Honey

[Polyhive]

On reading through the threads here there is one matter that seems to be ignored.

Honey.

Most seem to just say I added xyz amount of honey and......

There are literally hundreds of honeys and you get back what you put in. Same as grapes. Would a top vinyard buy rubbish grapes, course not they grow their own to control quality.

I am not suggesting that every one takes up beekeeping but if you are buying honey off the supermarket shelf at a couple of bob a pound you are obviously not buying the best.

Just some food for thought.

PH (Beekeeping for 30+ years)

 

[bernardsmith]

Gotta agree with you, Polyhive. There seems to me to be three key elements (apart from "quality") associated with honey for mead- One is the use of local, raw honey and if you are interested in using indigenous yeasts (wild fermentations) this honey can provide your fermentables and the yeast and most likely (I think) in this part of the planet - Upstate NY - most of the local honey is wildflower and/or clover. This honey may provide the equivalent to the wine makers "terroir" (the flavor and character of the place itself)
The second element is varietal honey - So while I am certain that no beekeeper can claim that any varietal contains ONLY say, raspberry, apple, acacia, Tupelo, meadowfoam, heather etc the great majority of the honey has come from those blooms and so you get a great range of flavors and aromas from these different varieties. I would argue that wildflower and clover are great vehicles for other flavors (metheglyns and melomels) while the varietals can hold the stage as the starring act and again, local varietals offer "terroir".

The third element is the season: here, at least, you can find spring, summer and fall honey (again, these would be wildflower) and the intensity of flavor at each season is, I think, markedly different.

But all that said, recipes are ... recipes. And recipes are really no more than a very basic "account" of what some did translated to remove all the peculiarities and uniqueness of particular actions on a specific day and time. So when "John" writes he used 3 lbs of "honey" he may have used 3.2 lbs of local honey that came in fact from flowers from local apple orchards and when "Jane" uses this recipe she may take 2.9 lbs of spring wildflower honey...

 

[specialkayme]

As an EAS Masterbeekeeper, I'd agree. I don't consider supermarket honey and "true" honey to be considered the same food group, let alone impart similar flavors on mead produced.

But when most meadmakers and homebrewers see the cost of getting "true" local honey, they are suddenly willing to take a compromise to flavor. Which I'm personally fine with. I sell my honey at a price that literally covers my costs in beekeeping. I don't make a profit off it, but do it for fun. And I sell out every year. If $7/lb is too much for you, and you don't understand what it takes to get it (the literal blood, sweat, stings . . .), have at the supermarket $3/lb "Chinese imported" stuff. Doesn't bother me at all. And it provides a more consistent flavor on your mead too. If you're going for that.

 

[Polyhive]

Here in Scotland the honey considered to be the best is from the Ling Heather and is a special honey as in like Manuka its thixotropic and so needs to be agitated to enable extraction. It sells for up to £10 a pound so at 20 pounds per five gallons it starts to look expensive circa the £200 mark.

In general though the message is simple. Rubbish in and sh**e out.

PH

 

[piojo]

I don't disagree, but we have no common point of reference. What's the point in talking about it? If I said my newest batch of mead was made with the cheap but decent honey from the PrizeMart around the corner that they import from Thailand (not the one they import from Australia), would you know what I was talking about?

Edit: Of course it's great to brag about it if the honey is good! But for most honey that has been made into a commodity, there's often not much to say. (Or if there is, I honestly don't have the ability to describe it, much as I can't describe a glass of wine.)

 

[AZCoolerBrewer]

I went to a farmers market here in Arizona and paid 12 dollars for 12 oz. of local honey. When I put it in my beer, my wife was mad because she didn’t get to use any on her toast. I put the honey in my all grain version of White House Ale and because it was so thick, it boasted my ABV about 2% (2 gallon batch).

 

[OG-wan Kenobi]

I get my Honey from Medford Farms not cheap at $7 a LB but a superior product no doubt about it

 

[specialkayme]

But for most honey that has been made into a commodity, there's often not much to say.

Unlike most other commodities, honey comes in a varietal and geographic location options.

