new grading in the works

[PATheron]

Guys- Whats the scoop on the new grading system everyone is talking about? Does anyone know for sure what is going on? How will it affect the bulk syrup prices? Thanks, Theron

[brookledge]

The IMSI BOD voted to implement the new standards
Grade A 4 classes
Taste Color
Delicate Golden 75%Tc or greater
Rich Amber 50-74.9%Tc
Robust Dark 25.1-49.9%Tc
Strong Very dark 25%or less Tc

Processing grade
All off flavored syrup
not for retail and packed in 5 gal or larger
I originally thought that syrup that was very dark would not be able to be sold retail but it can under these standards provided it has no off flavor
The biggest suprise to me is that Vermont fancy will become a word of the past
While I can see where it would be nice to have the entire industry standardized, it is going to cost a lot of$$$. New labels, new silkscreens for jugs, new grading kits etc.
And no one has discussed whether you can use existing supply of items before you are required to change. hopefully there will be a grace period to use up jugs,labels, etc.
Keith

[caseyssugarshack93]

i think they should just leave it how it is PERIOD! this is just going to make a big mess

[KenWP]

When have they ever left anything alone. If we talked to a old timer they could probbably come up with stories of this being done before. History repeats it's self over and over.

[syrupkid]

im with caseyssugarshack on this one leave it the way it is its good enough now so why change it???????????

[brookledge]

The reason for change is quite obvious. Not that I agree with it.
for example if you like very light syrup and are in Vt. it is called fancy in Canada it is Canada#1 Extra light and others will call it light amber. So for a consumer that becomes confusing.
Can you imagine if gasoline was not graded the same throughout the country and each state had different grades and names with different octane levels. you would not know what you were buying. Well to a certain extent it is the same with syrup.
I personally think that it could be left the way it is but since this has been a priority of IMSI I don't see it going away to be left alone
Keith

[Bucket Head]

Does anyone know when the new grading system is supposed to be in place? How long before the "change"?

Steve

[brookledge]

Steve
at best I'd say a few years. Each state and providence through the government agencies need to make these changes first.
Keith

[Thompson's Tree Farm]

Ken,
I'm not ready to call myself an old timer but you are correct. It has happened before. When I was a kid, the table grades were Fancy, No.1 and No.2. In an attempt to standardize across the US, USDA came up with light medium and dark amber color gradations. Vermont was allowed to keep its "Fancy" designation while here in NY we had to start labeling it "light amber". I remember we had a stamp that we stamped the color grade on cans with and that had to be replaced. I still have customers who ask for Fancy and I sell them light amber with a brief explanation. We made the change then, there were complications but they were not severe. The positive in this is that we will be able to sell all good flavored syrup as a retail product.
Doug

[Russell Lampron]

The reason for the change is so that all of the syrup producing states and Canada will be the same. Right now some states have no grading standard while others are close but different. It gets confusing when you cross state lines and national borders as to what is what. New Hampshire goes by the USDA grading standard which only has color specs for Grade A Light, Medium and Dark Amber. Anything darker than that is Grade B as long as it has good flavor. Vermont has grade A Fancy, Medium and Dark Amber and Grade B which has a color limit before you have to call it Commercial regardless of taste. Maine has Grade A Light, Medium, Dark and Extra Dark and Grade B. Three states with three different grading standards and we haven't even left New England yet.

[Amber Gold]

I agree with Russ, unfortunately I bought a USDA permanent grade set last year.

[NH Maplemaker]

Maybe now we know why USDA grade sets are so much cheaper than the dealers!! They know this is comming and need to get rid of a few hundred thousand units. LOL Jim L.

[maple flats]

And for once I am on the right side. I was planning to get a permanent grade set in 2010 before the season. Now I will wait for new ones or maybe I'll get a grade meter, then if they ever change again I'll be set except for replacing the labels themselves.
My understanding at least for NY is that the state has not yet signed onto the new grade def.s I think it will take a few years, time will tell.
I however do think a standard grading system throughout the maple world is best.

