Jump to content
jamesc

Manuka standards

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CraBee said:

 

More MPI bashing but no solution offered, this time from one of our industry leaders.

 

There will be endless debate and wailing over ANY new standard.

 

What then are the fatal flaws in these standards? And what is your proposed "proper" standard?

Im not an industry leader, but a small time commercial beekeeper who thinks we need to sort this out.

Im not a mpi basher, i have respect for our regulatory bodies, we need them to export our products, but they are not without fault at times.

Having spent many hours in meetings with them on varying subjects they have many issues, but you have to keep on pressing through the bulls..t to get somewhere close to where we need/want to be.

I am not a member of UMFHA but they have done some research that is worthy of being part of the end standard, which also piggybacks up with the trademark win, a mix of both mpi and their work would be a good starting point.

 

 

1 hour ago, frazzledfozzle said:

 

Until more people have their honey tested under the new standard how can anyone make the call on how much Manuka is in the mix.?

It’s all just conjecture at this stage as far as I can tell.

 

 

 Thats the problem, it isnt a % its a wide band of an chemical amount which does not have a correlation to a % amount.

27 minutes ago, Gerrit said:

 

Yes, it is bad that the honey in the jar is not what it says on the label. But remember that the consumer in the first place paid the extra dollars for the umf content. If it had been just plain manuka, it had not fetched the same price at all. It would be timely to re-label.

You may be right, but nothing has ever stopped anyone from testing any honey for an UMF/MGO amount and putting that on the label, it will be up to the buyers to decide if that is a product they want to buy, so why do we need a standard to call it multi manuka, you have always been able to call it that. If you have a test that measures mono flora then you can test as to how much is in each jar and put that on the label with any other tests you may have done ie umf/mgo. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been talking to a few people I trust and getting some interesting replies. Some very good manuka honey is failing even the multi floral with manuka test and some obviously multi floral with some manuka is passing with flying colours. Manuka honey from different areas is passing no trouble. These inconsistent results are very troubling especially if you have some really good manuka honey which should but doesn't meet the new standards.

  • Agree 1
  • Good Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, john berry said:

I have been talking to a few people I trust and getting some interesting replies. Some very good manuka honey is failing even the multi floral with manuka test and some obviously multi floral with some manuka is passing with flying colours. Manuka honey from different areas is passing no trouble. These inconsistent results are very troubling especially if you have some really good manuka honey which should but doesn't meet the new standards.

Yes I’ve heard similar 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, john berry said:

especially if you have some really good manuka honey which should but doesn't meet the new standards

that would be very bad. with "really good manuka" you mean judged by taste, texture, ... right? not umf?

i've send in 2 samples that i thought was good manuka and they passed.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dennis Crowley said:

You may be right, but nothing has ever stopped anyone from testing any honey for an UMF/MGO amount and putting that on the label, it will be up to the buyers to decide if that is a product they want to buy, so why do we need a standard to call it multi manuka, you have always been able to call it that. If you have a test that measures mono flora then you can test as to how much is in each jar and put that on the label with any other tests you may have done ie umf/mgo. 

Just one of the issues is the use of the word "Manuka" To use the M word the standard needs to be applied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen the manuka samples in question but like I said I know the people that have produced them. They know what manuka looks like. I have seen  inexperienced beekeepers bring in a load of honey they were convinced was manuka when it was obviously clover or something else but these and that sort of beekeeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All my manuka passed. I think that only rubbish blend would fail. Even my blendy stuff passed ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are my latest results. The middle batch was some weak as kanuka rubbish which I got tested for a laugh. Glad I did now. Most of this honey can be diluted with pure clover 2-3 times (some up to 6x!!!) and still be classified as 'monofloral manuka'. What a joke. 

Looks like I'll do OK out of the new standard but I can't believe we waited all this time for such a weak definition. 

Screenshot_20180203-221049.png

Edited by Merk
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Merk said:

Most of this honey can be diluted with pure clover 2-3 times and still be classified as 'monofloral manuka'. What a joke. 

 

if that's true than we are doomed and good by manuka industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the maths bro, we're doomed!  I think I run out of 3-phenyl if I go past 3x dilution but up to that point- all good for monofloral minoooooka honey. 

Now if I want to wave the magic wand and turn it in to multifloral manuka then I can dilute even more for some batches. The dna results are in the low 20s so can handle 100s of times dilution and still come in under the limit. 

FYI most of this except for the 3rd batch is under ten npa 

 

 

Edited by Merk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i got already a bit worried from @Emissarycomments, that nobody really challanged and @john berry opinion is probably the one i care most about here, but what you're saying is just shocking. so unless this is an error we are byby.

no wonder they waited for a new government to implement this bull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Merk said:

Most of this honey can be diluted with pure clover 2-3 times (some up to 6x!!!) and still be classified as 'monofloral manuka'

When you say for example "6 times", Can you please clarify what that means.