Varrietal examples: Orange Blossom, Blackberry, Tulip Poplar, Sourwood, Acacia, Basswood, Clover, Wildflower, Buckwheat

Geographic location examples: Florida, Wisconsin, Arizona, Brazil

Even the honey you buy in the grocery market has the source of origin (state) or country of origin, and often type the nectar source and/or the grade (in the event it is a blended honey).

If you told me your recipe involved wildflower honey from PA, I know it is entirely different than wildflower honey from MT (and having tasted enough honey around the country, I could tell you what the two types probably tasted like). Or if you told me your recipe involved Sourwood honey, I know it is entirely different than Buckwheat honey. Not at all unlike using different types of apples in your cider recipe, or different types of grapes in your wine recipe.

The point of the original post was that when you find a wine recipe, it tells you the specific breed of grapes that you should use (or at least a selection). Same holds true with cider. Same holds true with beer ("use Golden Promise, can substitute for Pilsner malt"). But most mead recipes call for "honey." Not one of the 7 grades of honey (such as Water White, or Amber). Not a specific varietal of honey. Not even a description of where it came from "local NC honey." Just simply "honey."

 

[mirthfuldragon]

Maybe a little off topic, but the barrier I have to mead-making is not wanting to spend a significant amount on high-quality honey only to find out my process sucks and then get mediocre results a year or three down the line. It's one thing to dump a $30-40 keg of beer or batch of wine, but $100+ for a batch of mead for something that is going to take upwards of a year or more to finish before I know what I have . . . it's hard to get my mind around it.

I should probably just jump in at the 1g level, but I would love to make something I can enjoy a decade from now.

 

[Maylar]

The point of the original post was that when you find a wine recipe, it tells you the specific breed of grapes that you should use (or at least a selection). Same holds true with cider. Same holds true with beer ("use Golden Promise, can substitute for Pilsner malt"). But most mead recipes call for "honey." Not one of the 7 grades of honey (such as Water White, or Amber). Not a specific varietal of honey. Not even a description of where it came from "local NC honey." Just simply "honey."

With some exceptions. Orange Blossom is often specified, but as you mentioned Florida and California Orange Blossom are totally different. You'll also see Star Thistle specified sometimes, which is mostly a Michigan source. And of course Tupelo ($$$) which only comes from one place on earth.

 

[bob1852]

And of course Tupelo ($$$) which only comes from one place on earth.

And, be cautious of spending money on tupelo honey unless you really trust the source oryou get a pollen report from the beekeeper.

There are some predators out there trying to capitalize on the 'unique' honey market (especially given the lax regulations in labeling...)

 

[specialkayme]

With some exceptions.

True, but those are likely the exception that proves the rule, so to speak.

The reason why Orange Blossom honey is often specified is because it's the only type of honey you can often find in mass quantities that isn't clover honey, wildflower honey, or from "China" (although the growing Almond market, and the increasing war over Florida orange grove pollination, may change that in the future . . . a lawsuit was filed between an seedless orange grove owner and a beekeeper, where the court had to decide who arrived in Florida first, the bee or the orange, to which the bee won and now seedless orange grove owners have to "net" their trees to avoid pollination, but that's an entirely different thread). When they mention Orange Blossom, it's probably usually as a notation of "something more than Clover" and less of a notation of actual imparted flavors on the end product.

Same holds true with beer though. I can go to the LHBS and find two types of honey on the shelf. "Honey" and "Orange Blossom Honey." If I ask what type the "Honey" is I get a resounding "I don't know" from the clerk. If I show them my recipe, if it says "honey" they get me the "Honey", and if it says "XXX honey" they get me the "Orange Blossom Honey." Doesn't matter if the recipe called for Tupelo, Acacia, or Manuka, probably.

The Star Thistle and Tupelo honey references (along with Fireweed, Sourwood, and a few other specific honey sources) are often due to individual locations that are very proud of their local honey source, and are less due to the flavor impacts they impart on the resulting mead or beer. With some exceptions of course. It physically isn't possible to buy 20 pounds of Sourwood honey in CA, or Tupelo honey in WA, unless you're a honey broker or you pay to ship it in.