[red maples]

I agree with everyone change it tough and we are all familiar with the current grading system. I feel it can be slightly adjusted. it will be come second nature for us because we deal with it every day. But do you think it will be a problem for the consumer who knows it as vermont fancy or light amber etc. I agree it need to be stream lined. maybe just tweek it a bit but to change the whole thing ..not a good idea!!!

I guess if you change it then it needs to be completely different. But like anything from the powers above it will take some time for it to change. So we probabably don't really need to worry about it for a while.

[WESTVIRGINIAMAPLER]

Either way, it is about time that everyone is the same. No state or providence should be any more special than another for the consumers sake. Long term, it should benefit the consumer more so when they buy syrup, they know what they are getting or at least supposed to be getting.

[Brent]

I thnk (hope) that the new grades will not give the false impression through name of the grades, that the lightest stuff is somehow superior to anything a bit darker.

It certainly seems that almost all consumers that take the trouble to buy from any of us rather than grocery stores, like medium or darker better.

[Frank Ivy]

Does color correlate to flavor?
If so, how strongly?

[sapman]

I would say usually, but there can certainly be exceptions.

Tim

[Frank Ivy]

I would say usually, but there can certainly be exceptions. Tim

This is only my opinion as a consumer - it seems to me that unless there is a fairly definite correlation between color and flavor, then having a grading system based on color doesn't make a lot of sense.

It'd be like grading red wines based on how dark/light they are.

Why not just have no grading it all? Require that producers put the sugar % on the label and that's it, and just like virtually every other product out there, consumers just figure out which brand they like.

[red maples]

if they call strong/ very dark how strong is strong then?? I think it leaves it a little open ended...

well now that I have said that I guess the current grading is way open ended on flavor right.

[upsmapleman]

Syrup is graded according to color but flavor always overrides color. It is possible to make a light syrup late that has a strong flavor which would drop the grade. producers who have bubblers make lighter syrup but cannot change the flavor. Hence may lose a grade. You may make Light amber with a Med amber flavor so it is graded Med. amber. I compare syrup grading to milk. When i go into a store I want to buy skim milk, I don't want to buy several containers to find one I want. Same with syrup you like Med. you should get that, some like Light amber another grade B. The sugar content is the same for all grades so that would do you no good.

Dale

[Homestead Maple]

I've talked a little to the New Hampshire member of the International Maple Syrup Institute and he says that the Institute is proposing to make these changes effective by 2013 but he says that getting all the states and Canada to agree to the proposals will put that date beyond 2013. If you go to this site you can read up on what the proposal is about, http://www.internationalmaplesyrupinstitute.com/content/en/news.aspx?noNew=78

[Frank Ivy]

I compare syrup grading to milk. When i go into a store I want to buy skim milk, I don't want to buy several containers to find one I want. Dale

Certainly a valid perspective. My perspective is really only that I'd rather have consumers decide what they want rather than have tax dollars go to government agencies to ensure grades that have fairly arbitrary borders. You walk in to the store, you go get the wine you like, maybe you try a new one once in a while. No two years the same. Why not 5 grades? Why not 10? Why not 5 grades of color and 5 grades of flavor?

If the only risk to getting completely rid of the grading system is that consumers would then have to start to buy based on brand recognition of the brand they like, and we can save all the tax dollars that are being spent to come up with these standards and prosecute people for violating them, then I'd say that's a good thing.

Just my 2 cents.

[markct]

i think your missing the thing about grading syrup here frank, cant just find a brand ya like cause its not like wine where it is made to a recipe and procedure, mother nature makes alot of variables to play with in maple so one sugarhouse (brand) makes basicly a bit of each grade every year. so you could buy the same brand and not have it taste or look at all the same as the last jug you bought. and the reason its done by color rather than flavor is that its hard to set a standard for flavor, not realy something you can test for, more of a personal opinion realy and the colors do basicly follow the flavor so thats why they go by that

[Frank Ivy]

i think your missing the thing about grading syrup here frank, cant just find a brand ya like cause its not like wine where it is made to a recipe and procedure, mother nature makes alot of variables to play with in maple so one sugarhouse (brand) makes basicly a bit of each grade every year. so you could buy the same brand and not have it taste or look at all the same as the last jug you bought. and the reason its done by color rather than flavor is that its hard to set a standard for flavor, not realy something you can test for, more of a personal opinion realy and the colors do basicly follow the flavor so thats why they go by that

Look - I'm certainly not trying to start a fight here, and I recognize that the grading standards have been around a long time, and I have no delusion that they won't be here in 100 years.

