Conservation Reserve Program in Lee County, South Carolina, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 121 to 140 of 628
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in Lee County, South Carolina totaled $13,681,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
121 | J W Barrett | Camden, SC 29020 | $25,030 |
122 | Elizabeth D Barrett | Camden, SC 29020 | $25,030 |
123 | Stephen Boykin | Lemon Grove, CA 91945 | $24,871 |
124 | Gayle J Breon | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $23,664 |
125 | William K Phillips Jr | Lynchburg, SC 29080 | $23,293 |
126 | Jean C Keziah | Camden, SC 29020 | $23,054 |
127 | Brooks Stuckey | Sumter, SC 29150 | $22,743 |
128 | Danny Burke | Dalzell, SC 29040 | $22,666 |
129 | Chadwick V Marshall | Sumter, SC 29153 | $22,476 |
130 | Thomas A Christmas Estate | Camden, SC 29020 | $22,149 |
131 | William W Mccants | Mayesville, SC 29104 | $22,133 |
132 | William H Wilson III | Mayesville, SC 29104 | $22,034 |
133 | William R Gaskins | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $21,938 |
134 | Henry D Rembert | Sumter, SC 29150 | $21,875 |
135 | Pamela Rembert | Sumter, SC 29150 | $21,875 |
136 | Sylvia H Floyd | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $21,744 |
137 | Leonard L Price | Kershaw, SC 29067 | $21,479 |
138 | Rosa Lee E Brown | Columbia, SC 29203 | $21,400 |
139 | Mary Dell Griggs | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $21,233 |
140 | H B Woodham Jr | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $21,229 |
* 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.”