Anyone clean year prior taps

[white mt]

Anyone clean last year's taps with success and reuse without premature tap hole closer.

[bill m]

I think there are a few people on here that do but I do not. New taps are .25 cents each and I would think it would cost more than that to properly wash, sanitize and rinse them.

[Pdiamond]

I have SS taps that I boil and reuse each year, and I have done it once with the blue bucket taps.

[buckeye gold]

I agree, At $.25 each I won't bother with washing any and risking a poor sap run. You won't know if you have a problem until it's over

[ecp]

Not sure what taps you are using that cost a quarter a piece, but I would run scared at that price. I have heard of of people soaking them in peroxide for a week then rising them off. I don't do it personally because of the time it would take but I bet it would save some money (guarantee it would at 25 cents a piece)

[buckeye gold]

https://bascommaple.com/collections/spouts

http://sugarbushsupplies.com/catalog/2021%20Catalog%20Web.pdf pages 21 &22

I'm using 3/16th $24.00/100 or .24 each

Some are a little more, but most plastic below .50 each. Pretty standard through the industry.....

[berkshires]

Anyone clean last year's taps with success and reuse without premature tap hole closer.

I bolded the part of your question that I think is the crux of the issue, and that also makes it a problematic question. While I'm just as curious as you are, I think we might not be able to get a good answer.

Personally speaking, some years I have cleaned taps and re-used them. Do my taps close down earlier because of it? Unless I'm a research facility that is carefully factoring in all the parameters, and measuring results in clearly quantifiable ways that are apples to apples, there's just no way I can tell. Let's say one season I'm doing that my taps do close earlier than I expect. Did that happen because of a big warm spell that year? Was there something else I did differently?

Some things I just don't think producers are in a position to be able to answer (even if they think they are). To the degree anyone knows, I would trust folks like the researchers at Proctor who are going to design a study where they have equivalent trees on each, they do both during the same season, and they repeat the study for several seasons. Without that, you're just trying to read tea leaves (random noise that you can see whatever you want to see in).

Gabe

[ALSMAPLE]

Anyone clean last year's taps with success and reuse without premature tap hole closer.

https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.cornell.edu/dist/7/5773/files/2020/08/2014-15-Maple-Tubing-Research-Report-2cp3xos-2.pdf

Some research showing different treatments and the results above .There's newer research I can't locate at the moment by Steve Childs showing only treating taps with bleach for a half hour and triple rinse with results similar to new taps.

[berkshires]

https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.cornell.edu/dist/7/5773/files/2020/08/2014-15-Maple-Tubing-Research-Report-2cp3xos-2.pdf

Some research showing different treatments and the results above .There's newer research I can't locate at the moment by Steve Childs showing only treating taps with bleach for a half hour and triple rinse with results similar to new taps.

Sounds like the takeaway is that 30 minute contact with bleach, installed in the spring, will make things just about good as new, so long as the drops are new or similarly treated with at least 30 minute bleaching.

Unfortunately I don't see anything here that tells what you might get from well sanitized taps on old drops. There is one piece of data that suggests that results will be pretty good: In the results of the 2015 season, test #3 (New spout/old drop) performs almost as well as new/new. So the spout seems to be the bigger determining factor.

I would be curious to see how Star-San performs. It's used a lot in the brewing business, and it's cheap and easy to use. But who knows, it may not be as effective on the particular bugs that we're working with here.

Gabe

[DrTimPerkins]

https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.cornell.edu/dist/7/5773/files/2020/08/2014-15-Maple-Tubing-Research-Report-2cp3xos-2.pdf

Some research showing different treatments and the results above .There's newer research I can't locate at the moment by Steve Childs showing only treating taps with bleach for a half hour and triple rinse with results similar to new taps.

A summary paper including a good part of the work done at UVM and Cornell is available at: https://mapleresearch.org/pub/1019sanitation-2/

There are several other papers there on sanitation as well. If you'd prefer the video version, you can find it at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z35z6oZDz4A&list=PLZP4fDl-nB9-4aZkQyDR070QpxcAr02q5&index=4

The results are very consistent, with expected variation from year-to-year depending upon how the season plays out (hot, cold, long, short). Basically the better the sanitation level, the higher the sap yields. Cleaning with bleach can work well, but (like pretty much all chemical sanitizers) you need to have adequate contact time and (most often) you need to rinse well afterward. Whether it is economically worth it depends upon what you think your time (or your hired help time) is worth.

