Production Flexibility Program in Sutter County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 1,003
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in Sutter County, California totaled $112,998,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Triple C Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $602,019 |
22 | Shannon Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $599,227 |
23 | Five Way Farming | Sutter, CA 95982 | $573,178 |
24 | Anderson Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $555,308 |
25 | Enterprise Farms | Meridian, CA 95957 | $547,723 |
26 | Schreiner Brothers | Knights Landing, CA 95645 | $543,792 |
27 | Alonso & Lytle & Ricci | Knights Landing, CA 95645 | $541,702 |
28 | Linneman Ranches | Firebaugh, CA 93622 | $538,568 |
29 | Broomieside Farms | Knights Landing, CA 95645 | $520,380 |
30 | Drew Mayfield & Bennett | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $519,126 |
31 | Martin & Susan Lund Farming Co | Rio Oso, CA 95674 | $513,088 |
32 | Niegel Farms | Pleasant Grove, CA 95668 | $513,044 |
33 | James & Claireen Tarke | Sutter, CA 95982 | $509,015 |
34 | Trevethan Farms | Pleasant Grove, CA 95668 | $508,254 |
35 | Richard & Laurel Nelson Jt Vt | Pleasant Grove, CA 95668 | $507,006 |
36 | Bell Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $503,790 |
37 | Hunt Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $495,919 |
38 | Penning Farms | Woodland, CA 95776 | $493,810 |
39 | L & N Farms | Robbins, CA 95676 | $490,682 |
40 | Siller Bros | Yuba City, CA 95991 | $490,330 |
* 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.”