 

[SKBugs]

Great thread.
In Australia we are having a honey crisis. Big brands have allegedly been adding other products to the honey. Additives and syrup seem to be the most common. Reports have indicated that 1 in 5 batches of honey tested in Oz have been found to be contaminated. So in regards to making mead from this crap, I totally agree with polyhive - go with high quality, which usually means local.

 

[bernardsmith]

Have to agree about Ling

Here in Scotland the honey considered to be the best is from the Ling Heather and is a special honey as in like Manuka its thixotropic and so needs to be agitated to enable extraction. It sells for up to £10 a pound so at 20 pounds per five gallons it starts to look expensive circa the £200 mark.

In general though the message is simple. Rubbish in and sh**e out.

PH

Have got to agree about Ling honey. There is a company here in the USA that sells Ling honey (among other Scottish products). It ain't cheap but if you want to make heather mead (and I do - I grew up in Scotland and we were all crazy about heather honey. It is a wonderfully flavored honey there is) then I think you need both heather honey and heather tips... But that is another story.
I guess I don't know that Manuka honey is great for mead making. It may be but here it costs about $40 for a 4 oz jar so unless you are making nano batches of mead it may not be the first varietal to consider. I believe that Menuka is typically used for some kind of complementary (alternative - not mainstream) medical purposes.

 

[bernardsmith]

I don't disagree, but we have no common point of reference. What's the point in talking about it? If I said my newest batch of mead was made with the cheap but decent honey from the PrizeMart around the corner that they import from Thailand (not the one they import from Australia), would you know what I was talking about?

Edit: Of course it's great to brag about it if the honey is good! But for most honey that has been made into a commodity, there's often not much to say. (Or if there is, I honestly don't have the ability to describe it, much as I can't describe a glass of wine.)

But this has nothing to do with "bragging" and everything to do with indicating the flavor notes that the recipe is suggesting will be in the finished product assuming of course that the mead maker is doing everything to highlight those notes and not destroy them with their protocol ("Boil the honey and remove the scum that rises to the top...").

But , piojo, when you tell me that the honey used in a recipe is supermarket sourced you are telling me that it is blended from multiple sources and that tells me that the flavor of the honey is not really something that is especially factored in this recipe. The point is that that honey will taste like generic "honey". And that's like a vintner saying that they use Welch's grape juice. That will make wine - no question... it won't make a Riesling, a Malbec or a Merlot but it will make a "Welch's wine".

 

[bernardsmith]

I went to a farmers market here in Arizona and paid 12 dollars for 12 oz. of local honey. When I put it in my beer, my wife was mad because she didn’t get to use any on her toast. I put the honey in my all grain version of White House Ale and because it was so thick, it boasted my ABV about 2% (2 gallon batch).

I think - but may be wrong, AZCoolerBrewer, because I am not a bee keeper and do not extract honey from any comb - that all honey has essentially the same amount of sugar /lb because all honey has the same moisture content (about 18%). So the "thickness" has nothing to do with how much fermentable sugar is in the honey but whether the honey has crystallized.

Some varietals are invariably crystallized under normal conditions while others crystallize as they age. The "thickness" caused by crystallization has no impact on fermentation but to break down those crystals you simply warm the honey (still in its container) in a water bath.

My rule of thumb for any honey I have access to is to assume that 1 lb of honey dissolved in water to make 1 gallon of must will increase the gravity of the water by 35 points. Your experience with your White House Ale is precisely what I would have anticipated (Add .0175 of fermentable gravity to a must or wort (because you added one pound to 2 gallons) and you increase the potential ABV by a hair over 2%). Nothing surprising with your result. What other result did you expect?

 

[specialkayme]

I guess I don't know that Manuka honey is great for mead making.

It isn't. Just a reference point.

I think - but may be wrong, AZCoolerBrewer, because I am not a bee keeper and do not extract honey from any comb - that all honey has essentially the same amount of sugar /lb because all honey has the same moisture content (about 18%).

Not correct.