But everything you've said, IMO, just reinforces my point.

Wine is NOT made to "recipe"!!!!!! In fact, wine changes with every season, because the grapes and yeast and fermentation are different every year. This is why a 2008 Cabernet might be much superior to a 2009 Cabernet made by the same company in the same way! Just like maple syrup.

You say the reason they rely on color is because doing one for flavor would be difficult!!! I say Yes! That's the point! Color is not nearly as relevant as taste, just like with soda - they could make Coke blue if they wanted, and it would taste the same. They can't grade based on the critical factor - taste - so they've created a grade based on the only significant visible factor - color.

So the old cynic in me says that somebody a long time ago wanted to sell something as "fancy" or "fine" based on color, because that was the only thing they could base it on, and so they did! Now I'm selling mine as "fancy" and you're not, and eventually we pass a law that says Vermont Fancy must have this color, and so on, and I don't know the origins of it, but I'd guess it had something to do with giving somebody or other a competitive advantage.

So my only point here is that a much simpler system would be to completely exclude the government and just let consumers figure out what they want themselves - the high quality producers will have a market - those putting out bad product or misleading product will lose business.

I wonder what our founding fathers would say about tax money being used to pay government officials to make sure that people making maple syrup aren't misgrading the syrup???!!!!! Wow!

If you run Maple Staple Farms and you want to bottle something called "MSF Super Light first run," then that's fine, and it's up to the consumer to let you know they like your product by buying it. And then when they go to buy syrup again they buy your product. Sure it's a bit different year to year - but so is wine, and everybody gets by fine with that and we don't need to tax everybody to pay for government wine people and wine standard laws.

So that's it, and like I said, I'm not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out that there is another way to do it, and it would save money and be a lot simpler. We don't need the government to protect us from mislabelled maple syrup!

[Homestead Maple]

I wish that the grading would just change to: Grade A Light, Grade A Medium, Grade A Dark, Grade A Extra Dark and Commercial. People say that consumers are turned off by the current term Grade B, thinking that B means substandard, but how many people use B as a "table" grade. Changing to A Extra Dark would make it more acceptable to consumers I would think. B is now considered a "food" grade, where commercial wouldn't be, correct? There would be less changes needed to the current grading system and if they wanted to change the range for light transmittance for medium, I don't think that would'nt change the system much overall, accept for the poor people that have the current grading kits. Just my thoughts. I hope more people will express their thoughts to their State representatives to the International Maple Syrup Institute.

[Dill]

To me the issue is have all the states be the same. If Canada doesn't want in too bad. Especially in New England where the states are tiny we should be all on the same marketing stage. Not to mention how can we all sell to the same packers if we are operating under different rules?
The milk analogy works for this. You know what your getting, 98% fat free or 96.5% fat free, why can't that work for syrup?

[Acer]

The system creates 64 possible grades of syrup, which seems pointless to me. it will confuse consumers and i can see them sliding down to the aunt jemima section where things are simpler.
The idea of grading for flavor is interesting but really how do you do that?

I would like to see a labeling requirement for blended syrup.
if someone is blending mersh with light to make something that looks like my DA but has that special zing of mersh that hurts me as a small producer. allow "unblended" labeling and require labeling for "blended for grade".

if packaging is clear plastic or glass, do not require any color or transmittance grading. consumers can see what they are getting, a label wont change that.

[nymapleguy607]

I think grading by color is the easiest way to judge syrup. I agree grades should be standarized, so if a customer wants to buy syrup from out of state the can buy a brand they like.
I don't see how you can grade syrup based on taste, I know the syrup I make tastes different form my neighbors. Granted the differences are minimal but you might get someone making a fuss because it was flavored differently than someone elses

[Thad Blaisdell]

I guess I am lost on the grading by flavor theory. Who is going to come up with what flavors go to what catagory? Everyone's tastes are a little different. I made some syrup last year on one day for about an hour that was the sweetest tasting syrup that I ever had..... then it changed to a butterscotch flavor... delicious also. But how in the heck do you grade that. And who is going to give a definition to "off flavor"?

