Dairy Programs in Sonoma County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 165
Recipients of Dairy Programs from farms in Sonoma County, California totaled $19,896,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Dairy Programs 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Joe Tresch Dairy Inc | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $462,282 |
| 2 | Johnson & Neles Dairy | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $450,758 |
| 3 | Mulas Dairy Company | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $425,796 |
| 4 | Mertens Dairy | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $420,621 |
| 5 | Debernardi Dairy Inc | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $391,635 |
| 6 | Jeff Jones | Santa Rosa, CA 95404 | $370,260 |
| 7 | Bordessa Dairy | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $363,517 |
| 8 | Paul Bianchi Inc | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $361,601 |
| 9 | E & M Deniz Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $358,171 |
| 10 | Aggio Dairy Inc | Santa Rosa, CA 95401 | $351,106 |
| 11 | Joe Pinheiro | Santa Rosa, CA 95401 | $350,136 |
| 12 | Circle Lc Corp | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $348,079 |
| 13 | John A Mattos Jr | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $347,558 |
| 14 | Correia Dairy | Cotati, CA 94931 | $338,029 |
| 15 | Albert Mello Jr | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $337,934 |
| 16 | Nosecchi Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $329,657 |
| 17 | Mazzetta Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $323,122 |
| 18 | James Riebli Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $307,431 |
| 19 | George Bianchi Inc | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $296,024 |
| 20 | Mce Amos Inc | Santa Rosa, CA 95401 | $286,139 |
* 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