Poll: Should it be legal to use the word "Raw" on labels to describe unheated, non-pressure filtered honey

[jenkinsbrynmair]

I do it because it is a true and accurate description of the product I am selling.

How can it be true and accurate when there isn't even a definitive interpretation of the word 'raw' in relation to honey.
It's just what you think is true someone else may hold a different view of the definition and their believe wound be as valid as yours (even though both may be wrong)

 

[Anduril]

Whether it is regional or a specific clientele, all mine recognise the word organic as their gold standard. But as this is virtually impossible in the UK due to the close proximity of neighbours. They also wanted to know if my honey was adulterated, which appears to be a practise in Pakistan, all my sales are by word of mouth. For some of them Brexit stopped them buying a particular type of honey and then they heard about me and keep returning.
In the early days I ran out of stock and they were happy to wait. I may have to rethink the number of hives I have again and increase or go further and apply to the beefarmers in the future.

 

[Sanntos]

... there is a need for the word raw to be defined in it's use on honey labels - at present it isn't but it is being used. The situation needs to be regularised and that's what the petition is all about.

But how? Raw is mostly about temperature and filtering and I guess it's hard to check. Place for a new department with a raw minister

 

[Hachi]

Nobody is disputing that, face to face, with your customers that you can educate them to the benefits of the product you produce ... Are you then, by this conversation with your customers, denigrating other products sold by supermarkets which, as ITLD suggests, adding Raw to the label will do ?

If this is the case then are you saying that it's OK to verbally express this but it's not permissible to add raw to a label ? Bit of a moral dilemma there or at least there is a bit of a dichotomy ....

Rubbish Phil I Like ITLD am saying there's no need for it there's no other "spin" I'm trying to put on it but good try

 

[Younus]

But ... you are looking at it from the wrong perspective.

I've been in sales and marketing all my working life. The one thing you have to be cognisant of is what your customer PERCEIVES - it does not matter whether their perception is right, be it misguided, ill-informed or misled - if your product does not immediately meet their PERCEPTION then they won't progress to a purchase.

If, as most have admitted, their customers are seeking out RAW honey - they are more likely to gravitate towards a product that actually states it clearly than one that doesn't.

I fully accept that future purchases will depend upon taste and quality and repeat purchases go beyond PERCEPTION into reality.

Those of you resistant to the word raw should, perhaps, reconsider things from a consumer and marketing perspective. I do accept that raw has to have some statutory meaning and that products that do not meet whatever the standard set is need to be weeded out and prevented. I'm probably living a dream that this could happen in the imminent future but we should ALL be supporting the petiition that is now available to sign at:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/603996

Raw = not pasteurized, in fact not heated beyond 40 degrees Celsius, not fine filtered, no added substances especially sugar, no GMO. Sells for 40-50 Pounds per kg in deli and health food shops, more in special delivery - by appointment.
Above comment is pure wisdom. But many customers know by now what honey quality means. So it is perception and also a sought after product > with medicinal properties.
Label regulations will not be clearer anytime soon. Brexit quibbles and uncertainty about future developments have Food Standards and Councils hesitating even more. No man's land.

 

[PeaBee]