Thanks to Gabe (and others) for recognizing that the research done at Cornell and UVM are done properly, with adequate controls, replication, statistical rigor, and all the other factors we take into account to get accurate results we can pass on to maple producers.

[TheNamelessPoet]

I don't reuse, although I am small, under 50 taps. I get the check valve taps at .47 each from Bascom's. I am not buying 1,000 taps though, so I don't have to look at the $225ish in savings for 1k taps.

[berkshires]

A summary paper including a good part of the work done at UVM and Cornell is available at: https://mapleresearch.org/pub/1019sanitation-2/

There are several other papers there on sanitation as well. If you'd prefer the video version, you can find it at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z35z6oZDz4A&list=PLZP4fDl-nB9-4aZkQyDR070QpxcAr02q5&index=4

The results are very consistent, with expected variation from year-to-year depending upon how the season plays out (hot, cold, long, short). Basically the better the sanitation level, the higher the sap yields. Cleaning with bleach can work well, but (like pretty much all chemical sanitizers) you need to have adequate contact time and (most often) you need to rinse well afterward. Whether it is economically worth it depends upon what you think your time (or your hired help time) is worth.

Thanks to Gabe (and others) for recognizing that the research done at Cornell and UVM are done properly, with adequate controls, replication, statistical rigor, and all the other factors we take into account to get accurate results we can pass on to maple producers.

Thanks for linking this study again ^^^. Much more detail than the one posted earlier. So I think what I said the main takeaway for this thread about the earlier study:


Sounds like the takeaway is that 30 minute contact with bleach, installed in the spring, will make things just about good as new, so long as the drops are new or similarly treated with at least 30 minute bleaching.
... is mostly right. But it's good to hear that I can amend it to say that 10 minutes is enough, it doesn't have to be 30 minutes (but a quick squirt of bleach and then rinse like some people do is not enough).

But the second half of what I got from the first study:

So the spout seems to be the bigger determining factor.
... did not hold up so well after looking at the longer-term study. In fact, spout alone represents only 1/3 of the improvement you'd get from new/sanitized spout AND drop. The difference between this and the earlier study is because this one includes some much older drops, while I think the other one was just looking at one-year-old drops.

So I guess the answer to the OP is that yes, sanitizing your taps well should work about as well as new taps, at least for a year (or more?) but it needs to be done in conjunction with well-sanitized or new drops.

Gabe

[berkshires]

In searching around, I also found where Dr Tim said that Star San was among the products that didn't make the cut for the study because they either didn't work well, or weren't widely used enough. I sure wish I knew which it was, because I bought Star San last season, and I've been using it on drops, taps, and buckets. I wonder if all that needs to go back into a bleach bath, because the star-san batch doesn't really work on the specific creepy-crawlies we care about in maple (as opposed to beer).

Gabe

[220 maple]

Was told but someone who works or worked at Sweet Tree now The Maple Guild, they wash and reuse all taps because the State of Vermont did want 750000 used taps in the landfill every year, have two elderly ladies clean spiles all summer! May not be the truth but that is what I was told
Mark 220 Maple

[darkmachine]

Last year I switched to stainless taps for buckets and tubing, I'll be boiling them all before I head out to tap. I won't be replacing them any time soon!

[220 maple]

MBOWERS894
Last year due too shortage of funds washed some polycarbonate spiles, had third best season every! Doing the same again.
Mark 220Maple

[DrTimPerkins]

... I also found where Dr Tim said that Star San was among the products that didn't make the cut for the study

The main active ingredient in Star-San is phosphoric acid. The other main ingredient is a detergent. We did try phosphoric acid in some of the trials...nothing particularly special about it that I can recall. Like most sanitizers, if the contact time is long enough it works reasonably well, but most need rinsing afterward (or you need to let the first sap run on the ground), which tips the economic scale away from those approaches.

Star-San is a no-rinse formulation for beer and other uses, but in maple that (not rinsing) probably isn't a great idea due to the concentration factor of detergents possibly creating an off-flavor. Cost is the other factor.

[DrTimPerkins]

... In fact, spout alone represents only 1/3 of the improvement you'd get from new/sanitized spout AND drop. The difference between this and the earlier study is because this one includes some much older drops, while I think the other one was just looking at one-year-old drops.

So I guess the answer to the OP is that yes, sanitizing your taps well should work about as well as new taps, at least for a year (or more?) but it needs to be done in conjunction with well-sanitized or new drops.


