Consumers are unhappy with increasing food prices and blame inflation. In reality, natural disasters have a direct link to grocery costs, and no end is in sight.

Indiana farms are affected by climate change including hot, dry summers and excessive rain.

The weather extremes lower the productivity of their livestock which raises the price of dairy and meat products.

Trace One is a software and regulatory compliance company for the food and beverage industry.

Spokesperson Mike Stromberg said the effects of floods, hurricanes, drought, and extreme heat have a nationwide and global impact.

"The price of oranges and the price of orange juice have both steadily increased in recent years, due to declining production in Florida caused by large hurricanes," said Stromberg. "Grain prices are through the roof in critical agriculture regions like the Midwest. It starts with drought. It affects a huge portion of agriculture in that region, that has an after effect at the grocery store - in terms of your grocery prices."

Indiana ranked 24th in the Trace One study of all 50 states where natural disasters have the biggest impact on the nation's food supply.

Losses were mostly due to riverine flooding, or excessive water flow - in Clay, Dubois, Knox, Morgan, and Vigo counties.

Stromberg said innovation is needed to solve these dilemmas. One solution is to develop and distribute climate-resilient crops that can withstand extreme droughts and floods.

Other strategies are to implement effective water resource management systems and invest in flood-control measures alongside restoring natural buffers.

Wetlands and watersheds will act as sponges to help mitigate the dangers of excessive rainfall. More answers, he added, can take on a scientific tone.

"Also, farmers can use newer precision agriculture technologies," said Stromberg, "like IOT sensors, drones, advanced analytics that can allow farmers to better monitor weather patterns - things like soil health and their water usage, which can optimize resources better."

He advocated for the public to vote for policies that prioritize renewable energy, water conservation and sustainable agriculture to drive "incremental improvement" and for the public to reduce their food waste.

The study found that Hoosiers lost slightly more than $2,000 per household, or $826 per person, from food waste last year.




get more stories like this via email

Indiana farm leaders are pushing back against a bill that would increase inspections at large livestock farms.

Senate Bill 193, sponsored by Sen. Rick Niemeyer, R-Lowell, would require the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to double inspections at Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations for permits.

Josh Trenary, executive director of the Indiana Pork Producers Association, said the department said it will not need more staff but a study suggested otherwise.

"The agency's ability to balance inspecting where the needs are, or the risks are, while still making sure they get around to enough operations every year to receive their grant funding from the federal government," Trenary contended.

Supporters said the bill strengthens oversight and protects water quality, while opponents argued it adds costs and unnecessary burdens on farmers. A Senate committee moved the bill to the full chamber despite concerns from industry leaders and no public testimony in favor of it.

Trenary stated livestock farmers carefully manage manure because they use it as fertilizer instead of costly commercial products. He wants the regulatory program to be efficient.

"We want the regulatory program to run well -- it makes our environmental record look good if IDEM is quickly responding and solving problems before they happen -- that's what we want," Trenary emphasized. "We want them to make those discretionary risk based inspections instead of a blanket statutory requirement."

Trenary argued the proposal creates more regulation without addressing a real problem. He wants lawmakers to focus on better environmental solutions.


get more stories like this via email

North Dakota lawmakers are still sorting out a thorny agricultural issue getting to the heart of local zoning restrictions for animal feedlot operations.

The state is looking to revise standards capping setbacks a county or township puts in place when figuring out how close feedlots can sit near a community.

State agricultural leaders want more livestock production in North Dakota. The recommendations call for reducing distance caps involving smaller sites but to extend allowed setbacks for larger ones, known as concentrated animal feeding operations.

Sen. Paul Thomas, R-Velva, at a committee hearing Friday, acknowledged the growing debate.

"There's a lot of communication from constituents, from agriculture organizations on all sides of this," Thomas observed.

Thomas proposed an amendment to do away with the longer setbacks for the larger feedlots. He argued the current limit of one mile is sufficient. It is unclear what a final bill would look like but Thomas' proposal is likely to anger local residents and environmentalists opposed to concentrated animal feeding operations, which are under increased scrutiny in the U.S. over concerns about air and water pollution.

Opponents had already spoken out against elements of the bill during earlier testimony this session, noting the push chips away at local control.

Jeff Kenner, a farmer from the Devils Lake area, was among those who expressed frustration with the broader pressure applied to townships to welcome feedlots with large animal herds.

"Why try to bully your way and get as close to a town, residence, lake or business (as possible) when there are miles and miles of open land to put animal feeding operations on?" Kenner asked.

Opponents of factory farms said not only are air and water quality affected, local road infrastructure is burdened with increased truck traffic. Backers of boosting livestock output in North Dakota said the state is falling behind its neighbors, while arguing the modern large-scale approach to producing food is needed to meet global demand. They said the bill in its original form strikes a balance between community needs and helping farmers. The amendment was tabled, for now.


get more stories like this via email

Groups working to protect Iowa's air and water rally at the State Capitol this afternoon, against a bill they say would protect pesticide companies from lawsuits if their products make people sick.

Iowa Senate Study Bill 1051, the so-called Cancer Gag Act, "provides defense from civil liability tied to the use of pesticides," as long as their labeling meets Environmental Protection Agency standards - which can be 15 years old.

Iowa Food and Water Watch Central Iowa Organizer Michaelyn Mankel said the measure would essentially change the law to protect pesticide companies from accountability, in a state that's already seeing a "public health crisis."

"We have rising cancer rates," said Mankel. "We're the only state in the nation where incidents of cancer are increasing, and we rank second in the nation for rates of cancer."

The International Agency for Research on Cancer has said that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic to humans," but the EPA says there's no evidence to supports that.

Pesticide makers - including Bayer, which has four lobbyists in Iowa alone - have said they're following current law and need protection from what they deem frivolous lawsuits, and this bill would provide that.

But Mankel said the measure would further erode Iowans' ability to take legal action if they think these products caused health problems.

"This is not a matter of stopping frivolous lawsuits," said Mankel. "It's a matter of not robbing Iowans of the only avenue we have to hold the pesticide industry accountable at a time where we're really suffering."

The rally at the Capitol will begin with an altar ceremony to memorialize Iowans who have died from cancer, many of whom advocates say were deaths related to pesticides.