Total Conservation Programs in Oconto County, Wisconsin, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 41 to 60 of 549
Recipients of Total Conservation Programs from farms in Oconto County, Wisconsin totaled $5,668,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Conservation Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
41 | Leon Czech Trust | Pulaski, WI 54162 | $33,068 |
42 | Donald Teschke | Oconto Falls, WI 54154 | $33,010 |
43 | Timothy R Budz | Pulaski, WI 54162 | $32,975 |
44 | Anthony Finger | Oconto, WI 54153 | $32,906 |
45 | Nick Nickels | Lake Tomahawk, WI 54539 | $32,045 |
46 | Patrick Scanlan | Oconto, WI 54153 | $31,873 |
47 | Michael A Scanlan | Abrams, WI 54101 | $31,873 |
48 | Thomas A Wied | Green Bay, WI 54313 | $31,605 |
49 | Kevin Shallow | Lena, WI 54139 | $31,035 |
50 | Clarence Spice | Lena, WI 54139 | $30,852 |
51 | Fur & Feather Conservation Group | Lena, WI 54139 | $30,744 |
52 | Emil Steier | Oconto, WI 54153 | $30,483 |
53 | Donald Kanack | Lena, WI 54139 | $30,051 |
54 | Leonard J Zoubek | Coleman, WI 54112 | $29,970 |
55 | Howard Murphy | Oconto Falls, WI 54154 | $29,769 |
56 | Mcmahon Family Trust | Suring, WI 54174 | $29,469 |
57 | Donald Van Hoff | Lena, WI 54139 | $29,283 |
58 | Hilgenberg Sturgul Inc | Shawano, WI 54166 | $29,056 |
59 | Orven Fabry | Suring, WI 54174 | $28,542 |
60 | Joanne Radzinski | Oconto, WI 54153 | $27,992 |
* 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.”