Correct, and a detail that too many producers choose to ignore. Spouts are quite important in terms of sanitation, but a new (or well sanitized) spout by itself is not nearly good enough to result in the best sap yields or the most economic approach from a cost-benefit perspective. A new spout alone will produce a significant increase in sap, but (in no specific order) 1) a new spout in combination with changing drops every 3 yrs (there is a calculator to determine the rotation time, 3 yrs just turns out to be the most common result), OR 2) the use of CV spouts or adapters, OR 3) sanitizing with bleach and rinsing (if you labor costs are low) are the "top-tier" approaches to spout and drop sanitation strategies in terms of best sap yields and highest net profits.

[berkshires]

The main active ingredient in Star-San is phosphoric acid. The other main ingredient is a detergent. We did try phosphoric acid in some of the trials...nothing particularly special about it that I can recall. Like most sanitizers, if the contact time is long enough it works reasonably well, but most need rinsing afterward (or you need to let the first sap run on the ground), which tips the economic scale away from those approaches.

Star-San is a no-rinse formulation for beer and other uses, but in maple that (not rinsing) probably isn't a great idea due to the concentration factor of detergents possibly creating an off-flavor. Cost is the other factor.

Thanks for this insight. I guess the gold-standard is calcium hypochlorite. I should be able to pick some of that up, but one question: I don't see anywhere in this study, and searching at https://mapleresearch.org/search/?_sf_s=Proctor&sort_order=date%20desc didn't help either, where it says the concentration to use. What concentration do you use?

Thanks again!

Gabe O

[TapTapTap]

I've got lots of used spouts if anyone feels ambitious. They're waiting for a trip to the recycling center but I'd give them up real cheap!
Ken

[white mt]

Thankyou Gentleman . Very good answers exactly what I was looking for.

[DrTimPerkins]

What concentration do you use?

The only way to really know for sure is to read the label and/or SDS (safety data sheet) of the product you are using. It is not possible to say what ratio to mix due to varying concentrations of the starting solution. Typically you're shooting for a 200-400 ppm solution, which would be 0.55 oz of 5% bleach per gallon of water. Make sure to use the cheap bleach without any additives (whiteners, detergent additives, etc.). Bleach degrades fairly quickly over time, so get new stuff each season.

[berkshires]

The only way to really know for sure is to read the label and/or SDS (safety data sheet) of the product you are using. It is not possible to say what ratio to mix due to varying concentrations of the starting solution. Typically you're shooting for a 200-400 ppm solution, which would be 0.55 oz of 5% bleach per gallon of water. Make sure to use the cheap bleach without any additives (whiteners, detergent additives, etc.). Bleach degrades fairly quickly over time, so get new stuff each season.

Seems like something like this: https://www.amazon.com/DryTec-23224-Treatment-Swimming-Chlorine/dp/B00WLWMM06/ref=sr_1_8 should work perfectly, right? A one-pound bag would last me quite a few seasons.

Edited to add a question: Is that parts per million of chlorine, or of calcium hypochlorite?

If you meant the latter (the whole salt, not just the chlorine ion), by my calculations:
300 ppm = 0.0003 grams of calcium hypochlorite
pool shock says it's 75% calcium hypochlorite. So that would mean .0004 grams of it per gram of water
So that would mean 0.4 (roughly half) a gram of pool shock per liter of water, or 7.5 grams per five gallons of water.

LOL if my above calculations are right, a one-pound bag of the stuff would last me 55 years if I mixed up five galls per year. But again, I don't know if I should be shooting for 300 ppm chlorine ion, or the full salt.

GO

[DrTimPerkins]

Seems like something like this: https://www.amazon.com/DryTec-23224-Treatment-Swimming-Chlorine/dp/B00WLWMM06/ref=sr_1_8 should work perfectly, right?

I'm not able to comment on specific chemicals. Up to the user to verify that the material used is suitable (meaning registered with the EPA) for sanitizing of porous and non-porous surfaces.


Edited to add a question: Is that parts per million of chlorine, or of calcium hypochlorite?

You need to factor in the concentration of the sanitizing material (chlorine) used. The calcium isn't doing anything. In this case (again, not an endorsement), looks like it is 73% chlorine (minimum specified is 70%, so might be easiest to go with that.

Note that at these high concentrations (before mixing with water) the material is corrosive. Take precautions (gloves, eye protection, inhalation protection). Pretty nasty stuff.