[peacemaker]

the differnce in flavor is what makes it a home made product like someone said every producer makes a different flavored fancy mine taste like cotton candy supper sappys taste like vanilla and even some taste like lemonade
others taste like defoamer
if i walk into a store or a sugarhouse and buy a jar and i dont like the flavor of pruducer 1s syrup i will try anothers and not go back
i have gotten comeback buyers who try my syrup and say i like yours better then so and so but there always looking for the same grades
i do agree that fancy should be fancy and so on i am on the border of ny and vt it gets confusing when people say well u cant sell b in ny when u are selling b its just named dark amber ...
we need to standardize grade as color and let the consumer figure out what the like taste wise

[Dill]

I agree on the flavor part. I only taste sweet or buddy. Just like me and wine. I never get hints of whatever.
Grade by color, have all the same color scores and be done with it. Heck people want B due to the cooking shows pushing flavor anyway.

[Homestead Maple]

Does anyone know if any other states besides Maine that use a grading system that has Light, Medium, Dark and Extra Dark for grades?

[Clan Delaney]

As a new member on the MMPA board, I've found myself doing a lot of reading to bring myself up to date on a lot of maple-related issues. The new grading issue was just one.

In order to help myself and others better understand the differences between the standards we're currently using and the ones being proposed, I spent some time to create a side by side comparison. I've attached it below.

All the information used in the chart was taken from Appendix A, Table 8.6 (https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AbjwJOMssbD0ZGZoem1tNmJfOWR4amhnc2c5&hl=en) of the Proposal for Standardized Grades and Nomenclature for the Maple Syrup Industry, Final Draft, December 2009. (https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AbjwJOMssbD0ZGZoem1tNmJfMTBjazR2N3A1ag&hl=en) (Any highlighting you see is my own, not part of the original document.) The paper contains a nice color coded timeline for the implementation of the new standards, for those of you who had been looking for this info.

As I understand it, the proposed system does something that I think we all want - it recognizes darker syrup as something consumers enjoy. It upgrades everything we currently call Grade B to Grade A Dark or Very Dark. The new term for Grade B is Processing Grade, and it is not determined by color (or, more correctly, light transmittance) but by the presence of off flavors - (i.e. caramel, woody, buddy, burnt, etc.)

We've been describing the flavor intensity of the different grades for years. The new system would add that info to the labeling, to give consumers more information when deciding which syrup suits them best. The descriptors: Delicate, Rich, Robust and Strong relate to the intensity of flavor, not to any specific flavor (such as vanilla, maple, confectionery). These terms weren't pulled out of the air, but were suggested by consumers.

I'm willing to go with this change. Admittedly, I'm so new to sugaring that these changes won't affect me in the same ways they will affect "old timers" (of all ages! :D ). I don't have personalized packaging that needs to be changed. Though if I did, I'd have till 2013 to do so. I haven't yet purchased a grading kit of any kind, so when the new ones are made available I'll know that investing in one will be long term. I don't have to re-educate my customers, since I haven't yet had customers outside of friends/family, though I know I'll still have to explain the new grades to long time maple consumers.

I don't like the additional "for cooking" label assigned to the new Grade A Very Dark. It's really just taking that old stigma from "Grade B" and re-assigning it. I know it doesn't say "for cooking only", but I'd even be happy with "preferred for cooking" or "great for cooking". But why have that at all? We don't need to be suggesting or discouraging the use of our product as a part of our required labeling. That should be up to the individual seller.

[Homestead Maple]

I agree with what you have to say Patrick, especially the cooking grade part. I wish other wording could be used because so many people consider this a 'table grade' now. Standardization is needed so that things are consistent in every part of the maple producing area. The charts look good.

[Sugarmaker]

Pat,
Thanks for posting the chart. That will help.