Dont think we can blame Brexit quibbles. There is no doubt surrounding the retained regulations that have been used to prevent the application of the term Raw with regards to honey, it is more to do with allocation of resources. I spoke to a TSO colleague yesterday regarding it in the area I work and they said it's quite straight forward as currently the term Raw is deemed to infer that the honey has properties or qualities not found in typical samples of similar product and that this is not the case, BMH honey probably has the same properties as yours or my non raw honey. So it is judged to be misleading the consumer. They would therefore take action in response to a complaint of it for sale in their area (cue a lunchtime visit to a certain supermarket but non on the shelves- disappointing). There is no law to say specificitally that Raw can't be used it is just judged by the TSO to be misleading. However they do not have the resources to proactively seek it out and honey is not a high priority product that they sample routinely on visits to shops. With regards to changing the law and allowing honey to be called raw. The simplest way would be a legal challenge to allow a court to decide if labelling certain honey as raw does or doesn't mislead a customer, if a raw beekeeper was convinced of the rawness of their honey enough to persuade a judge that they are not misleading consumers it would be job done and legal precedent set. If it progressed down the route suggested in the petition and it became a protected term with specified criteria it would be unenforceable by TS as they would not be able to be out checking that the raw honey had not been filtered through a smaller mesh or heated above 40C. So either way, legal challenge or protected term, it would be open season on the use of the term. The only way we could see that any sort of regulation being feasible would be through the establishment of a body some how equivalent of the soil association for organic or red tractor scheme. That would need to be funded by the industry and certify to a set standard. Think there is the appetite in the UK honey production industry to fund that? If you look at the hoops and audits producers jump through on these schemes it would introduce a whole new level of administrative burden. I have seen on social media BMH buys honey in from other producers, so that would need auditing, it is a whole can of worms. Let's face it a large proportion of small scale uk honey producers dont even register as a food business with Env health so can't see many registering to have this kind of scrutiny just to use a three letter word on their labels. So the body overseeing it would need to be large enough to not only audit those in the scheme but check retail outlets for unauthorised use of the term. Simply not feasible. So we are back to if the term is allowed it being unregulated and therefore meaningless as a mark of quality.

 

[user 20297]

Dont think we can blame Brexit quibbles. There is no doubt surrounding the retained regulations that have been used to prevent the application of the term Raw with regards to honey, it is more to do with allocation of resources. I spoke to a TSO colleague yesterday regarding it in the area I work and they said it's quite straight forward as currently the term Raw is deemed to infer that the honey has properties or qualities not found in typical samples of similar product and that this is not the case, BMH honey probably has the same properties as yours or my non raw honey. So it is therefore judged to be misleading the consumer. They would therefore take action in response to a complaint of it for sale in their area (cue a lunchtime visit to a certain supermarket but non on the shelves- disappointing). There is no law say it can't be used it is just judged by the TSO to be misleading.However they do not have the resources to proactively seek it out and honey is not a high priority product that they sample routinely on visits to shops. With regards to changing the law and allowing honey to be called raw. The simplest way would be a legal challenge to allow a court to decide if labelling certain honey as raw does or doesn't mislead a customer, if a raw beekeeper was convinced of the rawness of their honey enough to persuade a judge that they are not misleading consumers it would be job done and legal precedent set. If it progressed down the route suggested in the petition and it became a protected term with specified criteria it would be unenforceable by TS as they would not be able to be out checking that the raw honey had not been filtered through a smaller mesh or heated above 40C. So either way, legal challenge or protected term, it would be open season on the use of the term. The only way we could see that any sort of regulation being feasible would be through the establishment of a body some how equivalent of the soil association for organic or red tractor scheme. That would need to be funded by the industry and certify to a set standard. Think there is the appetite in the UK honey production industry to fund that? If you look at the hoops and audits producers jump through on these schemes it would introduce a whole new level of administrative burden. I have seen on social media BMH buys honey in from other producers, so that would need auditing, it is a whole can of worms. Let's face it a large proportion of small scale uk honey producers dont even register as a food business with Env health so can't see many registering to have this kind of scrutiny just to use a three letter word on their labels. So the body overseeing it would need to be large enough to not only audit those in the scheme but check retail outlets for unauthorised use of the term. Simply not feasible. So we are back to if the term is allowed it being unregulated and therefore meaningless as a mark of quality.

A very sensible and well written analysis given above; I would still like to see "raw" as a descriptor I can use, but I can see just how difficult it would be to ensure that the word was any more enforceable or meaningful than "local"or even "honey".

 

[PeaBee]

A very sensible and well written analysis given above; I would still like to see "raw" as a descriptor I can use, but I can see just how difficult it would be to ensure that the word was any more enforceable or meaningful than "local"or even "honey".

Local and honey are both more enforceable. Local would be at the judgement of the TSO if it is reasonable to call it local in that region. Obviously a blend of EU and non EU if labelled local would be misleading. Less clear is if I sold my Lincolnshire honey as local on a farmers market in london? Honey is clearly defined in the regs. The problem comes when Tesco has the clout to question and introduce doubt inthe tests used to determine if it is adulterated or not.

