Conservation Reserve Program in Union County, South Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 737
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in Union County, South Dakota totaled $27,070,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Richard Edsel Sommervold | Alcester, SD 57001 | $113,070 |
62 | Sally Ann Vreugdenhil | Alcester, SD 57001 | $108,871 |
63 | Chen Beverly Chow | El Dorado Hls, CA 95762 | $107,028 |
64 | Kimmel Family Farms, LLC | Sioux City, IA 51108 | $106,829 |
65 | Gerald Flannery | Elk Point, SD 57025 | $104,762 |
66 | Marimac Inc | Beresford, SD 57004 | $101,076 |
67 | Randall Mollet | Burbank, SD 57010 | $100,683 |
68 | Michael J Mcgill | Beresford, SD 57004 | $98,873 |
69 | Vincent E Mcgill | Beresford, SD 57004 | $98,872 |
70 | Jonathan Michael Manning | Burbank, SD 57010 | $98,031 |
71 | Curtis Elwood Winquist | Akron, IA 51001 | $97,562 |
72 | Kathleen Maxine Chicoine | Elk Point, SD 57025 | $96,012 |
73 | David Michael Staum | Elk Point, SD 57025 | $94,372 |
74 | Helen A Quirk Estate | Hastings, NE 68902 | $94,049 |
75 | Eleanor Jane Wevik | Beresford, SD 57004 | $89,000 |
76 | Leonard Gayland Small | Akron, IA 51001 | $87,728 |
77 | Douglas E Eisma | Luverne, MN 56156 | $87,575 |
78 | Jean Ann Girard Living Tr | Elk Point, SD 57025 | $86,332 |
79 | Todd David Larsen | Beresford, SD 57004 | $85,824 |
80 | Donald Gene Jorgensen | Jefferson, SD 57038 | $85,612 |
* 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.”