Environmental Quality Incentives Program in California, 1995-2023

Subsidy Recipients 121 to 140 of 3,060

Recipients of Environmental Quality Incentives Program from farms in California totaled $42,508,000 in from 1995-2023.

Rank Recipient
(* ownership information available)
Location Environmental Quality Incentives Program
1995-2023
121Bert G HolzhauserDorris, CA 96023$52,299
122Tulelake Basin Joint Unified SchoTulelake, CA 96134$52,251
123Lauren N GiumarraDelano, CA 93216$52,250
124Wickstrom DairyHilmar, CA 95324$52,170
125Gallo Cattle Company LpAtwater, CA 95301$52,017
126Douglas S FaircloPaisley, OR 97636$51,750
127Lashinski Living TrustSebastopol, CA 95472$50,828
128Hackett Timber And LivestockFerndale, CA 95536$50,820
129Rolling Camel Ranches IncCoachella, CA 92236$50,561
130Robert BensonCatheys Valley, CA 95306$50,000
131Gregory VarianSan Miguel, CA 93451$50,000
132Linda G MartinMadera, CA 93636$50,000
133Nicholas J StehlyValley Center, CA 92082$50,000
134Clarence & Jackie Dutra Living TrHanford, CA 93230$50,000
135Dudley J SilveiraFresno, CA 93711$50,000
136Rick BlanchardFresno, CA 93711$50,000
137Esk TrustCoalinga, CA 93210$50,000
138Darrell SilveiraFresno, CA 93711$50,000
139Philip J MartinMadera, CA 93638$50,000
140Preston VineyardsHealdsburg, CA 95448$50,000

* 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.”

<< Previous | Next >>

 

Farm Subsidies Education

AgMag