Production Flexibility Program in 5th District of Alabama (Rep. Mo Brooks), 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 2,774
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in 5th District of Alabama (Rep. Mo Brooks) totaled $36,200,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Darden Bridgeforth And Sons | Tanner, AL 35671 | $1,518,989 |
| 2 | Newby Farms | Athens, AL 35613 | $1,443,424 |
| 3 | Haney Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $1,257,299 |
| 4 | Brentwood Farms | Mooresville, AL 35649 | $646,278 |
| 5 | Lecroix Farms | Belle Mina, AL 35615 | $535,920 |
| 6 | Macedon Farms | Madison, AL 35756 | $529,368 |
| 7 | Barron Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $507,004 |
| 8 | Marsh Farms | Madison, AL 35756 | $501,637 |
| 9 | Henderson Farms | Madison, AL 35756 | $495,453 |
| 10 | Mcnatt Farms | Elkmont, AL 35620 | $436,080 |
| 11 | J U Devaney Farms | Madison, AL 35756 | $434,265 |
| 12 | R W Anderson & Sons | Elkmont, AL 35620 | $424,867 |
| 13 | Black And King Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $407,962 |
| 14 | Vaden Farms | Florence, AL 35633 | $387,579 |
| 15 | Pryor Farms | Tanner, AL 35671 | $362,180 |
| 16 | Ray Mcintyre & Sons | Florence, AL 35633 | $351,209 |
| 17 | Jesse Dee Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $348,288 |
| 18 | Cross Key Farms | Belle Mina, AL 35615 | $344,888 |
| 19 | Haddock Brothers | Florence, AL 35633 | $344,710 |
| 20 | J & M Hargrave Farms | Elkmont, AL 35620 | $337,902 |
* 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