Total Conservation Programs in Kingsbury County, South Dakota, 2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 224
Recipients of Total Conservation Programs from farms in Kingsbury County, South Dakota totaled $1,274,000 in in 2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Conservation Programs 2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Lyle J Anderson | Brookings, SD 57006 | $16,288 |
22 | , | $16,058 | |
23 | Alan Aughenbaugh | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $15,936 |
24 | Kenneth W Warne | Willow Lake, SD 57278 | $15,928 |
25 | Kathy Aughenbaugh | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $15,795 |
26 | Vicky Aughenbaugh | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $15,795 |
27 | Kingbrook Rural Water System Inc | Arlington, SD 57212 | $15,645 |
28 | Bradley John Albrecht | Arlington, SD 57212 | $15,579 |
29 | Jeffrey Emil Albrecht | De Smet, SD 57231 | $15,579 |
30 | Jon Charles Albrecht | Howard, SD 57349 | $15,579 |
31 | Mary G Junker Living Trust | Sioux Falls, SD 57110 | $14,844 |
32 | Kathleen Swenson | Brandon, SD 57005 | $14,694 |
33 | George & Carol Johnson Living Trust | Huron, SD 57350 | $14,639 |
34 | Dorothy Holter | Troy, MI 48085 | $13,231 |
35 | Jill Stearns | Madison, SD 57042 | $12,795 |
36 | Sharon J Van Moer | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $12,360 |
37 | Marvin Alan Smith | De Smet, SD 57231 | $12,006 |
38 | Lsk Farms LLC | Oldham, SD 57051 | $11,386 |
39 | Robert B Good Revocable Intervivos Trust | Sioux Falls, SD 57108 | $11,155 |
40 | Roger Weiss | Hetland, SD 57212 | $10,921 |
* 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.”