Miscellaneous Conservation Programs in Starr County, Texas, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 121 to 140 of 192
Recipients of Miscellaneous Conservation Programs from farms in Starr County, Texas totaled $490,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Miscellaneous Conservation Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
121 | Dilia Sulema Villarreal | Santa Elena, TX 78591 | $2,500 |
122 | Lucio Mejorado Jr | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,500 |
123 | Dennis J Dodson | Bigfork, MT 59911 | $2,500 |
124 | David Q Day | Harlingen, TX 78550 | $2,500 |
125 | Ana Maria S Alvarez | Roma, TX 78584 | $2,500 |
126 | Javier R Saenz | San Antonio, TX 78224 | $2,500 |
127 | Teresa N Alaniz | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,500 |
128 | Noelia G Sanchez | Edinburg, TX 78541 | $2,500 |
129 | Santiago Garcia | Houston, TX 77085 | $2,500 |
130 | Pedro Laurel Jr | Santa Elena, TX 78591 | $2,412 |
131 | Elias Elizondo | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,405 |
132 | Cruz Flores Jr | Grulla, TX 78548 | $2,400 |
133 | I A Pena | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,400 |
134 | Jose Olivarez | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,340 |
135 | Patricio Olivarez Jr | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,340 |
136 | Filiberto Olivarez | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,340 |
137 | Barrera-izaguirre Enterprises Ltd | Roma, TX 78584 | $2,340 |
138 | Maria Teresa Mayorga | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,338 |
139 | Israel I Rodriguez | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $2,191 |
140 | M.o.m Inc | Falcon Heights, TX 78545 | $2,190 |
* 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.”