FDA Inspections In the Maple News

[PerryFamily]

Anybody read the article on Putnams in NH being inspected?
What are everyone's thoughts?

The article stated that registering with the FDA was Voluntary and the wish they never did. The way I understood it was that it was Mandatory as a producer?

[nymapleguy607]

I thought registering was mandatory as a producer, but the inspections wouldn't be done unless you bought and repacked syrup.

[Chicopee Sap Shack]

I was told by them that as long as more than 50% of your crop was not sold bulk you did not need to register


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PerryFamily]

I was told by them that as long as more than 50% of your crop was not sold bulk you did not need to register


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This might be true . I got an email last year from them after hearing nothing for a couple years. It was basically asking the percent of your sales that is bulk versus retail to determine if a site inspection was needed. I'm about 50/50 so I guess that was the magic #.

I'm not 100% positive but I don't think Putnams buy in bulk syrup and I'm pretty sure most of their syrup is sold retail. Could be wrong though. Been a long time since I've been there

[wiam]

Some bulk buyers require an FDA registration number to buy your syrup.

[PerryFamily]

Some bulk buyers require an FDA registration number to buy your syrup.

The two I have sold to haven't required anything but I'm sure that will change

[markcasper]

All of the exposed "stud and rafters" and wood wall sugarhouses will all be illegal. And one right after another in the maple news.

[milligkl]

what happens if they fail the inspection? And by selling bulk, does this include selling to restaurants? I also understood it was only the bottling area that was inspected?

[southfork]

What is happening, and will continue,.... buyers and grocery retail sellers will refuse product that is from premises not registered and inspected, AND, who do not have extensive product liability insurance. Packers simply cannot and will not suffer the total brunt of potential product liability lawsuits.

IMO, it is not the FDA to fear. It is the potential for massive food related lawsuits on the producer, packer and grocery retailer that will drive how we produce, and at what cost. I would be worried more about the courts, than the FDA.

[markcasper]

I am baffled by the ability for Vermont #1, followed by the rest of the new england states to get away without inspection for as as long as they have. We here in Wisconsin have no doubt been held to the highest of standards to date. I read about an 86,000 tap producer in the Maple News and directly above the evaporator was exposed wood and tin, so its going to affect more than just smaller people. Southfork, while what you said is mostly true about groceries expecting more, I don't think wood handles on scoops and exposed rafters above an evaporator is going to give someone food poisoning. This extreme measure is the result of Obabmas passage of the food safety and modernization act of 2011. Expanding broad powers and overeach to the FDA. It will only go so far as people will allow it to. Hence the relooking of the current law by Wisconsin inspectors because of the craziness that unfolded this past spring in Wisconsin. They may have bit off more than they could chew.

[southfork]

I was not defending the FDA and their policies, merely pointing out they are not the sole drivers of industry reform.

[markcasper]

Guess no one wants to go here, or admit that it has come to this? All of the sugarhouses with wood walls and exposed wood will now be banned! FDA will be able to find out real easy, they just have to look in the Maple News! No more wooden cream sticks and wooden stir spoons, no more maple suckers on pop sickle sticks. How did Leader know before the time to get rid of the wood handle on their flue pans? Even the Proctor maple and their exposed wooden walls will be illegal. How much will you personally put up with?

[PerryFamily]

Guess no one wants to go here, or admit that it has come to this? All of the sugarhouses with wood walls and exposed wood will now be banned! FDA will be able to find out real easy, they just have to look in the Maple News! No more wooden cream sticks and wooden stir spoons, no more maple suckers on pop sickle sticks. How did Leader know before the time to get rid of the wood handle on their flue pans? Even the Proctor maple and their exposed wooden walls will be illegal. How much will you personally put up with?


Unfortunately, I think you are probably correct

[VTnewguy]

Can't say I like this one. section 9.14
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/FoodDefense/ucm331959.htm

[Maple Man 85]

Can't say I like this one. section 9.14
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/FoodDefense/ucm331959.htm

At what point in time did sugar makers have to seek legal advise to make a little syrup??? What happened to the simpler times when we could sell to whom ever??? Suppose there is an article somewhere that is going to make me wear a beard net while I'm walking the lines for leaks!!! :lol:

Maple Man 85

[Wanabe1972]

Not having exposed wood on the walls and ceiling. Can this be solved by simply painting the interior or does it need to be covered with some thing washable. Im in the process of sheeting up the interior of my shack with 1/4 luan and a coat of exterior white paint but im not sure now if this is proper. I have a ton of vinyl siding and thought about using it on the ceiling as it would be somewhat washable but im not sure how it would look.

