Conservation Reserve Program in Watonwan County, Minnesota, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 917
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in Watonwan County, Minnesota totaled $20,314,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Mary Guilliams Revocable Living T | Knoxville, TN 37934 | $147,776 |
22 | Virgil C Monson | Saint James, MN 56081 | $147,110 |
23 | Robert Berndt | Saint James, MN 56081 | $140,017 |
24 | Curtis L Peterson | Windom, MN 56101 | $135,545 |
25 | Bergeman Family Living Trust | Madelia, MN 56062 | $133,778 |
26 | Tom Mayberry & E Kuderer | Saint James, MN 56081 | $126,598 |
27 | Duane Helget | Saint James, MN 56081 | $122,914 |
28 | Watonwan Game & Fish | Saint James, MN 56081 | $117,274 |
29 | Donald Davis Jr | Mankato, MN 56001 | $117,234 |
30 | Vernon Burgeson Trust | Madelia, MN 56062 | $114,052 |
31 | Ernest Brandts | Saint James, MN 56081 | $111,703 |
32 | Charles Nibbe Revocable Trust | Ormsby, MN 56162 | $110,958 |
33 | Richard Lepp | Saint James, MN 56081 | $109,992 |
34 | Dominic Kunz | Madelia, MN 56062 | $109,646 |
35 | Laura Manney | Kirksville, MO 63501 | $107,085 |
36 | Darrin Hovden | Madelia, MN 56062 | $103,059 |
37 | Albert Prahl | Saint James, MN 56081 | $101,517 |
38 | Patricia Heger | Medford, MN 55049 | $99,106 |
39 | Lyle Heger | Remer, MN 56672 | $99,104 |
40 | Mike Brandts | Saint James, MN 56081 | $97,553 |
* 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.”