Chris

[DrTimPerkins]

The reason for using flavor descriptions is because consumers do not buy maple syrup because of the color....they buy it for the flavor. In general, flavor follows color. It means nothing to most people when you say your syrup is "dark amber", but when you say it tastes "strong", they have some idea of what it'll be like. While there are a lot of subtle flavor variations (vanilla, confectionary, maple), most consumers don't readily recognize these -- and neither do a lot of people in the maple industry for that matter.

The proposed new grading scheme does several things. First, it homogenizes the grades across all jurisdictions to make it easier for consumers to understand. We all do education of consumers....this effort just means that it will be easier for everyone rather than confusing because all of us regardless of where we are will be teaching the same grading system. Secondly, it reduces the number of grades -- the consumer palate just isn't good enough to distinguish all the grades we had. Third, it simplifies the color breakpoints for sugarmakers by reducing the number of grades and putting them on a simpler scale (25% light transmittance breakpoints). Forth, it ties a set of common flavor descriptions to each grade....again, to help educate the consumer about what they're buying and to standardize the descriptions across the maple world. Finally, it recognizes that darker syrup is becoming more desirable. A substantial amount of time, effort, and consumer-based research went into designing this new system. Is it perfect....no. Is it a huge improvement....absolutely.

[Beans Maple]

I can't say that I really agree with this new system. I am a little old school in the fact that "if something isn't broke...don't fix it" In recent years we have listened to several people in the sugaring industry boast about how this is the best of times for world wide maple syrup sales. We all know that our combined market is growing. Each state and country takes their own pride in their syrup and markets its accordingly.

I have heard mostly in the past few years that we are making to much light syrup and that the demand is up on the darker grades. So why then are we trying so hard to better market the dark stuff?

If we are so focussed on educating our customers then lets spend more effort with topics that could put us all out of business like the Asian Longhorn Beatle. I mean really, does anyone think changing a lable from "Fancy" to "Delicate" is honestly going to help them sell more of it? If any changes at all are needed then just simply add "B" grade to the "A" grade category and call it something like "Extra Dark", "Robust", "Strong", or something to that nature. I think each state/country should absolutely keep their own unique grading system. It's just like Ragu calling theirs "Thick" and Prego calling it "Chunky".

[Squaredeal]

Any idea about the labeling requirements that will come with this? Will we have to list the entire description ie 'golden, delicate taste', or will we only have to list 'golden'?

I myself think that describing taste for someone is ridiculous. Will off tasting but adequately transmittant syrup be required to be labeled 'Amber, tastes like ***'?

Are we going to send our customers to tasting school?

This system will still require grading by transmittance more than by color or taste. Lot's of colors can pass the transmittance test. Medium Amber can be any number of hues and still be greater than 60.50% transmittant. Let's not even go into the lightening that seems to occur with air injection. Is syrup lighter because it is started at 25% concentration and thereby boiled (and carmelized) less?

How about the wide range in flavor difference that occurs between regions, or individual bushes for that matter?

It's been hard enough to educate consumers about the difference in grades -why change the game now and create more confusion? Who really cares about this except for the packers who would be able to have one labeling system that they can ship to any state? Do we need to make it any easier for them?

I am surprised that Vermont would go along with this and lose the last identifier that separates it from other State's syrup. I take pride in the fact that my syrup is graded 'Vermont Grade A', because I know of all of the law behind it and that we take it seriously here.

I can say from experience that with the federalization of the organic standards, which I see as similar, that small producers immediately lost their competitive edge when standards were changed to make it easier for the big guys to compete.

My feeling is to leave the standards as they are and fight centralization and the loss of individual identity.

[802maple]

I can't say that I really agree with this new system. I am a little old school in the fact that "if something isn't broke...don't fix it" In recent years we have listened to several people in the sugaring industry boast about how this is the best of times for world wide maple syrup sales. We all know that our combined market is growing. Each state and country takes their own pride in their syrup and markets its accordingly.

I have heard mostly in the past few years that we are making to much light syrup and that the demand is up on the darker grades. So why then are we trying so hard to better market the dark stuff?

If we are so focussed on educating our customers then lets spend more effort with topics that could put us all out of business like the Asian Longhorn Beatle. I mean really, does anyone think changing a lable from "Fancy" to "Delicate" is honestly going to help them sell more of it? If any changes at all are needed then just simply add "B" grade to the "A" grade category and call it something like "Extra Dark", "Robust", "Strong", or something to that nature. I think each state/country should absolutely keep their own unique grading system. It's just like Ragu calling theirs "Thick" and Prego calling it "Chunky".

I have got to agree with yeah, but that may be cause of your name
One Bean to another

[Clan Delaney]

Any idea about the labeling requirements that will come with this? Will we have to list the entire description ie 'golden, delicate taste', or will we only have to list 'golden'?

.......

I am surprised that Vermont would go along with this and lose the last identifier that separates it from other State's syrup. I take pride in the fact that my syrup is graded 'Vermont Grade A', because I know of all of the law behind it and that we take it seriously here.

Taken from the document I linked to above, here's what will be required on the labelling:

Product Descriptors to appear on the product label:
· Pure Maple Syrup (Grade A and Processing Grade)
· No additives (Grade A and Processing Grade )
· Product Origin: Country of Origin or Province/State (Grade A and Processing Grade )
· Intensity of Flavour (Grade A)
· Colour (Grade A)
· For Food Processing (Processing Grade)


I couldn't find anything that said it would have to be in that order. I understand these to be minimum requirements, not a dictate that this is the only information that shall appear on the label.

In fact, I found this in the documentation as well:


Producers and packers will remain free to add additional descriptors and other information to their product as they do now, provided that it is not misleading to the consumer. Examples of this include an organic certification logo or a marketing term such as “fancy” which is recognized locally by existing consumers. Space to accommodate logos and additional descriptors on the label as well as their value to sales will be used to determine additional label content.

That sounds a lot like you being able to keep that "Vermont Fancy" label. I suspect that conjecture about Vermont giving up that label has been somehow exaggerated.

[Squaredeal]

Patrick,
Thanks for the info. I guess the way things are going, we will have to 'step in line'. Oh, how that hurts a nonconformist like me.

[DrTimPerkins]

I really don't have any stake in this. UVM PMRC has not been terribly involved in the development, other than adding our opinion when the opportunity arose. It has been a very long (7+ yrs), thoughtful and inclusive process. Given that both IMSI and NAMSC voted to approve it at the Oct Annual Meeting, it has had input and acceptance from all segments of the industry (producers, packers, bulk buyers, equipment manufacturers).

Also, although the system isn't broken, that does not mean that there is not room for considerable improvement (sort of like a vacuum pump running at 15" Hg....can't it do better at 25" Hg).

In the proposed scheme, the syrup that tastes like crap goes into the "Processing Grade", regardless of light transmittance. That's the way it should be.

There is already a great deal of $ and effort spent each year to educate consumers about grades. However it is not transferrable from one place to the next, which just confuses people and makes the education more costly and time-consuming. Harmonization will help that for everyone, whether it's a big packer or the small producer who sells mail-order or on the web.

Finally, some people seem to think that the current grading scheme has been around forever. It hasn't -- in fact it's relatively young. Might surprise you to know it's only been here since the mid-1970s. Realistically this new scheme is just an evolutionary change, not a wholesale tossing of the old and in with the new.

[Squaredeal]

Who determines what it tastes like when the syrup is graded perhaps the same people that send in entries to the Maple festival that taste like defoamer?

Point being that people's ability to taste varies greatly, and color is no guarantee of quality.

I have been at a packers when they received syrup that the taster described as "tasting like a wet, mildewed mop" The seller argued that it was top notch. In the end, they bought in anyway and up it went into the silo.

[Beans Maple]

Why is this even an issue? Who is driving the change? Back 20 years ago the maple industry was somewhat broken. We had the ability to make more...but couldn't sell it all, certainly not at prices that were fair to the producers. Each state/country developed a grading system that was friendly to the consumers. Joe Public could identify and choose the syrup of his liking, packers could standardize and market the different grades, producers could take pride in their product while using their grade system as a marketing advantage....all was good. I don't think USDA is pushing for this...are they? So why regulate ourselves in an area that doesn't need it. I really haven't heard to many pros to this system from producers. We have a good thing going now....

