The past year has presented significant challenges to Ohio farmers. In August, several southeastern counties were designated with drought disaster areas. By the end of the month, this list had expanded to 22 counties across Appalachian Ohio. As of early November, the total has reached 52 counties, creating a diagonal swath from Northwest to Southeast Ohio.

Unraveling the Drought Crisis Facing Ohio Farmers

Drought Conditions and Their Severity

The U.S. Drought Monitor classifies drought conditions on a five-point scale, ranging from D0 (abnormally dry) to D4 (exceptional drought). At the highest level, D4, one can expect widespread and exceptional crop or pasture losses, along with water emergencies due to shortages in reservoirs, streams, and wells. In Ohio's latest drought map, a patch of D4 drought is situated over Guernsey and Noble Counties, resembling Jupiter's Great Red Spot. This severe drought has had a profound impact on farmers across the state.

Representative Don Jones, R-Freeport, who represents some of the highly impacted areas, has been actively involved. He is co-sponsoring a measure to assist farmers. The drought has led to skyrocketing hay prices, with people paying as much as $80 a bale and sometimes even more if they can find it. Many farmers have been forced to sell off their livestock due to a lack of feed. This situation has put a strain on their livelihoods and forced them to make difficult decisions.

Ohio's U.S. Drought Monitor map as of Nov. 19, 2024, clearly shows the extent of the drought. Richard Tinker from NOAA/NWS/NCEP/CPC has been closely monitoring the situation. The drought has not only affected crop yields but has also led to depleted groundwater, forcing farmers to rely on trucking in water to sustain their operations.

Stakeholder Perspectives

Ohio Department of Agriculture Director Brian Baldridge described how the drought has been particularly hard on those raising livestock. Drought means less forage in their own pastures and a tightening supply of hay. It also leads to depleted groundwater, which many farmers have been supplementing by trucking in water. Federal programs can provide some relief, but they come with prerequisites.

"Yes, you can get paid for hauling hay if it's more than 25 miles," he said. "Yes, you can get paid for hauling water and get reimbursed for that water you purchase, but there are a lot of gaps in between, and it's not fully reimbursed." He added that federal programs, which serve farmers across the entire country, don't have the same understanding of local needs and dynamics.

Ashley Kasler, an organization director with the Ohio Farm Bureau in Southeast Ohio, whose family also runs a cow-calf and hay farm, shared her perspective. In her area, the past year has been a rollercoaster for farmers. Early spring, there was enough rain, but many farmers worried about being able to plant. Then the rain stopped, and fields that were once wet now looked dry.

The first cutting of hay was a bit dry but manageable. By the second cutting, yields were down significantly, and a third cutting was almost non-existent. This meant that many farmers had to start using their hay stores earlier than usual to carry their livestock through the winter. "We would normally start feeding hay in mid-November," she said. "Now we have been feeding hay since mid-June. Normally, for those needing to buy round bales, you would pay about $40 to $45 per round bale. It's now close to $80 to $85."

Lawmakers' Questions and Concerns

In committee, lawmakers primarily asked why aren't we doing more? Representative Tom Young, R-Washington Twp., asked, "I mean we needed it this summer, right? Shouldn't we do something more now, if we can, versus coming back and waiting until we get into drought season again?"

Jones stressed that "we don't know where this ends," and he didn't want to ask for too much now and risk lawmakers being reluctant later when the need might be greater. Representative Dani Isaacsohn, D-Cincinnati, cautious not to mention climate change directly, asked if an ad hoc approach is the best way to address the problem. He said, "This is not the last time this is going to happen. Unfortunately, this is going to get worse. It's going to get more frequent."

He asked Baldridge if the department is thinking about a climate mitigation fund or some state-level version of crop insurance and what approaches other states are considering. "Because right now, it's these farmers who are acutely impacted," he said. "In the future, it will either be other farmers or, honestly, if it goes the other direction, it will be basements in places in Cincinnati that people can't afford to fix, right?"

Representative Bob Peterson, R-Washington Court House, warned against "irrational exuberance" and attempting to recreate crop insurance when the federal program is "very robust." He said, "The one gap probably that exists right now in federal crop insurance is these haying grazing operations. And I appreciate the work that the administration and you have done to try and address that gap that's out there, but I don't see the need to step into what the federal government does very well."

Despite the quibbles on the margins, lawmakers on the panel had no reservations about advancing the funding. The measure was introduced and reported favorably in the same hearing. It still needs approval from the full House and the Senate, but given its rapid progress and broad support, it seems likely to be a priority in the final weeks of the legislative session.

Follow OCJ Reporter Nick Evans on Twitter.Ohio Capital Journal is part of the States Newsroom, a network of similar news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.