Honey varies widely in moisture content, from 16% and up (actually, honey starts as nectar, containing anywhere between 50-80% moisture, and the moisture content is reduced down by the bees in the process of making honey. Once the moisture content is typically below 18.6%, the bees cap the cells indicating they are ready to be extracted. But you don't extract 100% of cells that are capped. You actually extract 70-95% of cells that are capped. Meaning 70-95% of cells have a moisture content below 18.6% [the actual number varies on the nectar source and the bees used] and 5-30% have a moisture content above 18.6% [the actual number varies on when the honey is extracted, but it typically only has a moisture content in the 19-20% range, ideally]). With the end honey, anything below 18.6% is considered grade A. Larger blending operations will blend honey that has 17% with honey that has 20%, to get 18.6%. Take what you will out of it. Not that it isn't useable honey. You can also make mead out of higher moisture content honey, say 21%. You just need to use it quickly as it is not "shelf stable" and will ferment on its own if given the opportunity.

But moisture content aside, honey varies widely in composition from one type to another. Honey is a mixture of, predominantly, glucose, fructose and sucrose. Typically it's around 30-40% fructose, 30-40% glucose, 1-5% sucrose, and the rest is moisture and trace elements (plus gluconic acid, hydrogen peroxide, and a few other preservative chemicals made in the process of converting nectar [sucrose] into honey). But the percentage of fructose to glucose will shift from one honey to another. Your taste buds take up the different sugars differently, and one will taste "sweeter" than another. It also has an impact on how quickly it granulates (or drops out of a super saturated solution, but that doesn't really matter much to most mead and beer makers). The composition of glucose to fructose will also vary from year to year, even within the same nectar source, making honey from the same hives taste different from year to year.

Now the question is, how does the composition of glucose, fructose and sucrose impact the yeast you use? Assuming the strain of yeast you use can easily digest glucose, fructose and sucrose evenly, then it shouldn't matter on the alcohol content. But not all yeasts evenly digest all three types of sugars. Some will attack all forms of sucrose while partially digesting fructose, and others will only partially digest glucose (although most will actually attack the vast majority of all three). Different yeast strains will leave behind different sugars and trace minerals and elements. If your mead has a final gravity of 1.015 (just a random number), it matters if the residual sugar is predominantly glucose or predominantly fructose, as the two will taste different to you. The difference depends on the type of honey you use, as well as the type of yeast you use.

The point is, all "honey isn't honey" considering the same moisture content. Chemical and mineral composition varies from source to source, making them taste very different and making your mead taste very different.

 

[bernardsmith]

Thank you for that very informative post. Most mead makers have no problem getting their mead to ferment brut dry without any problem assuming they feed their yeast an amount of sugar that they can tolerate without creating osmotic shock and the amount of alcohol in the mead is within the yeast's tolerance for alcohol. While a final gravity of 1.015 may be a brewer's bottom line mead makers can - and do - aim for meads that are neither sweet nor semi sweet. Unless we plan for it, there is no "sour" which we need to balance with sweet - and if the ABV is reasonable there is no powerful reason to balance the amount of alcohol with sweetness either.

 

[specialkayme]

I actually like my mead dessert sweet, that's why I used the 1.015 number. I've never been a fan of dry meads, but I know many that like them.

But that's actually not the point. Even with a mead that finishes at 1.000 or 0.995, there are still residual sugars that are present. Because in the finished mead, the alcohol that's present has a SG of roughly 0.790, and because the water present has a SG of roughly 1.000, if you have a finished mead at 1.000 and an ABV of 12%, 0.0948 of your FG was contributed by alcohol, 0.880 of your FG was contributed by water (actually a little less, but still), and the resulting 0.0252 of contributing SG is by residual sugars (and some trace minerals and elements, which are typically quite few in a mead).

Now if those 0.0252 contributing SG points, in very rough math, come from fructose or glucose, the resulting mead will taste different, even if it is brut dry. It still works at 0.990, and at 1.015. Even more so if you have an FG of 1.015 and 0.051 of SG points is coming from residual sugars, but you get the idea.

 

[theron.hall]

As an EAS Masterbeekeeper, I'd agree. I don't consider supermarket honey and "true" honey to be considered the same food group, let alone impart similar flavors on mead produced.

But when most meadmakers and homebrewers see the cost of getting "true" local honey, they are suddenly willing to take a compromise to flavor. Which I'm personally fine with. I sell my honey at a price that literally covers my costs in beekeeping. I don't make a profit off it, but do it for fun. And I sell out every year. If $7/lb is too much for you, and you don't understand what it takes to get it (the literal blood, sweat, stings . . .), have at the supermarket $3/lb "Chinese imported" stuff. Doesn't bother me at all. And it provides a more consistent flavor on your mead too. If you're going for that.