 

[Patrick1]

Sorry I realize I am late to this thread but are we talking about, real aphids wee or honeydew ?

 

[polymath]

Now maybe I am getting picky here but the law also states that if you add anything to honey it can not longer be called honey. We see a lot of Honey sold with Royal Jelly, pollen, or other other things added even nuts. By law once you add anything it can not longer be called honey, very clear on that.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Not even honey WITH something?

 

[Erichalfbee]

Or something WITH honey?

 

[Sanntos]

Raw = not pasteurized, in fact not heated beyond 40 degrees Celsius, not fine filtered, no added substances especially sugar, no GMO. Sells for 40-50 Pounds per kg in deli and health food shops, more in special delivery - by appointment.

This is exactly the definition of every small beekeepers honey, and some larger beekeeping operations too. A least in Sweden, and also UK I guess where most honey produced are done so by small beekeepers. So if "raw" is the definition of nearly all not imported honey, why use it?

And a complication are, it's not really about temperature, it's about temperature and time. I would much prefer heating honey to 50 degrees C during five minutes, than heating to 40 during five hours.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

And a complication are, it's not really about temperature, it's about temperature and time. I would much prefer heating honey to 50 degrees C during five minutes, than heating to 40 during five hours.

Exactly - everyone missed that bit - if you are going to restrict yourself to a maximum temperature of 40°, once you encounter a bucket of honey that's been in store over winter, to liquefy that again, your 'raw' honey will have to sit in the warming cabinet cooking for two or three days.
The arbitrary figures Laurence has put together are to suit himself, not the general beekeeping population.
Of course, it's not really an issue for those who barely scrape enough honey each season to populate a stall at the annual village fete.
Which is what this whole poll boils down to..

 

[enrico]

I do not use the word raw on my main label. I use it on a separate label that describes my honey and where it comes from and how to store it etc. I think this is actually the best way to placate both camps! Or not!!

 

[pargyle]

Exactly - everyone missed that bit - if you are going to restrict yourself to a maximum temperature of 40°, once you encounter a bucket of honey that's been in store over winter, to liquefy that again, your 'raw' honey will have to sit in the warming cabinet cooking for two or three days.

You need to invest in one of these and dispense with the old fridge and tube heaters - so old school. Four or five hours at 35 degress and you have a 30lb tub of runny honey from one fully set ... About the same temperature the bees like to see but they maintain it for weeks.

 

[Ian123]

You need to invest in one of these and dispense with the old fridge and tube heaters - so old school. Four or five hours at 35 degress and you have a 30lb tub of runny honey from one fully set ... About the same temperature the bees like to see but they maintain it for weeks.

View attachment 29585

Is that the one 30lb bucket to fill the fete stall he’s on about. Got to say 35-40c won’t clear my set summer honey!!

 

[pargyle]

Is that the one 30lb bucket to fill the fete stall he’s on about. Got to say 35-40c won’t clear my set summer honey!!

Ha ha .... you can resort to sarcasm ... it's usually a sign that the argument has been lost.

I have used the Lidl Jam maker to render a bucket of set honey back to runny honey and you only need to set it to 40 degrees max and it does it in a few hours; the honey inside the bucket does not get above 35 degrees if you give it the occasional stir.

 

[Repwoc]

the Lidl Jam maker

I've looked out for them all year in the local Lidl and on their website but not seen any.

 

[pargyle]

They are usually on a late summer promotion but I didn't see them either this year ... I got mine on Gumtree I think - they go for quite good money when people know that they are in demand ... mine was a cheap one and I got lucky - someone had been bought it for a present as a jam maker and realised it was useless for that purpose but obviously had not researched what they fetch. I wonder if some people in the know buy them up when they get the chance and then sell them on for a margin on ebay. They are much in demand from the Home Brew fraternity ...

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/304270974495?hash=item46d7f69e1f:g:jmgAAOSwjyJhv5oO
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/224722997112?hash=item345288cf78:g:rf4AAOSwEGxhL6x8
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/224727443779?hash=item3452cca943:g:rf4AAOSwEGxhL6x8