[Moser's Maple]

At what point in time did sugar makers have to seek legal advise to make a little syrup??? What happened to the simpler times when we could sell to whom ever??? Suppose there is an article somewhere that is going to make me wear a beard net while I'm walking the lines for leaks!!! :lol:

Maple Man 85

at the time when sugar makers wanted more exposure for maple syrup and value added products. Everything is a give and take. Sugar makers wanted more markets and exposure ( the give side) and now the gov't wants places to start up grading to food processing standards (the take side).
Look at any dairy milk house. ss containers, washable walls, inspected water, and the milk is never exposed to air contact until it's collected. No matter how traditional, and nostalgic maple is, for the good and bad it's coming to point where you'll have to meet standards or get out.

[psparr]

I wonder when apple trees will have to be made of pvc?

[MISugarDaddy]

When we built our sugarhouse we covered all the interior (walls and ceiling) with fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) so it could be washed. We figured that we might as well treat it the same as we would expect of a kitchen in a restaurant, since we are producing food. When the State inspector came through he was very happy to see no exposed wood.
Gary

[PerryFamily]

I wonder how they will feel about exposed wood of post and beam structures?

Does all the wood have to be covered? Like RO room vs canning area vs evaporator area?


If the exposed wood becomes a problem there a lot of folks who are gonna have issues.....myself included

[markcasper]

I wonder how they will feel about exposed wood of post and beam structures?

Does all the wood have to be covered? Like RO room vs canning area vs evaporator area?


If the exposed wood becomes a problem there a lot of folks who are gonna have issues.....myself included Our inspector did not like a couple 2x4 wood blocks a foot long supporting the drain pipe under my triple wash vats. In Wisconsin at least, the state had hearings in July or August and the consensus was that if you didn't have a R.O. and only concentrated maple sap by thermal means you would fall under a less stringet set of rules. The last I heard was that a decision was to be announced by December. Keep in mind they were following the FDA rules. There will be many producers not able to meet the rules IMO.

[wiam]

Our inspector did not like a couple 2x4 wood blocks a foot long supporting the drain pipe under my triple wash vats. In Wisconsin at least, the state had hearings in July or August and the consensus was that if you didn't have a R.O. and only concentrated maple sap by thermal means you would fall under a less stringet set of rules. The last I heard was that a decision was to be announced by December. Keep in mind they were following the FDA rules. There will be many producers not able to meet the rules IMO.

Let me start by saying not directed at Mark

That makes no sense having stricter rules with an RO. If concentration is internal to a machine the rules should be less not more.

[DrTimPerkins]

This extreme measure is the result of Obabmas passage of the food safety and modernization act of 2011. Expanding broad powers and overeach to the FDA.

Actually, the recent push for food facility registration and inspection began under President Bush as a result of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (which is a direct result/consequence of Sept 11th).

FSMA is related, but different. To my knowledge the rules and implementation are still in flux, however maple is considered a fairly low threat in the overall scheme of things (compared to meat, milk, produce). I'm not really interested in being dragged into a long discussion of this, since we don't yet know what the rules are, or how they'll be implemented, whether there will be inspections, who might be doing them, or what they'll be looking for. I do think it is likely there will be some additional rules and guidelines, and don't necessarily think that is a bad thing as long as they are reasonable. There was also talk at various points about "farm" exemptions, exemptions if you were mostly selling bulk syrup, etc., so again....no point debating the whole thing at this point. That said, if this is of great interest, I'd keep an eye on any upcoming announcements and utilize the ability to make comments on any proposed rules (which is always part of the introduction of any new rules).

[DrTimPerkins]

At what point in time did sugar makers have to seek legal advise to make a little syrup???

At about the same time it became fashionable to sue anyone for the slightest infraction or slight of any kind.

[DrTimPerkins]

Our inspector did not like a couple 2x4 wood blocks a foot long supporting the drain pipe under my triple wash vats.

Not justifying this decision, but I can explain why the inspector didn't like that (or the wood handle on the scoop).

Wood is considered a porous material. Porous materials cannot be adequately sanitized. Ask anyone in the artisanal cheese industry what the FDA thinks about wood and you'll probably get an unprintable response.

It's also worth noting that the inspector probably didn't write the rules....they're just interpreting them and applying them to the facility at hand. They may not have any clue about how maple syrup is made. Keep in mind that education in these cases is a two-way street....it can help to keep your cool, listen, and explain.

[southfork]

Thank you Dr. Perkins.

[RIVERWINDS]

Let me start by saying not directed at Mark

That makes no sense having stricter rules with an RO. If concentration is internal to a machine the rules should be less not more.



Sorry if this really doesn't help any of our eastern US sugar makers...

I attended the WI state hearings this summer regarding the proposed rules changes. It is my understanding that it was the RO permeate the state was having issues with. Under the current rules technically you are not allowed to reuse RO discharge water (due to dairy regs)...so no washing with it. That would have eliminated RO for maple in the state if something wasn't changed. I'm not sure where the issue stands now but last time I heard anything it got to a point you'd have 24 hours to use it or you'd have to dump it. Or you could keep it longer as long as you held it above a certain temperature and be able to prove it's not contaminated. That would mean on site testing to prove this (you'd need to prove your permeate contains no sugars or other contaminants). It's been over a month since I heard anything so it very well could have changed by now since the public comment period closed Sept 1.

The issue WI has is that the same sanitarians that inspect milk plants and other food facilities also inspect maple operations. So prior to a visit to your sugar house they could have been at a dairy plant. Then they stop at your place and see pages of violations. The current statutes don't separate maple from any other food plant, so rightfully so they can pick you apart just because they can. Some sanitarians understand maple and some don't. That is why you are seeing such a range of who is passing inspections and who isn't. Newer inspectors running by the book could throw said book at you.

The state is making new sections of the rules separating some of the maple operations. As Mark mentioned some of the rules will be relaxed if you ONLY do thermal sap processing. Once you upgrade to a RO and/or are using maple as an ingredient into another product you will fall into food plant regulations and will be more thoroughly scrutinized. This would be where they have zero tolerance on any exposed wood.

[buckeye gold]

I will start by saying I am all for clean and safe standards. However, I would like to see some not so common reasonable common sense applied to regulation. In my former career I had statutory inspection responsibility, for a certain industry I won't mention, and I always tried to give the benefit of the doubt to the producer. If I saw they were making good faith and reasonable effort I let things go. If it meant a large financial burden to fix a non compliance I would help them with alternatives. As long as they were implementing effective means and management I was satisfied even if they were not exactly what the rules said. I also saw that each and every inspector applied the same rules differently. I would appeal anything I could. What I would not let go is rules violations that were clear non compliance and created risk. Rules are made to protect everyone, not punish certain people. What aggravated me to no end was getting rules promulgated by bureaucrats relenting to special interest that were unnecessary and burdensome. The only way to fight this is be active with the rule makers. I also ran a government facility that lived under the same rules so I new how it affected producers, but many of the rule makers were clueless. I have to say that the most unreasonable agency I ever dealt with was the FDA!

The small meat packers and dairy farmer faced this in the past and it pushed most all of the small farms and mom and pop producers out of business. In many cases the were proud people that done their best to put out good safe products. So now we have mega dairies and huge meat processing plants. If the FDA thinks all their rules make things safer they also have created the world where mega operations have a hard time with quality control. Now you see contamination issue on the mega scale as well. Instead of a few people with a dose of food poisoning you see millions of pounds of contaminated product and thousands sickened or dead. So are we better off? My wife's family and mine both processed their own food for decades, from butchering to canning and by some miraculous means we all survived. I really don't know how the species made out of the middle ages.

With that said we live in a different age and we do need regulation with current threats and the gross amount of food we need processed to feed the huge world population, but I don't think the Maple industry on the local small producer level is any threat to the world food supply and thus not in need of heavy FDA scrutiny. If they show up in my wood sugar shack with an agenda I will simply shut the door for good and cease to make syrup. If they piss me off enough I might just burn it to the ground right then. I think it is a sad world when an industry that has a stellar food safety record is brought to task with unfounded reasoning.

[Wanabe1972]

Im still wondering what the fix is for the exposed wood surfaces. Is it just a good paint job or something more extensive? Is there a special paint that can be used? I'm in the process of sheeting in the interior of my shack right now and want to do it right the first time. My plan was to side inside with 1/4 inch luan plywood and exterior paint. I will seal and paint the floor after the walls and ceiling are done. Jeff

[DuncanFTGC/SS]

Im still wondering what the fix is for the exposed wood surfaces. Is it just a good paint job or something more extensive? Is there a special paint that can be used? I'm in the process of sheeting in the interior of my shack right now and want to do it right the first time. My plan was to side inside with 1/4 inch luan plywood and exterior paint. I will seal and paint the floor after the walls and ceiling are done. Jeff

Look up your state's regulations for food processing facilities, that will probably tell you what the worst case scenario is. Go from there!

[DuncanFTGC/SS]

Not sure if, or where this may apply for us?

http://www.farmtoconsumer.org/blog/2016/10/12/rule-key-fsma-definition-final/

[eagle lake sugar]

As the feds get more involved, it's just a matter of time before regulations get more stringent. What has happened in virtually every other industry, is that the large players team up with regulators and come up with standards that the little guy finds nearly impossible to comply with.

[DuncanFTGC/SS]

As the feds get more involved, it's just a matter of time before regulations get more stringent. What has happened in virtually every other industry, is that the large players team up with regulators and come up with standards that the little guy finds nearly impossible to comply with.

This is where the Cottage Food Laws can come into play, and help even out the playing field a little.

[Flat Lander Sugaring]

couple things i found

4-101.17 Wood, Use Limitation.

(A) Except as specified in ¶¶ (B), (C), and (D) of this section, wood and wood wicker may not be used as a food-contact surface.
(B) Hard maple or an equivalently hard, close-grained wood may be used for:
(1) Cutting boards; cutting blocks; bakers' tables; and utensils such as rolling pins, doughnut dowels, salad bowls, and chopsticks; and
(2) Wooden paddles used in confectionery operations for pressure scraping kettles when manually preparing confections at a temperature of 110°C (230°F) or above.
(C) Whole, uncut, raw fruits and vegetables, and nuts in the shell may be kept in the wood shipping containers in which they were received, until the fruits, vegetables, or nuts are used.
(D) If the nature of the food requires removal of rinds, peels, husks, or shells before consumption, the whole, uncut, raw food may be kept in:
(1) Untreated wood containers; or
(2) Treated wood containers if the containers are treated with a preservative that meets the requirements specified in 21 CFR 178.3800 Preservatives for wood.



http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?FR=175.300

[maplecherry]

will we be allowed to store sap in trees until ready for processing??

[maple maniac65]

will we be allowed to store sap in trees until ready for processing??

Now that is a good question.

[southfork]

Yes, sap can be stored in trees. Beets, carrots and potatoes can be grown in dirt, but they cannot be processed and packaged there.

[Parker]

Well thats a relief..i was wondering how we were going to get sap from that dirty wood..im wondering what my buddies with post and beam sugarhouses,,dirt floors,,wooden floors,,,are going to do,,,i can screw a covering on my walls and ceiling but if this is enforced it will put the hurt on many....seems a little over the top to me.....but,,,im a conspeiry therioist i have been told,,,,,almost like big ag wrote the regs,,,much like the organic regs.......

[southfork]

Maybe we will find out from Hillary's leaked emails who the big ag conspirators are.

[Wanabe1972]

Well i dont know if Hillary will approve of my methods but after some research I found Zinsser Perma-White Mold and Mildew proof interior paint at my local hardware store. Its supposed to be washable and good for high moisture/humidity areas. Has anyone used this before and if so did they roll it on or spray it? Im undecided yet but may use a 4x8 sheet of the pvc paneling on each side of the cupola so if any drips make it back into pans it would not have been in contact with the paint. I keep telling my wife (my financial adviser) if i could somehow purchase a nice hood for this evaporator i would not have to got through all of this. She responds the board meets every other year and i just bought my new pans out of the last session.

[Maple Man 85]

Maybe we will find out from Hillary's leaked emails who the big ag conspirators are.

Only if the Russian's keep up the hacking :lol: We need a farmer for the next president, starting my campaign early!!! Vote Maple Man 85 in 2020 and our future will be 20/20!!!

[Bucket Head]

Maple Man- You have my vote!

Wannabe1972- Those board meetings must be very difficult. Best of luck to you at the next one, lol.

Going back to the FDA foolishness, did they explain where they would like to see the jugs stored, since the boxes they came in are unacceptable? The boxes are okay for storage at the manufacturers warehouse, okay for storing during shipping, okay for storing at the maple suppliers warehouse, pole barn, barn, trailer, etc., but they can not be used at the sugarhouse?

I'm not saying the whole inspection was off the mark, but how many nights did they lay awake trying to come up with the rest of the "checklist"?

[GeneralStark]

Look out sugarmakers! The FDA is coming.....

Here is another version of the Putnams story for those of you that missed it.

https://www.themaplenews.com/story/fda-targets-nh-sugarhouse/123/#

[hookhill]

This is a really good to know excerpt from the article on Putmans inspection:


Karen Putnam said the sugarhouse was targeted because she registered the operation with the FDA on the FDA website, a voluntary procedure that was encouraged by industry officials several years ago.

It is a decision the Putnams regret.
“I’ve been telling all of my friends who make syrup not to register with the FDA,” Rocky Putnam said.

The Putman's have a really modern well kept sugarhouse. Ours is not messy or dirty but is not any more than a sugar shack. If these are the new rules then there will be many sugar makers either rebuilding or getting out of the business. I wonder when the bulk buyers are going to demand inspections?

[Maple Man 85]

[The Putman's have a really modern well kept sugarhouse. Ours is not messy or dirty but is not any more than a sugar shack. If these are the new rules then there will be many sugar makers either rebuilding or getting out of the business. I wonder when the bulk buyers are going to demand inspections?[/QUOTE]

Producers are going to have to start demanding higher price per pound to comply with FDA/bulk buyers to cover the extra overhead... Government + Small Business = (poop emoji)

[n8hutch]

I have Driven buy the Putnams place many times, and it looks like A nice Opperation from the Road, and In the pictures. That being said if I had that much exposure and that big of an investment in Sugaring I definitely would be mortified if someone saw Dog feces in my Sugarhouse, stuff like that can't happen off season or not, And when you have things like this when an Inspector shows up you shouldn't be surprised if they throw the book at you.

I know that some things like the Boxing of containers are over the top but maintaining a clean work environment should be a consideration year around. Not just During Sugaring season. No doubt the inspector was uninformed but why would you expect anything different better than half this country is uninformed and severely lacking in the ability to make comprehensive choices.

I in no way mean any disrespect to the Putnams. I'm sure they are great people.

[mudr]

I agree with much of n8hutch says. First things first- I've heard the name putnam, I get the feeling that he is a well respected producer. I'm still producing in my backyard, yes, with birds flying overhead and dog poop somewhere I'm sure. Also, he (they?) have probably forgotten more about maple than I currently know.

All the said, I get the feeling that the inspector (who probably does not know much if any about maple) walked in, immediately saw feces on the floor, birds flying around, and bird poop somewhere and decided that they were going to throw the book and be as harsh as possible. I know of stories about cops that basically got pissed for one egregious thing and then threw the book at someone for a million "pointless" things.

I agree that we need knowledgeable inspectors. I also feel that producers need to do a bang-up job of policing themselves if they want to limit future over reach.

[PerryFamily]

After reading through these responses it seems to me that what the inspector is looking for, or hoping to not see, is way beyond what the voluntary inspection that Vermont offers. I wonder how much will change with the voluntary inspection after this one at Putnams?

[Maplewalnut]

Having a hard time with this one to be honest. Since when is it OK to have dog crap and dead birds in your sugarhouse ever? Mr Putnam admits he became hostile which may have set the tone with the inspector. First impressions are everything during an inspection of any type and well.... it doesn't look like this one started or ended very well. Never understood why manufacturers still make equipment with wood handles but I would hope they adjust accordingly. How exactly do you clean wood? My sugarhouse has a far way to go to meet some of the observations but in any case definitely not a very supportive article for the maple industry irregardless of who is at fault.

[southfork]

This whole public discussion and scenario is toxic to the maple industry. To the maple consuming public, this is making a case for more regulation, not less. As maple producers, we all should do our best to improve sanitation, product quality, and image.

[sap retreiver]

well stated. An old fella told me once, if you have time to do it, DO IT RIGHT!
No one is perfect but we should all be trying. Good luck folks

[n8hutch]

Ha I think what Southfork was trying to say is similar to Something my Grandmother is famous for saying, "If you stir a turd it stinks" I always laugh a little, but she has a point.

[BreezyHill]

FDA has a responsibility as do every one of us to protect the consumer and our image of maple production.

Over the last three season we have been remodeling our sugar house to meet the pending minimum standards that our industry will have to meet.

Since Jeff and I have a similar board that controls financial distribution; I have to do upgrades in steps that will not negatively affect the financial account.

I pray that everyone takes this thread to heart and does a few improvements this season and keeps a log of what you have done that you can show an inspector you are making an effort to comply with the regulations that will come in the near future.

Think of this as a Farm Truck Registration. The law in NY states you are not required to get an annual safety inspection but you are still required to have the vehicle in a condition that it will pass an inspection when ever the vehical is in use.

I am certain that the Putnams would have the birds and the poo cleaned up when it was sugaring time. Things do happen in an idle building or room in every farm, condo, or house. I have had to make the effort to keep our cats and dogs from entering our sugar house and I total realize this is due to allergens. Just is the use of old time defoamers.

So as others have said well. If you are going to do anything in farming, do it Right...somebodies Life or Livelihood Does depend on it.

[PerryFamily]

This whole public discussion and scenario is toxic to the maple industry. To the maple consuming public, this is making a case for more regulation, not less. As maple producers, we all should do our best to improve sanitation, product quality, and image.

I didn't mean this to be toxic in any way. I was simply looking for feed back and peoples thoughts. The article was only one side of the story and we all know there are 2 sides to every story.

[Wanabe1972]

I have been to many open houses in my local area and according to whats being said in this article there are alot of people that would be out of business if these inspections were manditory. I myself am trying to go from hobby to a hobby plus operation an have tried to clean up my act so to speak. Ive replaced my soldered pans with welded this year and have removed all brass from my operation other than my filter press pump. This is going to be changed if the cards fall right and i find the right pump. Im not doing this for any inspection or ruling but for the simple reason i want customers to be happy with what they see. im now in the market for a couple of small SS tanks to replace the stock tanks i now have. I always thought these were ok as i see 10 of them from other producers just on my trip to and from work everyday but i guess they are not up to standards. Jeff

[BreezyHill]

Perry, In no way do I feel that your question is toxic. This is a very important topic that must be discussed and it is in the best interest of the consumer that all producer realize that the way things were done in the 1970's was fine then but it is not acceptable in todays more learned society.

We now know that galvanized can cause zinc toxicity. Leaded solider is source of lead to consumers. Plastic totes that were not from a human consumption source are not acceptable.

Jeff you are right...the number of producers that are using tanks that are not acceptable is on the increase. I see it all the time. Acceptable poly tanks are not that costly. I have seen lead poisoning it isn't pretty. Allergic reactions where there is no known source is very frustrating and can be lethal if the wrong product is used for a defoamer for the wrong customer.

I total do not see how the education of producers can be toxic in any way. When a customer sees that we, the producers, are sharing knowledge of important production techniques with each other and especially those that may not understand the wheres and why fore's of the discussion; I would expect the consumer to be glad that maple producers are working together to make the safest production of product possible.

I would see toxic, to be if this subject was swept under the table, deleted from the site, or nobody gave a darn. The fact that people care enough to read it and to bring to light issues they see is a huge step in the right direction.

[southfork]

What I was trying to say is this is a public forum read by maple producers........... as well as maple CONSUMERS. Having dog and bird feces in a food production facility is a correctable mistake and does not need to be broadcast to the entire food consuming public. It is best if this inspection report and discussion does not find it's way to the New York Times, as one example, where they may report a picture not favorable to the consumption of maple products. I think these type of issues are best dealt with professionally by producers, not the media. You guys can of course get the media involved if you so choose.

[markcasper]

In my opinion, so many people are getting so politically correct that it is affecting their ability to think and deal with real life. I work in a food related factory field and when it gets busy, there are times the public would be horrified if they saw how messy it can get and this is a fortune 500 company. While dog crap shouldn't be in the sugarhouse, why was this even put in the Maple News? I'll bet 90% of the people on here have had dog chit in their sugarhouse at one time or another. Time to grow up people and in more ways than one!

