Counter Cyclical Program in Cascade County, Montana, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 881
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Cascade County, Montana totaled $1,027,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bowman Farms II | Belt, MT 59412 | $42,189 |
| 2 | Meadowlark Farms | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $29,984 |
| 3 | Cascade Colony Inc | Sun River, MT 59483 | $21,562 |
| 4 | Montana Prairie Nest | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $20,052 |
| 5 | Pleasant Valley Colony | Belt, MT 59412 | $19,040 |
| 6 | Standley Brothers Partnership | Cascade, MT 59421 | $16,179 |
| 7 | R & R Farms | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $16,162 |
| 8 | Hill Top Colony Inc | Stockett, MT 59480 | $15,594 |
| 9 | Sheffels Farms Inc | Great Falls, MT 59403 | $15,422 |
| 10 | K & R Farms Inc | Floweree, MT 59440 | $14,624 |
| 11 | Bumgarner Ranch | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $14,436 |
| 12 | Grass Land Colony Inc | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $13,929 |
| 13 | Fairhaven Colony Inc | Ulm, MT 59485 | $13,854 |
| 14 | Sun Land Farm Inc | Ulm, MT 59485 | $13,813 |
| 15 | G & G Farm Partners | Great Falls, MT 59405 | $13,544 |
| 16 | Taft Land Partnership | Cascade, MT 59421 | $12,748 |
| 17 | D & R Farms | Power, MT 59468 | $12,440 |
| 18 | Countryhome Colony Inc | Ulm, MT 59485 | $12,290 |
| 19 | Sun River Farm Inc | Ulm, MT 59485 | $12,071 |
| 20 | Epic Partners | Sun River, MT 59483 | $11,911 |
* 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