Total Commodity Programs in Jefferson County, Montana, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 220
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in Jefferson County, Montana totaled $5,171,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | The Dykema Ranch Partnership | Manhattan, MT 59741 | $89,993 |
22 | George W Dawson & Sons | Boulder, MT 59632 | $73,026 |
23 | Compton Ranch LLC | Boulder, MT 59632 | $67,522 |
24 | Daryn Cederberg Dba C Lazy A Livestock | Three Forks, MT 59752 | $58,436 |
25 | Simon Ranch Lp | Cardwell, MT 59721 | $57,872 |
26 | Travis Creek Cattle Co LLC | Helena, MT 59624 | $57,000 |
27 | Michael J Smith | Whitehall, MT 59759 | $52,958 |
28 | Xc Ranch Inc | Boulder, MT 59632 | $51,453 |
29 | John P Zuelke | Three Forks, MT 59752 | $49,777 |
30 | Paul T Smith Ranches Inc | Boulder, MT 59632 | $49,407 |
31 | Sharon L Buckallew | Cardwell, MT 59721 | $49,122 |
32 | Steingruber Ranch Ltd Partnership | Manhattan, MT 59741 | $44,452 |
33 | Lynwood Stephen Bateman | Whitehall, MT 59759 | $42,092 |
34 | Katherine D Cederberg | Three Forks, MT 59752 | $41,718 |
35 | Megan Bullock | Boulder, MT 59632 | $39,683 |
36 | Patritti Cattle LLC | Whitehall, MT 59759 | $36,056 |
37 | Lathe Fadness | Boulder, MT 59632 | $33,771 |
38 | Sandra Murphy Estate | Cardwell, MT 59721 | $33,507 |
39 | Holt And Baker Ranches | Whitehall, MT 59759 | $31,450 |
40 | Dana Williams | Three Forks, MT 59752 | $30,931 |
* 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.”