Wool and Mohair Programs in 2nd District of Utah (Rep. Chris Stewart), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 298
Recipients of Wool and Mohair Programs from farms in 2nd District of Utah (Rep. Chris Stewart) totaled $1,268,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Wool and Mohair Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Worth Grimshaw | Cedar City, UT 84720 | $3,117 |
82 | Kent Carr | Annabella, UT 84711 | $3,059 |
83 | Sterling Hansen | Richfield, UT 84701 | $3,038 |
84 | Philip Taylor | Bicknell, UT 84715 | $2,990 |
85 | Raymon D Roberts | Venice, UT 84701 | $2,982 |
86 | Dan Nielson | Greenwich, UT 84732 | $2,961 |
87 | Reed Brian | Loa, UT 84747 | $2,894 |
88 | Justin Lister | Parowan, UT 84761 | $2,672 |
89 | Verle D Brian | Monroe, UT 84754 | $2,671 |
90 | Milton Taft | Bicknell, UT 84715 | $2,645 |
91 | Richard K Larsen | Monroe, UT 84754 | $2,545 |
92 | Grant J Anderton | Marysvale, UT 84750 | $2,499 |
93 | Mell Taylor | Santa Clara, UT 84765 | $2,483 |
94 | Thelmer Stratton | Cedar City, UT 84720 | $2,446 |
95 | Joan D Taylor | Fremont, UT 84747 | $2,405 |
96 | Melvin D Baldwin | Cedar City, UT 84720 | $2,303 |
97 | Cory Fautin | Marysvale, UT 84750 | $2,275 |
98 | Mark King | Monroe, UT 84754 | $2,247 |
99 | Chad Brinkerhoff | Bicknell, UT 84715 | $2,218 |
100 | Seth Chappell | Lyman, UT 84749 | $2,175 |
* 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.”