 14 | Eldon Eugene Hopper | Pine River, MN 56474 | $15,367 |
| 15 | Archie Shamp Jr | Casa Grande, AZ 85194 | $15,365 |
| 16 | Archie Shamp Estate | Pine River, MN 56474 | $15,183 |
| 17 | Randolph Groothuis | Pillager, MN 56473 | $14,545 |
| 18 | Calvin F Martin | Pillager, MN 56473 | $14,231 |
| 19 | Steve Dailey | Verndale, MN 56481 | $13,893 |
| 20 | John D Teune | Pine River, MN 56474 | $13,873 |
* 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 >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf