Differences in Australian and NZ Manuka explained

[Rob's BP 262]

A well written article here, which helps answer the frequent question: is there any difference between NZ and Aus Manuka?

It also makes and validates the point that Australians shouldn't be using the term Manuka when describing their leptospermum honey.

UMFHA Understanding Leptosperumum Article.pdf

[tudor 1526]

This sounds very biased and I think a rebuttal argument is needed to test the validity of many of the statements.

.

[Dennis Crowley 1022]

3 hours ago, tudor said:

This sounds very biased and I think a rebuttal argument is needed to test the validity of many of the statements.

.

What is your rebuttal ?

 

[Madsci 4]

I agree it's well written and I like the comparison between Pohutakawa and Rata. However, I do agree with a degree of bias which is to be expected.

The comment on colour and crystal formation is interesting considering NZ manuka honey is often creamed giving a lighter colour and to reduce crystallization compared to Australian honey which is not creamed so is darker and does crystallize. Though there are possible differences in colour between the Leptospermum species in oz. The comments on taste are biased considering I've heard that some Australia Leptospermum honey is sometimes considered tasting better than NZ, though this could simply be a case of red vs white wine, ie taste is dependent on the consumer. The comments on pollen nutritional values are not great considering that I'm sure the pollen content would be the difference between the north and south of New Zealand so isn't really a good argument. Also, the comment Australian  Leptospermum honey was not seen as a desirable honey type is odd considering to my understanding the same was thought of manuka honey in New Zealand before the identification of its antimicrobial activity.

[Dennis Crowley 1022]

Madsci, taste is certainly in the "eye of the beholder", but chatting with a honey buyer who buys from both NZ and Aussie, his comments were that the honey from the leptospernum scopariam trees in Tasmania was very similar in taste and look as our NZ Manuka, which is to be expected but with perhaps some difference because of the type of soil, environment etc it is grown in, and the leptospernum honey from the other varieties/areas in Aussie were definately different in taste, color, texture etc with a stronger eucalyptus hint, almost to the point of them being another honey all together.

[Madsci 4]

Completely agree Dennis, my point was more the way the document was written implying the Australian honey was the worst tasting when it would be more correct to say it simply has a different taste than what the world considers Manuka and especially more so the honey not derived from Leptospermum scoparium

[Rob's BP 262]

4 hours ago, Madsci said:

Completely agree Dennis, my point was more the way the document was written implying the Australian honey was the worst tasting

Madsci, I've worked and sold honey from both sides of the Tasman, and led market research including many focus groups in several countries that included NZ, Australian honeys and other international honeys. The consumer sales and feedback responses to Australian leptospermum, Jarrah, Marri etc. were very negative. On a scale of 1-4, with 1 being the best, Australian leptospermum was a solid 4 in terms of organoleptic factors, with memorable comments such as 'smells like a cowshed' and something about wet gumboots. 

FWIW, NZ Manuka was generally rated a 3 out of 4 for organoleptic factors.

 

It's no surprise Aus Leptospermum needs to piggyback off NZ Manuka. It was not viable otherwise.

Edited May 9 by Rob's BP
included more detail