Conservation Reserve Program in Kingsbury County, South Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 684
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in Kingsbury County, South Dakota totaled $25,104,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Harvey O Andersen | Arlington, SD 57212 | $117,061 |
62 | Wade Jensen | Arlington, SD 57212 | $112,574 |
63 | Norman A Lee Revocable Living Tru | Custer, SD 57730 | $110,907 |
64 | Tommy Ray Wallum | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $106,788 |
65 | Robert Carlson | Lake Norden, SD 57248 | $105,570 |
66 | Marvin Alan Smith | De Smet, SD 57231 | $105,512 |
67 | Shamrock Farms Inc %j Huntimer | Oldham, SD 57051 | $104,824 |
68 | Arthur S Andersen | Fort Meade, SD 57741 | $103,869 |
69 | The Paul L Madison Family Trust | Carthage, SD 57323 | $103,147 |
70 | Orville Bau | De Smet, SD 57231 | $102,719 |
71 | William T Driscoll | De Smet, SD 57231 | $98,746 |
72 | Dorothy Holter | Troy, MI 48085 | $95,152 |
73 | Ralph Eugene Nelson | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $94,998 |
74 | Merrill Allen Nelson | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $93,882 |
75 | Harvey Miller | Arlington, SD 57212 | $92,670 |
76 | Douglas Vincent Kazmerzak | Erwin, SD 57233 | $91,625 |
77 | Storbeck & Geib Cattle Co | De Smet, SD 57231 | $88,858 |
78 | Roger A Haufschild | Lake Norden, SD 57248 | $88,458 |
79 | Roger Weiss | Hetland, SD 57212 | $88,293 |
80 | Roy E Wade | De Smet, SD 57231 | $87,773 |
* 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.”