The price of fuel is only a small part of the cost of food.
A lot of the present high price for food is tied to the continuing drought in the western United States. (The recent rains in California, heavy as they were, have not completely restored water to pre-drought levels.)
The drought has reduced the size of the beef herd in the US and the resulting shortage has raised prices. Ranchers are not going to start increasing the size of their herds again until they have the weather for more reliable range and feed products they need to economically raise cattle.
As consumers switch to more affordable alternative meats, demand for them has raised their prices as well.
Vegetables, fruits, and nuts produced in the western United States have been similarly affected by the drought. Wholesale suppliers are lining up alternative sources but the shortfalls are being made up from other, more expensive regions.
Of course, lower fuel costs - primarily diesel, I would imagine - do bring production costs down. But the producer is likely to initially pocket that as profit from internal savings and not pass it along to the customer.
For consumer costs to really come down, there would have to be a significant oversupply in the market. With the careful, computer-based, satellite and Internet-driven, management practices followed these days in modern agriculture and the time required to produce some of these products, there is probably a lag (how significant I don’t know) between improved growing conditions and any real improvement (decrease)in retail food prices. Creating a significant oversupply in the market is just not in their economic interests.
Then again, who thought we would ever see a below $0.50/gallon gas war going on in Michigan?
If there was not disconnect going on, we see the prices of nearly everything ticking down along with the fuel.
I have not seen it.