Production Flexibility Program in Butte County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 763
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in Butte County, California totaled $105,952,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Patane Family Farms | Biggs, CA 95917 | $608,146 |
22 | Rice Partnership | Durham, CA 95938 | $587,375 |
23 | Campbell & Son | Princeton, CA 95970 | $568,714 |
24 | Minasian Minasian Trust Minasian Ptshp | Oroville, CA 95965 | $560,584 |
25 | B & E Lundberg | Richvale, CA 95974 | $553,360 |
26 | Penning Bros | Gridley, CA 95948 | $544,924 |
27 | Terry Williams Farming | Richvale, CA 95974 | $528,282 |
28 | S & S Family Farms | Gridley, CA 95948 | $521,979 |
29 | Storm Farming Co | Gridley, CA 95948 | $521,482 |
30 | T & B Farms | Biggs, CA 95917 | $509,362 |
31 | Mcpherrin Land Co | Sutter, CA 95982 | $507,150 |
32 | Waterbury Farms | Gridley, CA 95948 | $503,020 |
33 | W Gregory Johnson Farms | Durham, CA 95938 | $499,094 |
34 | Tct Enterprises | Chico, CA 95973 | $498,758 |
35 | Anthony & Phyllis Lamalfa | Scottsdale, AZ 85255 | $484,406 |
36 | Deen Brothers | Biggs, CA 95917 | $482,958 |
37 | Rold Farms | Nelson, CA 95958 | $482,678 |
38 | Rancho Esquon Partners | Concord, CA 94522 | $480,959 |
39 | F D S Farms | Durham, CA 95938 | $474,501 |
40 | Four Ds Family Farms | Biggs, CA 95917 | $451,651 |
* 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.”