That's kind of funny because the local guy here where I live gets $7 per pound for his honey too.
I used a little in one of my recipes but neither of which are a true straight mead, but cyser and melomel.

 

[piojo]

Warning: I'm going off on a tangent.

Even with a mead that finishes at 1.000 or 0.995, there are still residual sugars that are present. Because in the finished mead, the alcohol that's present has a SG of roughly 0.790, and because the water present has a SG of roughly 1.000, if you have a finished mead at 1.000 and an ABV of 12%, 0.0948 of your FG was contributed by alcohol, 0.880 of your FG was contributed by water (actually a little less, but still), and the resulting 0.0252 of contributing SG is by residual sugars

You are right, except that alcohol and water don't add linearly when mixed. The density increases. (If you mix pure alcohol and water, you can also feel it get hot. If your finger is over the test tube, you can feel the suction as the volume contracts. It's very cool!) Spoiler: the error is pretty small at 12% ABV and can safely be ignored.

Interstingly all the online ABW/ABV calculators I found are clearly wrong, but this is more likely to be a correct equation: https://alcohol.stackexchange.com/a/6499

If you really want to know the math is right, it is better to use a chart than an equation. I found this: https://wissen.science-and-fun.de/chemistry/chemistry/density-tables/ethanol-water-mixtures/

The chart confirmed that a 12% ABV mix should be 0.984, so the residual sugars+nonfermentables account for the difference.

Note that to do all the math (accounting for how everything changes the density) would be ridiculously hard and I wouldn't want anyone but a physicist to do it. For example, the conclusions will change what is the ABV (maybe it's 11.5% or 12.5% instead of 12%, so we should iterate and do all the calculations again). I just use the online calculators.

 

[piojo]

That's kind of funny because the local guy here where I live gets $7 per pound for his honey too.
I used a little in one of my recipes but neither of which are a true straight mead, but cyser and melomel.

Also funny, that is the same price range as Chinese varietal honey from a farm ordered from someone that works for the farm, not some giant corporation. (I might pay a little less depending on the varietal, but the honey I buy has a higher water content.)

I also consider "honey" and "single origin varietal honey" to be different things, and that was part of the point I was trying to make before. It's okay for a recipe to be based on a generic product. It's just suboptimal. Also, if someone is posting their own results, they don't have the same obligation they would have if they were writing for a cook book. For example, what if I actually made the wrong choice about which honey to use? Should a pepper mead use a spicy honey, or is that a waste because the two spice aromas will mask each other? In that case, a beginner should not prescribe "you should use X honey if you follow this recipe because it's what I used". But a person with a superb sense of taste should be making that type of specification.

 

[bernardsmith]

All good points, piojo, but in truth a recipe is simply a record of what someone did (in our case) to make a batch of mead. Recipes are not written in stone and they are not even true or accurate or, IMO, reliable records. They are written to enable another unknown person, with unknown skills and unknown equipment to make something like a version of what the author of the recipe made on one day in the past.

How accurate were the measurements? How reliable was the report? What information was not included? How important are the details that were chosen to be included?

I think what happens is that many people focus in on "recipes" because they really do not have the confidence or the skills they need to make mead and treat the recipe as their crutch rather than as a general idea for a flavor blend they may not have previously considered - (from a recent NPR broadcast: Grenadine - made from equal parts pomegranate, elderflower and sour cherry with fennel and coriander - Quick thought: might that make an interesting mead?) .

I guess the thrust of my point is that if you know how to make a trad mead you really do not need any recipe.

 

[RPh_Guy]

I totally understand the frustration with inexact recipes. Beer recipes almost never include the water profile or maltsters (both of which can have a large flavor impact).
In fact I've never seen the water profile discussed for mead (besides buffers).

So...
How do I know which honey makes the best mead? Seems like that's just something I need to figure out myself through experimentation?

What makes one honey more quality than another honey?
What should I avoid and why?

Does it make much difference whether it's unfiltered or raw?

