The Great Cider Debate: Comments From Producers
From the July 2007 article "The Great Debate: Cider producers and researchers discuss whether pasteurization should be mandatory or voluntary."
Research Listed below are unedited comments from several cider producers on the issue of pasteurization. Clearly, this remains a hot topic for the industry.
"For those like me that like a ‘sparkling’ cider, pasteurization does away with my option of enjoying cider the way I like. The only way I can see around this is if cider producers allow some of their cider to work before using UV. May not be worth their time."
- Ron Becker, Program Assistant, Agriculture and Integrated Pest Management, Ohio State University Extension, Wayne County.
"Before fruit growers decide on the question of mandatory or voluntary pasteurization of cider, they may find it instructive to look at what pasteurization has done to the dairy industry. See Web sites: http://www.gardenstaterawmilk.org, and www.realmilk.com . Also read The Untold Story of Milk by Ron Schmid. As the consumption of pasteurization milk continues to decline, more and more consumers are seeking to buy good-quality raw milk. I suggest that the product be appropriately labeled and let the consumer have a choice."
- Joseph R. Heckan, Ph.D., Extension Specialist-Soil Fertility, Cook College, Rutgers University
"The first question is ‘How many people have died or became sick as the result of the use of unprocessed cider’? I was born on a farm in Northern Wisconsin with an apple orchard and although moved several times, still enjoy apple cider from natural sources all my life. Never have even heard of someone dying of apple cider poisoning.
There is a risk/benefit involved in all regulatory decisions. Restrictions should only be applied when there is a risk, and the risk must be defined and measured against the benefit. In this case the use of a wholesome, natural product that has been used since apples were cultivated (a few thousand years). There should not be any requirements if the numbers of individuals that suffered trauma are low. Remember the "Bell Curve", where you will always find susceptible individuals? My guess is that the number of people with adverse effects of un-treated cider is low (we need to measure that) and have data that describes the positive effects of use of un-pasteurized cider vs. the processed products.
We all ‘know’ that the unprocessed product is much healthier (same with milk) and the consumer has a right to the natural product, but data concerning the health effects of the natural over a basic non-natural product need to be based on a heallth benefit risk never before initiated. An apple cider requirement for processing is only the beginning. How about jams and jellies? Solve the problem now with these suggessions. Also remember that an agency should never have a law or regulation established that cannot be enforced, and therefore this regulation should not even be considered by the authorities. How would a regulatory agency ever enforce the proposed regulation?
Someone should put the data together and provide an anaylsis on the risk/benefit analysis described that can be submitted to the proper authorities or otherwise the regulatory officials will have their way.
Challenge the Universities and organic growers to fight the proposed regulations with carefully organized and directed studies that are approved by the regulatory officials. Sit down with them and provide the benefits of the natual vs. processed product and let them help you design the studies that will demonstrate that the benefits from the natual product outweigh the negetive effects of processing the cider.
It is better to work with them, voicing your concerns, providing data, and working out a solution than to face the regulatory officicals in court some day.
You may well consider the expansion of this concept to all other "endangered natural foods" in the study. Everyone enjoys the cidar and other commodities directly from the plants sold by the small growers and you need to be a leader in the fight to keep it that way."
- John Wayne Kennedy, Stevensville, MD.
"We have a small operation in Stow, OH. Only 400 apple trees so we do not produce alot of cider in a season. We press on two antique cider presses so if they make us go to pasteurization it would be way too costly and prohibited for us. We do not think that pasteurized cider is even cider!! Doesn’t taste the same at all. Cider as we have known it for hundreds of years is going to be history. We think that pasteurization of cider should be voluntary. When people buy our cider they understand that they are buying unpasteurized cider. And we have found out that there are a lot of people who prefer it that way. We hope that they don’t make us go that route because it would probably put us out of business."
- Faith and Peder Field
I believe there should be more information on the results and comparison between UV and heat pasteurization. We know pretty well what heat can do but not as much as what UV can do. We would all like to have a neat, safe, fast and cheaper way to provide a flavorful and affordable product that is highly competive in the market place. Will UV do the job as well as heat or will UV bite us down the road a ways?"
"I am a cider producer who is still allowed to produce non-pasteurized cider. I am in the Ann Arbor, MI, area and sell at our farm market and at the Ann Arbor Farmers’ Market. Ten years ago when the controversy started, I considered getting out of the business. It seemed like a big task to make the changes needed to stay in business. But I decided to make the updates and, yes, they made my operation more like it should have been all along. However, I will have to say that I have never considered going to pasteurized cider and won’t unless forced to by customer demand or government regulation.
Initially, I thought, well, I’ll lose half of my customer if I pasteurize or I’ll lose half of my customers if I don’t pasteurize. Why pay for the equipment if I’m going to lose half of my customers either way? I’m now sure that I would have lost many more customers by pasteurizing. I cannot believe how many customers read our label with the warning label and say they only want to have non-pasteurized cider. Or they will ask and when I tell them that it is not pasteurized, they say that they are glad.
Is there increased danger from non-pasteurized cider? Possibly. But I think that increase is minimal based on the experience in the country over these 10 years. Is there danger with pasteurized cider? Yes. The Michigan Department of Agriculture has been a leader in making rule that increase safety but still allow an operator to make a product for which there is a great demand. I want to thank them as well as Michigan State University for being in the forefront in this movement and hope that we are not mandated by Washington to drop this product."
- Bruce Upston, Wasem Fruit Farm, Milan, MI.
"I am the president of the New York State Horticultural Society and we are in support of the law requiring the treatment of all cider. I am not a cider producer but an apple producer. If the cider industry gets a black eye and bad press, I get the same black eye and bad press. Risk can never be eliminated but it can be reduced. The treatment of cider is a simple way of lowing the risk of someone getting sick.
Just as I have had to incorporate GAPs into the production of fruit to limit risk, cider producers need to incorporate GAPs into their program to decrease the safety risk of their product.
You should ask the New Jersey spinach growers how a mistake on one farm in California affected them."
- Jim Bittner, Singer Farms, Appleton, NY
|
