Biomass Crop Assistance Program in 2nd District of Florida (Rep. Neal Dunn), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 17 of 17
Recipients of Biomass Crop Assistance Program from farms in 2nd District of Florida (Rep. Neal Dunn) totaled $3,291,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Biomass Crop Assistance Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Whitfield Timber Co Inc | Wewahitchka, FL 32465 | $898,457 |
2 | Morris Timber Products Inc | Lynn Haven, FL 32444 | $295,910 |
3 | Panhandle Forestry Services Inc | Chipley, FL 32428 | $271,628 |
4 | St Joe Timerland Company Of Delaw | P C Beach, FL 32413 | $237,525 |
5 | Rex Lumber LLC | Graceville, FL 32440 | $228,401 |
6 | Gays Logging Inc | Alford, FL 32420 | $208,655 |
7 | Spanish Trail Lumber Company | Marianna, FL 32448 | $205,172 |
8 | Deer Point Timber Products Inc | Southport, FL 32409 | $182,336 |
9 | Wiregrass Wood Inc | Columbia, AL 36319 | $164,622 |
10 | Glenn T Warren And Co Inc | Blountstown, FL 32424 | $161,873 |
11 | Tri State Land & Timber Co Inc | Blountstown, FL 32424 | $135,647 |
12 | North Florida Woodlands | Graceville, FL 32440 | $99,583 |
13 | Canal Wood LLC | Conway, SC 29528 | $72,475 |
14 | Suwannee Lumber Company Inc | Cross City, FL 32628 | $58,656 |
15 | Coastal Forest Resource Co | Havana, FL 32333 | $42,625 |
16 | Neal Land & Timber Company | Blountstown, FL 32424 | $14,588 |
17 | Coastal Land And Timber | Southport, FL 32409 | $12,736 |
* 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.”