 

[bernardsmith]

Here's my take. Others may have very different opinions.
The honey you want for your mead is the honey that adds the flavor profile you want. If you don't know what profile you want or you don't know what flavor profiles different honey offers then perhaps any honey is as good as any other. If you don't know where you are going then any place you end up may be as good as any other. Me? I tend to use wildflower or clover if I am making a metheglyn or melomel where I want to create an ensemble performance from the honey and spices and herbs or fruit without any one starring lead but I prefer to use varietals if I want to highlight the flavor of the honey as a one person show.

What honey to avoid? I would avoid any honey whose flavor is likely to be masked by the other ingredients or by your protocol. I would also avoid any honey whose flavor is likely to mask any other flavors you would like to see be prominent. That might mean that buckwheat from the east coast is a varietal that you might use rather sparingly. It speaks through a fog horn when everything else is talking at a whisper.

Raw or processed? In my opinion the less any ingredient is processed the more of the real reason for its use is still available. Raw honey is filled with indigenous yeast and although those yeast are going to be completely swamped if and when you add lab cultured yeast there presence and their activity (if enabled for a day or two) will add complexity to a mead. Because of that my preference is always for the less "handled" honey. But if you ferment with yeasts that act like sledgehammers rather than scalpels then whether you use a raw or heavily processed honey really makes little difference. If you like to fantasize that you are making mead "like a viking" or some other ancient people they would likely have boiled hives with bees and bee parts included.

 

[S-Met]

Just an observation, but honey is an animal (insct) product, much like milk is from mammals. While there are some specific counter-arguments, most cheese recipies call for milk. They usually specify the animal, cow/sheep milk, not usually from the breed nor provence nor diet of the animal.

Thinking of honey: if you made a recipe, the likelihood of me being able to reproduce it is slim as I probably do not have access to your supply of honey. To add to the complications, each year, the honey will vary depending on environmental conditions.

Final broken thought: I agree that the better your starting product, the better your final product (assuming proper techniques); however, access to the best may is cost prohibitive. I would love to make wine from the finest grapes from Bordeaux, but cost/access is not within my reach. Kit or locally sourced is my best option. Same feelings towards Honey.

I'm not disagreeing on your point, just recognizing that the exact recipe is not reproducible. Factoring the mead and honey community is small enough to recognize this the, recipes are designed to be made with whatever is locally available.

 

[gratus fermentatio]

Here in Montana, we're rather limited as to varietal honey. We have plenty of clover, alfalfa & wildflower, but little else. We can get knapweed honey, but it's pricey. We can order other varietals from online sources, but often the price & the cost of shipping is prohibitive. So we use the generic/bland varieties like clover, alfalfa & wildflower for melomels, where the fruit flavor is highlighted, and save the special varietals like acacia, tupelo or orange blossom for the show meads, where the varietal honey is the star.
Regards, GF.

 

[ShareBrewing]

This thread is awesome, super informative.

Watch the documentary series Rotten on Netflix. The first episode of the series is on the global honey market and it’s pretty eye-opening, shocking honestly. It basically shows how much of the US honey market is imported, and how much tampering with blending there is, among other things. Picture any of the ubiquitous generic bear-shaped bottles you see on supermarket shelves. Now unless it is labeled with the nectar source, geographic location, etc I don’t trust it.

For eating honey, I only get it a pound at a time from a really small-time local beekeeper (friend of a relative).

For mead (I live in western PA), I use what is available at my LHBS, which is always wildflower, orange blossom, buckwheat, or clover honey from PA Dutch Gold farms. They recently started carrying imported Zambian (African) wildflower honey, for only a few more dollars than the usual 6lb jug. It’s much darker than our fall wildflower honey here at the moment. This has a wonderfully richer flavor compared to any US wildflower I’ve tasted. Nice and floral with a noticeable earthy undertone, touch of minerals and even a smoky quality. Loads of citrus too. Very complex. Just goes to show how diverse wildflower honeys can be, depending on location.

I’ve always been one to use the highest quality ingredients when- or wherever possible. Put good in, get good out. So after watching that doc, suddenly those big Costco jugs of honey that work out to $2-$3/lb just give me anxiety....

