Total Conservation Programs in Napa County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 73
Recipients of Total Conservation Programs from farms in Napa County, California totaled $499,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Conservation Programs 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Markham Vineyards | Saint Helena, CA 94574 | $29,003 |
2 | Mike Oliver | Oakville, CA 94562 | $22,418 |
3 | Fosters Wine Estates America's Co | Napa, CA 94558 | $18,612 |
4 | Jpcr Partnership | Auburn, CA 95603 | $16,914 |
5 | Larkmead Vineyards | Saint Helena, CA 94574 | $15,932 |
6 | Green And Red Vnyd LLC | Saint Helena, CA 94574 | $15,544 |
7 | Tambor Vineyards LLC | Napa, CA 94558 | $15,381 |
8 | Smith-madrone | Saint Helena, CA 94574 | $14,585 |
9 | Huneeus Vintners LLC | Rutherford, CA 94573 | $12,857 |
10 | Daniel George Mcqueeney | Napa, CA 94558 | $12,180 |
11 | Phillip Lamoreaux | Napa, CA 94558 | $12,114 |
12 | Gamble Family Investment | Napa, CA 94558 | $10,512 |
13 | The Hess Collection Winery | Napa, CA 94558 | $10,500 |
14 | Michael Clark | Napa, CA 94558 | $10,415 |
15 | Pat George | Berkeley, CA 94705 | $10,000 |
16 | Frogs Leap Winery | Rutherford, CA 94573 | $10,000 |
17 | Robert Lee Hudson | Napa, CA 94559 | $9,898 |
18 | James Konrad | Saint Helena, CA 94574 | $9,638 |
19 | Ed Schulz | Napa, CA 94558 | $9,469 |
20 | Napa County Land Trust | Napa, CA 94559 | $8,944 |
* 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 >>