Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) in 2nd District of California (Rep. Jared Huffman), 2023
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 236
Recipients of Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) from farms in 2nd District of California (Rep. Jared Huffman) totaled $1,864,000 in in 2023.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Neil Mcisaac & Son Inc | Tomales, CA 94971 | $213,262 |
| 2 | Mccall Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $75,092 |
| 3 | , | $64,787 | |
| 4 | Moretti Family Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $59,578 |
| 5 | Dolcini Jersey Dairy | Nicasio, CA 94946 | $58,029 |
| 6 | Larry Peter | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $52,426 |
| 7 | Joseph Lane Russ | Eureka, CA 95503 | $48,078 |
| 8 | William Nunes | Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 | $44,308 |
| 9 | Jack P Russ | Ferndale, CA 95536 | $43,060 |
| 10 | Cypress Lane Ranch | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $34,492 |
| 11 | Lafranchi Ranch | Nicasio, CA 94946 | $34,356 |
| 12 | Kehoe Dairy Inc | Inverness, CA 94937 | $32,622 |
| 13 | Fort Baker Ranch Co | Kneeland, CA 95549 | $32,335 |
| 14 | Luke Stevens | Marshall, CA 94940 | $27,015 |
| 15 | Fort Seward Ranch | Garberville, CA 95542 | $25,121 |
| 16 | Brian M Barbata | Ferndale, CA 95536 | $24,379 |
| 17 | Spaletta Ranch | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $23,578 |
| 18 | Justin Langer | Ferndale, CA 95536 | $21,728 |
| 19 | Joseph P Zanone | Ferndale, CA 95536 | $21,614 |
| 20 | William Barboni II | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $20,805 |
* 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 >>
Increasing crop reference prices would hurt young farmers
Do billionaires get farm subsidies?
Crop insurance pays billions in weather-related losses linked to the climate crisis
Crop insurance costs soar over time, reaching a record high in 2022
As the climate emergency heats up the Southwest, crop insurance payouts for heat surge
In the intensifying climate crisis, a hotter Southwest spurs rising heat-related crop insurance costs