You don’t have to spend an arm and a leg on a few pounds of honey, but maybe don’t get the cheapest thing you can find. Chances are, it may not be 100% honey.

And when it comes to recipes, I’m not arguing with anyone on here, I agree with basically everything said. But it can be summed with this - all recipes should end with “But Your Milage May Vary”.

 

[RPh_Guy]

I watched the Rotten episode -- it was very informative and unbiased! Looks like a great series.

Anyway, what do you guys think of this True Source Certified logo? The American Honey Producers Association stands behind it.
Wal-Mart has True Source Certified honey at $2.50 per pound, some of it from Asia.

I try to pick up interesting local varieties when I can find them, or wildflower if it's a good price. I got U.S. meadowfoam from MoreBeer.

 

[specialkayme]

Anyway, what do you guys think of this True Source Certified logo?

My opinion only - it's worthless as a quality standard. It holds some value as a marketing ploy.

The True Source program attempts to validate the chain of honey authority from the beekeeper to the customer, and verifies it through third party audits. All this attempts to do is determine the source of the honey, not the content. The content just has to comply with the laws of the state of origin. If you can prove all your honey came from beekeepers in China, you can put the label on. It doesn't matter that the honey is laced with chemicals, as China has very low food standards. Plus, the only people that I want to verify the content of the food they're selling me are the people that are selling me poor quality food, and those are exactly the people who are less likely to be honest about the content of the food they're selling me.

But that issue aside, the True Source program is only as strong as its weakest link. Honey will often pass through half a dozen hands before it makes it to your grocery store. The beekeeper, the regional purchaser, the blender, the packager, the distributor, the retailer, the customer are just some examples. Some of those end up being the same party, depending on who you buy from. Beekeepers who produce under 40,000 lbs of honey a year are exempt from "registration." Meaning they don't need to prove any source or content, and can sell to a purchaser, blender or packager without issue. The purchaser, blender or packager then doesn't know about the source or content (because they didn't ask the beekeeper and weren't required to as they are exempt from registration), and can blissfully continue on. My state's honey average is 35 lbs per hive. So that means anyone (in my state) that has less than 1,100 colonies doesn't need to participate in the program, and still have the True Source label applied. 1,100 colonies is a large operation. I have 50. But that issue aside, I'm not worried about the guy that has 5,000 colonies. I'm worried about the guy that has 100 colonies and needs to cut corners in how he produces honey. And most of the people in China and Vietnam are just that, beekeepers with a few dozen or hundred hives. So if they are exempt from the process, the next guy in the chain (the regional purchaser, or the blender, or the distributor) can comfortably buy from the beekeeper while still maintaining his certification, even if the beekeeper is full of crap. The chain then becomes broken, and the label is worthless.

Realistically speaking though the guy that's trying to sneak in some watered down chemical honey won't spend the time (or money) registering for the program. So the theory is, if you take the time to register (and pay) to be in the program, you probably care about the quality of your honey. But most of your regional packagers can comply with the requirements, paperwork, fees, and loopholes, while most of your smaller packagers can't. The AHPA is mostly controlled by larger packagers. Hence the support.

While beekeepers who produce less than 40,000 lbs a year are exempt from registration, that only applies if they sell that honey to a distributor who is registered. If that beekeeper wants to put the "True Source" label on his own honey, he must register and jump through all the audits, fees, and requirements. That's alot of red tape for the beekeeper who is putting honey straight from the hive to the bottle. So it cuts out the small local beekeeper, and the small packager. But the AHPA isn't governed by small local beekeepers. They actually don't want the competition from those small guys. Again, hence the support.

Nothing against the AHPA though. Good people. Just not the small guys in the crowd.

But as a marketing ploy it makes sense. You see "Rotten" and you think all honey is of poor quality, adulterated, or smuggled in. You can't tell the difference between the real stuff and the bad stuff. You don't want to take the time (or don't know where to look) to find a beekeeper and ask him questions. So you buy cane sugar instead. Until you come on a "True Source Certified" logo. Then you feel more confident about the honey, and buy it. It doesn't matter that it isn't a better product. It doesn't matter that the money isn't helping a local beekeeper. All that matters is you feel better about the purchase, and therefore you feel better about honey.

But hey, it's a start.