Environmental Quality Incentives Program in Meagher County, Montana, 1995-2021

Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 27

Recipients of Environmental Quality Incentives Program from farms in Meagher County, Montana totaled $428,000 in from 1995-2021.

Rank Recipient
(* ownership information available)
Location Environmental Quality Incentives Program
1995-2021
1Scott A JacksonWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$35,847
2Rostad & Rostad, IncBozeman, MT 59715$34,411
3David VoldsethMartinsdale, MT 59053$33,509
4Holmstrom Land Co IncWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$29,533
5Errol T GaltMartinsdale, MT 59053$29,381
6Matthew S Kmon LLCWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$28,665
7Crazy M Ranch LpFairfield, CA 94534$28,647
8Stephen G BuckinghamWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$27,050
9Springdale ColonyWht Sphr Spgs, MT 59645$24,119
10Brewer RanchRingling, MT 59642$20,960
11Townsend Brothers LLCWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$18,501
12Teague Ranches IncWht Sphr Spgs, MT 59645$17,908
13Rhynard Ranch LlpMartinsdale, MT 59053$17,768
14Charlene K RingerWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$14,690
15Brian L BodellWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$13,683
16Helen DupeaWht Sphr Spgs, MT 59645$11,438
17Keep Cool Creek Limited PartnershLivingston, MT 59047$8,997
18Nancy S HereimWhite Sulphur Spring, MT 59645$8,637
19Lucas Ranch IncRingling, MT 59642$6,403
20Higgins BrosRingling, MT 59642$6,092

* 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 >>

 

Farm Subsidies Education

AgMag