Dairy Programs in Merced County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 755
Recipients of Dairy Programs from farms in Merced County, California totaled $114,680,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Dairy Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Van Foeken Dairy | Hilmar, CA 95324 | $651,718 |
22 | Alves And Son Dairy | Turlock, CA 95380 | $636,393 |
23 | Hilmar Holsteins Inc | Hilmar, CA 95324 | $603,061 |
24 | De Jong Brothers Dairy Gp | Ballico, CA 95303 | $599,753 |
25 | Wickstrom Jersey Farms Inc | Hilmar, CA 95324 | $598,509 |
26 | Frank Coelho & Sons Lp | El Nido, CA 95317 | $598,024 |
27 | Rodoni Dairy Farms Lp | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $591,040 |
28 | Manuel & Maria Cardoso & Sons Dairy Ltd | Delhi, CA 95315 | $586,428 |
29 | Matos Dairy | Merced, CA 95341 | $580,573 |
30 | Ahlem Farms Partnership | Hilmar, CA 95324 | $578,197 |
31 | Hath Dairy | El Nido, CA 95317 | $562,848 |
32 | Jones Farms Gp | Stevinson, CA 95374 | $562,710 |
33 | Deolinda And Carlos Lopes Trust | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $561,091 |
34 | Souza Brothers Dairy | Stevinson, CA 95374 | $556,479 |
35 | Antero D Borges | Atwater, CA 95301 | $555,719 |
36 | Silveira Brothers Dairy | Gustine, CA 95322 | $552,668 |
37 | Nunes Bros Inc | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $540,489 |
38 | Pedretti Ranches Inc | El Nido, CA 95317 | $531,829 |
39 | Luis C Nunes & Sons Dairy | Gustine, CA 95322 | $530,512 |
40 | Vander Woude Dairy | Merced, CA 95341 | $517,530 |
* 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.”