David,
I think organic honey is a dead issue, because of the lack of control of
foraging bees. I know the organic people have real problems with this, but it
may still be on someone's burner. The requested article is attached. Thanks.
Kim
 
 
 


For over twenty years I've been producing what I feel is 'raw' honey. I try not to heat it during extraction, and when it crystallizes, the jars or buckets are re-liquefied at the minimum temperature possible. Over the years, I've found that 105 to 110°F does a sufficient job. This keeps most or maybe all the original enzymes intact, plus keeps the honey tasting as close as possible to the way it tastes as it comes out of the extractor. Honey will flow just fine for all stages of extraction, settling, and bottling anywhere above 90°, so I always supposed that I could claim that my honey was 'raw' and 'unheated,' and all my different labels have claimed this fact. Since our Summers reach 100°F occasionally, and since, according to Dr. Eric Erickson of the Tucson Bee Lab, honey will reach at least ambient air temperature, the bees had let the honey reach at least 100° occasionally.
All the honey I've ever produced crystallizes in about six to eight weeks, especially in the Fall and Winter. This was a headache to change out with the local stores, but in all good conscience, I felt I had the responsibility to my customers to produce the best tasting honey possible, and heating it much higher than I did always changed the taste substantially, driving off the aromatics and causing the honey to have a syrup-type taste instead of the delicate bouquet it had originally.
On a trip to the grocery store, I found a jar of Auntie Jane's Raw Wildflower Honey (name changed to protect me). After some investigating, I found that the huge Midwest packing conglomerate that produced this was heating it to only 140°F instead of the usual 160°, so they felt they could call it 'raw,' I suppose. The honey's taste was generally terrible (in my opinion), but consumers thought they were getting a product which had not been heated. You can suffer third-degree burns at 140°! Raw, my eye! I claim that this company, if the above temperature facts are true, is defrauding the unsuspecting consumer, who generally thinks he or she is getting a product similar to mine, where utmost care is used in all stages of extracting and bottling to preserve the original taste.
For a while, I was all excited about getting some legal wranglings going based upon some kind of fraudulent claims (I'm no lawyer), so I called up the Honey Board to see what was officially on the books concerning a 'raw' definition.
Here, beekeepers, is the official definition, followed and clarified afterward by a definition of commercially raw honey:
RAW HONEY: honey as it exists in the beehive or as obtained by extraction, settling, or straining without adding heat. (Italics mine)
COMMERCIALLY RAW HONEY: honey obtained by minimum processing. This product is often labeled as raw honey. With a tag added later: The definition of "minimum processing" can be set by purchasing standards.
Both these definitions as they exist and are applied to practical honey production are jokes. I will address each in turn and then make some proposals, followed by the big picture. I will also address why these definitions might have come about, and who needs to be producing 'raw honey.'
The first part of the raw honey definition is fine. We can produce honey, which for all practical purposes, is the same as it exists in the beehive, keeping in mind the ambient temperature in a particular area or the highest ambient temperature in the contiguous United States (more on this later). The last three words make this definition ridiculous. Let's say you come into your honey house, the temperature is in the mid-50s, and you decide to turn the heat up. Well, you've just added heat, and by definition, have just negated all your honey's definition as 'raw.' Or let's say you've just exchanged a jar of your honey at one of your accounts. Unless you sell it as is, this honey can no longer be classified as 'raw,' since to liquefy it (including putting it out in the sun), heat must be added. I venture to speculate that no one in the United States produces 'raw' honey by this absurd definition.
Now, as far as the "commercially raw honey" definition goes, I wonder what politician wrote this one? Certainly one with some ties to the packers, since this definition could be construed to mean whatever someone wants it to mean. "Minimum processing" sounds good at first, but 'minimum' compared to what 'maximum' or what defined standard? If a packer for years has heated honey to 160°F, then 140°F might be twisted to mean 'minimum processing.' Those of us who for years have traded out our honey and patiently explained to accounts and consumers that our honey and all 'raw' honey will crystallize in time are getting shortchanged. Unscrupulous honey people are taking advantage of this label to dupe consumers and sell them honey which in no way is 'raw.'
The Honey Board* generally agrees that we need a better definition for 'raw honey,' and they would work with us to expand the market niche for this product. That's great news if we can get a definition that means something. This definition must be passed by a general vote of the national beekeeping organizations, of which many members have strong ties to packers and others who might oppose a clearer definition. So here's my proposal, and it is a simple one. We base the definition on temperature alone, such as: "Raw honey is defined as honey kept below ____°F in all stages of extraction, settling, straining, and bottling." All we, the beekeepers, have to do is agree on a temperature, which should be easy, but in actuality probably will not be so simple. I propose that we adopt the ambient air temperature of the hottest area of the United States where bees are commercially kept, which is probably Arizona, and, again according to Dr. Eric Erickson, is around 115°F.
Giving the packers who might still be interested in marketing raw honey an additional break, I suggest we adopt the temperature of 120°F as the universal temperature maximum for 'raw' honey. Those who feel this is too high can change their labels to read something like "This honey has been kept at 100°F or lower in all stages to bring you honey as close to possible as it exists in my beehives." Or something to that effect. But before you scream for a lower maximum temperature than 120°, put yourself in Arizona. There your honey in the hives routinely reaches the 110 to 115° mark during the Summer. Consider also the fact that the combs start sagging and the liquid honey starts running down on the bottomboard around 120°, so honey can't exist in the hive above this temperature for very long. I couldn't find research on this exact temperature, and based it on an article written many years ago.
So what needs to be done? Badger the members of the resolutions committees of the ABF and the AHPA, and also their officers. Tell them you will withdraw your membership unless a better definition is drawn up. Get state associations to draw up resolutions to send to the national organizations. The ultimate objective of this is to raise the price of raw honey above that of regular honey and let the consumers who are so concerned about what they eat pay for all the extra time and trouble that it takes to produce genuine raw honey. At this point, we do not need any mechanism for enforcement, just a definition, as enforcement is a whole other ball of beeswax. Already customers exist out in the real world who are concerned with enzymes and eating products existing as close as possible to their natural state. Other customers are price-conscious only and want a product that tastes good and is price-competitive. Let the division begin and let's start commanding the higher price that 'raw honey' deserves.


Michael Meyer is a commercial producer/packer from Springfield, MO.


*In discussions on this topic with Honey Board Staff, it was determined that, indeed, no single definition for raw honey exists. For commercially raw honey, the standards are set between buyer and seller, and a standard minimum processing temperature does not exist. We agree that it is time to define these standards, and support any action by beekeeping organizations and others to do so. However, until such are in force, we do not believe that packers using the term on their labels are fradulent nor unscrupulous. Opportunistic may be a better term. Ed.