Price Loss Coverage Program (PLC) in Monterey County, California, 2019
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 28
Recipients of Price Loss Coverage Program (PLC) from farms in Monterey County, California totaled $93,592 in in 2019.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Price Loss Coverage Program (PLC) 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Miller Brothers Cattle Inc | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $11,460 |
| 2 | Peter J Vogel | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $8,951 |
| 3 | William R Barbree | King City, CA 93930 | $6,767 |
| 4 | Nino Ranch LLC | King City, CA 93930 | $5,496 |
| 5 | Larry Homen | King City, CA 93930 | $5,380 |
| 6 | The Anthony L. Lombardo Separate | Salinas, CA 93902 | $5,095 |
| 7 | John M Hurl | Shandon, CA 93461 | $5,002 |
| 8 | Michael R Strouss | Paso Robles, CA 93446 | $4,763 |
| 9 | John P Madson | San Lucas, CA 93954 | $4,681 |
| 10 | Kenneth Eade | San Ardo, CA 93450 | $4,025 |
| 11 | Work Ranch LLC | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $3,456 |
| 12 | The Rodgers Peaslee Family Trust | San Lucas, CA 93954 | $2,947 |
| 13 | Robin L Rist | King City, CA 93930 | $2,781 |
| 14 | Douglas H Thomason | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $2,724 |
| 15 | Demaree Ranch LLC | San Ardo, CA 93450 | $2,664 |
| 16 | John Moore | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $2,581 |
| 17 | W J Van Boxtel | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $2,385 |
| 18 | Nessen Schmidt | King City, CA 93930 | $1,879 |
| 19 | Daniel A Mainini | San Miguel, CA 93451 | $1,691 |
| 20 | Gregory N Brown | Bradley, CA 93426 | $1,539 |
* 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.”
Next >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf