Conservation Reserve Program in Kingsbury County, South Dakota, 2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 223
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in Kingsbury County, South Dakota totaled $1,027,000 in in 2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Bradley John Albrecht | Arlington, SD 57212 | $12,658 |
22 | Jeffrey Emil Albrecht | De Smet, SD 57231 | $12,658 |
23 | Sharon J Van Moer | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $12,360 |
24 | Marvin Alan Smith | De Smet, SD 57231 | $12,006 |
25 | Lsk Farms LLC | Oldham, SD 57051 | $11,386 |
26 | Robert B Good Revocable Intervivos Trust | Sioux Falls, SD 57108 | $11,155 |
27 | Jeffrey J Fox Land Tr | Bancroft, SD 57353 | $10,502 |
28 | James Douglas Olson | Watertown, SD 57201 | $10,476 |
29 | James A Ogren | De Smet, SD 57231 | $10,455 |
30 | Jill Stearns | Madison, SD 57042 | $9,739 |
31 | Jeanette Clendening | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $9,557 |
32 | Storbeck & Geib Cattle Co | De Smet, SD 57231 | $9,484 |
33 | Gregory Lee Ward | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $9,322 |
34 | The Paul L Madison Family Trust | Carthage, SD 57323 | $9,264 |
35 | David R Olson-david R. & Kay G. Olson Living Trust | Sioux Falls, SD 57108 | $8,867 |
36 | Devon Wolkow | De Smet, SD 57231 | $8,587 |
37 | Elwyn L Kropuenske | Lake Norden, SD 57248 | $8,436 |
38 | Daryl Lee Reinicke | Rapid City, SD 57701 | $8,352 |
39 | Kyle E Lee | De Smet, SD 57231 | $8,093 |
40 | Steven W Jensen | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $7,949 |
* 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.”