Livestock Disaster and Emergency Programs in Santa Clara County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 67
Recipients of Livestock Disaster and Emergency Programs from farms in Santa Clara County, California totaled $481,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Livestock Disaster and Emergency Programs 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ferrara Ranches Ltd Jv | San Jose, CA 95109 | $65,172 |
| 2 | Anthony G Pierce Sr | San Jose, CA 95135 | $48,939 |
| 3 | Joe Vargas | Hollister, CA 95023 | $45,962 |
| 4 | Leland P Belli | San Jose, CA 95127 | $39,069 |
| 5 | Donald Silacci | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $20,761 |
| 6 | Richard L Vargas Sr | San Jose, CA 95120 | $19,157 |
| 7 | Bar 71 Ranch | Livermore, CA 94550 | $19,156 |
| 8 | Tilton Ranch Inc | Morgan Hill, CA 95037 | $18,098 |
| 9 | Madelyn Bourdet | Hollister, CA 95023 | $16,173 |
| 10 | Robert Bianchi | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $15,369 |
| 11 | Val Rocha | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $15,368 |
| 12 | William Furtado | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $14,796 |
| 13 | Joseph F Gonzales | Morgan Hill, CA 95037 | $11,132 |
| 14 | Joe Franco | San Jose, CA 95116 | $11,128 |
| 15 | Joseph P Ferrara | San Jose, CA 95109 | $10,264 |
| 16 | Ml Ranch LLC | Galt, CA 95632 | $10,254 |
| 17 | Silva Ranch | San Martin, CA 95046 | $9,497 |
| 18 | Justin Fields | Coyote, CA 95013 | $7,106 |
| 19 | John Ramos | San Jose, CA 95127 | $6,995 |
| 20 | Sparrowk Livestock | Clements, CA 95227 | $6,402 |
* 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