[802maple]

Dr Perkins is 100% right about the timing on the changing of the grading system, as it used to be Fancy, Grade A, Grade B and commercial. Then it changed to the Fancy,Grade A Medium Amber, Grade A DarkAmber and comercial grading in the late seventies Then with the advent of tubing and people couldn't make as much light syrup there was a feeling that an additional grade was needed in the late 80's to early nineties, that is when we added the new Grade B.
I was on panels that were involved in both of those decisions. I was against adding grade B in the second go around because it was going to be in my mind confusing to the customers, all I felt we needed to do was lower the parameters of Grade A Dark Amber. I do alot of promoting of syrup at places such as the Big-E,Vermont Fairs and Ski areas and the only thing I hear is we have way to many grades. The names of those grades don't matter, it is the quantity of grades. It is confusing one state to another, believe me I know better than most when I was purchasing syrup for Maple Grove, but I like having each state have their own identity also as Beans Maple said.

[maple flats]

I agree, we need standardization. As small as I am I still sell and ship to several different states. When a customer thinks they want a specific grade name, if my state does not recognise the same name some customers don't understand when you tell them that a New York "x"is the same as Vermont "y" and Maine "z" and Canada "w". Standardization will end this. Maple IS NOT the same as wine and comparing them is rediculous. Granted flavors within a 22% light transmittance group of syrups can and does have many differing taste subtleties but unless it is OFF flavor, they are all good. I really think this needs to happen and should be sooner rather than later. However, which ever year it takes effect, the effective date should be timed to allow pruducers to be ready as a new season starts with proper preparation time for manufacturers, dealers and ultimately producers to be ready. Regional advantages are far less important to any of us as the consuming world continues to spread over the globe. If we were having trouble selling our product the arguments would likely change, but I have not heard of any unsellable surpluses. Now is the time to act. This will help the entire maple producing world sell more product. I embrace the change.

[maple flats]

Let's all embrace this move to make a simpler grading system for EVERYONE

[Bucket Head]

I like the proposed four retail grades and then the commercial grade. However, I never liked the "for cooking" label and still don't. It still makes it sound like the dark syrup is inferior somehow to the others. Some might argue, but it does.

That should be eliminated from the new grading language. Let the customer decide what color and flavor they like, but don't tell them how they should use it.

Steve

[maple flats]

OK, what if it were labeled, "also excellent for cooking"

[Clan Delaney]

Who determines what it tastes like when the syrup is graded perhaps the same people that send in entries to the Maple festival that taste like defoamer?

Point being that people's ability to taste varies greatly, and color is no guarantee of quality.

I have been at a packers when they received syrup that the taster described as "tasting like a wet, mildewed mop" The seller argued that it was top notch. In the end, they bought in anyway and up it went into the silo.

I'd say that whoever is packing the syrup is going to determine the grade, same as always. If you make syrup and pack it for sale, the grade is your call based on a grading kit (whatever becomes available) and your own palate. For those who aren't able to taste off flavors, they'll not likely grade their syrup "processing grade". For those who can discern off flavors and intentionally mis-grade... that's another issue entirely.

As to what happens when a producer goes to sell in bulk: my take on it is that the person buying the syrup gets to determine the presence of off flavors, not the person selling it. I know if I were laying my money down to buy syrup that I'd want it to be my call.

I think a key issue here is that state associations should be stepping up awareness of the presence of off flavors in syrup. Mass Maple did a taste test at it's meeting last year, and I'll admit to being dumbfounded that most of what I was tasting was not pure maple.

[Bucket Head]

Well, "also good for cooking" would be alright, but its not needed and where would it end? The other grades could have "good on ice cream", "great on french toast", "best used on waffles", "don't use on Tuesdays", etc., etc.

See what I'm getting at? There is no need for "recomendations" on the grading system labels and there is absolutely no need for a label that implies only one use. Let the consumers decide how they want to use it.

Is this new system set in stone? Is there no changing it now? I wish they would rethink the dark labeling. Only for cooking is terribly misleading.

Steve