Conservation Reserve Program in 1st District of Minnesota (Rep. Jim Hagedorn), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 141 to 160 of 13,130
Recipients of Conservation Reserve Program from farms in 1st District of Minnesota (Rep. Jim Hagedorn) totaled $349,853,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Conservation Reserve Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
141 | Connie Urban | Truman, MN 56088 | $241,027 |
142 | William K Kiehne | Harmony, MN 55939 | $241,004 |
143 | Reed Johnson | Le Roy, MN 55951 | $240,344 |
144 | Glen A Taylor Rev Tr | Spencer, IA 51301 | $239,748 |
145 | Keith Francis Wheelock | Janesville, MN 56048 | $238,462 |
146 | Lynn D Tienter | Preston, MN 55965 | $238,100 |
147 | Glen Thomas | Fountain, MN 55935 | $237,855 |
148 | Steven L Snyder | Lanesboro, MN 55949 | $236,863 |
149 | Daniel W Schmidt | Fountain, MN 55935 | $235,997 |
150 | Michael Mccabe | Adams, MN 55909 | $235,442 |
151 | Leroy G Wellman | Isanti, MN 55040 | $235,424 |
152 | Lowell Nelson | Caledonia, MN 55921 | $234,843 |
153 | Winton E Jones | New Ulm, MN 56073 | $232,887 |
154 | John Copeman | Fountain, MN 55935 | $232,056 |
155 | Denise Rannells | Le Roy, MN 55951 | $232,032 |
156 | Paul H Nelson | Saint James, MN 56081 | $231,487 |
157 | Osterbroen Family Limited Partnership | Albert Lea, MN 56007 | $231,366 |
158 | David A Christensen | Albert Lea, MN 56007 | $231,091 |
159 | Bruce Dornink | Preston, MN 55965 | $230,776 |
160 | Patricia Mariska | Waterville, MN 56096 | $230,003 |
* 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.”