Eg does it mean that 1 kg Moonika  can be mixed with 6kgs of Clover etc

Edited by Philbee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep that's what I'm saying. I got my maths a bit wrong, for monofloral manuka I can't go past 3x dilution but for multi I can go up to 6x or more. 

 

Most beeks on here with opinions on the standard are just repeating what they've heard from others, many of whom have specific agendas to push. I'd wager that few if any are quality manuka producers and that even fewer have had much honey tested. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess those responsible had years to plan their escape.

for the sake of having a good night sleep i will hope there is an error, cos i just had started to gain faith in the new standard and it would have been so nice.......

 

oh, by the way. anyone want to buy a small beekeeping business? pm me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, tom sayn said:

i guess those responsible had years to plan their escape.

for the sake of having a good night sleep i will hope there is an error, cos i just had started to gain faith in the new standard and it would have been so nice.......

 

oh, by the way. anyone want to buy a small beekeeping business? pm me

sleep on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Merk said:

These are my latest results. The middle batch was some weak as kanuka rubbish which I got tested for a laugh. Glad I did now. Most of this honey can be diluted with pure clover 2-3 times (some up to 6x!!!) and still be classified as 'monofloral manuka'. What a joke. 

Looks like I'll do OK out of the new standard but I can't believe we waited all this time for such a weak definition. 

Screenshot_20180203-221049.png

Thanks for sharing that with us Merck. My next question was going to be how does that relate to NPA, but you answered that, and the next question, most importantly....  what is the stuff worth ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't tried to sell it yet. Buyers want matured honey that they can sell now, not young honey that they will need to sit on and grow. Ha ha the irony..... 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Npa for comparison 

Screenshot_20180204-072820.png

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Merk said:

Yep that's what I'm saying. I got my maths a bit wrong, for monofloral manuka I can't go past 3x dilution but for multi I can go up to 6x or more. 

 

Most beeks on here with opinions on the standard are just repeating what they've heard from others, many of whom have specific agendas to push. I'd wager that few if any are quality manuka producers and that even fewer have had much honey tested. 

Well that helps keep the value of light  coloured honeys up ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

very impressive, @Merk

once i had readings like your first, but the dha of some of the others will make some beekeepers green with envy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tom sayn said:

 

 but the dha of some of the others will make some beekeepers green with envy.

 

 

Nope not me !

DHA at that level has its own set of problems that those of us on our bush sites don’t have to worry about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Philbee said:

sleep on it

and did you sleep on it @Philbee?

 

oh, now i understand, you suggested that i sleep on it.

well, i'm so stupid that i will miss the bus and go down with this ship.

not that anyone showed interest anyway....

i wonder if i could get a job developing honey standards or varroa resistant bees.

once in a while you have to face the crowed ....but obviously you can drag that out for years and meanwhile you earn good money.

you just have to grow a thick skin. and as a manuka producer you are daily accused to cream it on the back of others anyway, so highly qualified and used to the heat.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tom sayn said:

and did you sleep on it @Philbee?

 

oh, now i understand, you suggested that i sleep on it.

well, i'm so stupid that i will miss the bus and go down with this ship.

not that anyone showed interest anyway....

i wonder if i could get a job developing honey standards or varroa resistant bees.

once in a while you have to face the crowed ....but obviously you can drag that out for years and meanwhile you earn good money.

you just have to grow a thick skin. and as a manuka producer you are daily accused to cream it on the back of others anyway, so highly qualified and used to the heat.....

 

Lol

Its too late to turn and run now
Best to drop your shoulder into it and brace yourself.
Making Varroa resistant open mated bees is like making Gold fom egg yolks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Philbee said:


Making Varroa resistant open mated bees is like making Gold fom egg yolks

oh, that easy. just a marketing issue then.

 

it's the wave of afb i'm fearing the most. all the other stuff doesn't worry me really......

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, tom sayn said:

oh, that easy. just a marketing issue then.

 

it's the wave of afb i'm fearing the most. all the other stuff doesn't worry me really......

 

Interestingly I met a new Beek at an event in Auckland last week and he had just done a new Beek course.

What surprised me was that the course had made him terrified and paranoid about AFB but had completely failed to equip him to deal with Varroa.
He literary had no idea about Varroa.

I suggested that it was far more likely to be Varroa that killed his hives than AFB.

He was stunned.

Could it be that some of the teachers have very little experience with large scale Varroa control.
 

 


 

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...