Farm Subsidy information
Meagher County, Montana
Total Subsidies in Meagher County, Montana, 2019
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 46
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Meagher County, Montana totaled $1,178,000 in in 2019.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Springdale Colony | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $174,983 |
| 2 | Catlin Ranch Lp | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $163,828 |
| 3 | Townsend Ranch LLC | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $118,109 |
| 4 | Alkali Lake Farms Inc | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $92,125 |
| 5 | Brewer Ranch LLC | Ringling, MT 59642 | $39,407 |
| 6 | Bank Of The Rockies ** | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $36,282 |
| 7 | Camas Creek Cattle & Sheep Co | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $32,066 |
| 8 | Rostad & Rostad, Inc | Bozeman, MT 59715 | $30,713 |
| 9 | Galt Ranch Lp | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $30,044 |
| 10 | Scott A Jackson | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $23,791 |
| 11 | Matthew D Brewer | Ringling, MT 59642 | $21,687 |
| 12 | Fort Logan Ranch LLC | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $19,787 |
| 13 | Snowbank Ranch LLC | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $16,743 |
| 14 | Thad A Hereim | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $15,748 |
| 15 | Brewer Land Co LLC | Ringling, MT 59642 | $13,461 |
| 16 | Lucas Ranch Inc | Ringling, MT 59642 | $12,480 |
| 17 | Rose Cattle Company LLC | Three Forks, MT 59752 | $11,698 |
| 18 | Montana Horse Company | White Sulphur Spring, MT 59645 | $11,635 |
| 19 | Gary Welch | Townsend, MT 59644 | $11,443 |
| 20 | Jawbone Cattle Co Inc. | Martinsdale, MT 59053 | $11,169 |
* 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