[ToadHill]

Mark, While there is truth to what you say, it doesn't solve the problem to tell our potential customers to stop "getting so politically correct" and to "grow up." We have to deal with their perceptions of our industry. If they are reading these things in the media then they will start to formulate an opinion of us that is less than flattering. I agree with Southfork, we need to limit the discussion in the media and do a better job of policing ourselves. One bad report reflects poorly on the producer that was the subject of the report. Two or three bad reports and you start to develop a narrative of what people think of our industry. We all know that in days gone by things were different and nobody died from eating maple syrup, but today people expect more from their food suppliers and they won't differentiate us from any other industry no matter how many times we insist that our products haven't killed anyone.

[ender]

Having gone through milk house inspections in the past if an inspector see's a glaring error (dog poop on milk house floor) they tend to get more and more picky as they go, also getting hostile with them while easy to do is never smart as it becomes an instant pissing contest. In my experience if you do the best you can and get the inspector to offer advice / constructive criticism it goes a long way toward keeping them happy and you not getting written up officially

[buckeye gold]

ender is right and gives good advice. I have experience from both sides. I used to do government inspections for licensing (in another industry) and I ran a facility that was inspected. As an inspector what set me off most was someone who instantly treated me with contempt, spoken or unspoken you know how they feel. If you starting cursing me you got zero breaks. If you were friendly cooperative and genuinely willing to take advice I would work with you. I have actually saw violations and pointed them out then (if the operator expressed a desire to fix it right away) decided I would not complete the inspection that day and come back in a few days, knowing they would be ready to pass. If I saw violations I had no choice but sight them, but sometimes very small things would go unseen. However, the best way to improve my eyesight was to start out with a combative "you **** government asshole" attitude.

On the other hand I also had inspections. I always cooperated and opened any door they wanted. I would ask for advice and professional guidance. If they sighted something that had to be fixed we fixed it. I once had an inspector find something he said was a definite serious violation and I told him I wasn't aware of that rule. I then asked if he knew of any training that would keep us in compliance. He instantly changed his attitude and informed me he actually got merit points if he could get facilities signed up in a training plan. So we sat down and set it up. At the end of the day I asked when the violation had to be fixed and he said, Oh I forgot to put that in my inspection report", if it's gone when I do my followup in 10 days I'll consider I never saw it. It was fixed that day and I e-mailed him in three days that all issues were being resolved. That same man done three safety training days on my facility every year and the best part was we maintained a compliant facility with no surprise fixes. Most of his annual inspections were done in an hour with maybe a couple small fixes. We actually became quite friendly in all our dealings. You can not circumvent the rules so being combative get's you no where. However, you will get as much flexing of the rules that is allowed if you just be cooperative and hospitable.

[PerryFamily]

ender is right and gives good advice. I have experience from both sides. I used to do government inspections for licensing (in another industry) and I ran a facility that was inspected. As an inspector what set me off most was someone who instantly treated me with contempt, spoken or unspoken you know how they feel. If you starting cursing me you got zero breaks. If you were friendly cooperative and genuinely willing to take advice I would work with you. I have actually saw violations and pointed them out then (if the operator expressed a desire to fix it right away) decided I would not complete the inspection that day and come back in a few days, knowing they would be ready to pass. If I saw violations I had no choice but sight them, but sometimes very small things would go unseen. However, the best way to improve my eyesight was to start out with a combative "you **** government asshole" attitude.

On the other hand I also had inspections. I always cooperated and opened any door they wanted. I would ask for advice and professional guidance. If they sighted something that had to be fixed we fixed it. I once had an inspector find something he said was a definite serious violation and I told him I wasn't aware of that rule. I then asked if he knew of any training that would keep us in compliance. He instantly changed his attitude and informed me he actually got merit points if he could get facilities signed up in a training plan. So we sat down and set it up. At the end of the day I asked when the violation had to be fixed and he said, Oh I forgot to put that in my inspection report", if it's gone when I do my followup in 10 days I'll consider I never saw it. It was fixed that day and I e-mailed him in three days that all issues were being resolved. That same man done three safety training days on my facility every year and the best part was we maintained a compliant facility with no surprise fixes. Most of his annual inspections were done in an hour with maybe a couple small fixes. We actually became quite friendly in all our dealings. You can not circumvent the rules so being combative get's you no where. However, you will get as much flexing of the rules that is allowed if you just be cooperative and hospitable.

This is exactly what I meant by "two sides to the story". We don't know if there was any advanced notice or if this was a surprise visit. I'm still curious as to why they were picked. There a quite a few producers between Charlestown NH and Boston. Thanks Buckeyegold