Comments on: Setback for Organic Beer Drinkers

By: beeractivist

beeractivist — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:52:35 +0000

KVC – thanks for stopping by and sharing your USDA comments.

todayyesterdayandtomorrow – The federal regulations website is mind-numbingly complex and unpredictable but once you navigate it correctly you can find that there were actually 1,264 comments during the original seven day comment period. My quick browse through them looked like they were ov erwhelmingly opposed to the rule – actually I couldn’t find any in my brief look that were in support of it. I did in fact post my own comments, as did Seven Bridges, both noting (as many other commenters did) that organic hops are available. It is maddening. However, I was unable to figure out how to post any new comments for the new comment period. But here’s where I read that the comment period was extended:
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/oca/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=11401

I’ll publish a new post with instructions for how to read all the original comments and with a link to the Organic Consumer’s Association website where you can submit our opposing comments without needing to navigate the federalregulations website.

Cheers,
Chris

By: todayyesterdayandtomorrow

todayyesterdayandtomorrow — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:49:11 +0000

Where did you read that they have extended the commend period to August 23rd?

By: todayyesterdayandtomorrow

todayyesterdayandtomorrow — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:41:18 +0000

I went to the regulation site, and viewed each of the comments they received on this ‘rule’.

They received 51 – all objections that I could tell.
And there were many, many companies writing in – tell them flat out – I SELL THIS STUFF IN ORGANIC FORM you idiots!!!

Go here:
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main

Then key in the reg# AMS-TM-07-0062

you can see each and every comment.!!

By: kvh

kvh — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:49:53 +0000

oops – meant to add that this was the comment I just sent through to the USDA. Thought I’d add it here too.

By: kvh

kvh — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:48:36 +0000

In regards to Hops being exempted from the required organic ingredients list, I would like to add this comment:
While most beer advocates will jokingly tell you that “Anheuser Busch’s beers don’t HAVE any hops in them”, setting the bar this low sets precedent for everyone after them to push the limits a little bit farther and a little bit farther.
Making the argument that the required hops are not available in organic form simply gives in to the status quo. A-B, in fear that this ruling would fall the other way, rapidly and successfully procured a supply of organic hops. While I’m sure they are relieved to now be able to dump that account, the farmers they were working with are probably now left without a contract, and fighting in a market where they cannot reasonably compete.
To argue that the hops in AB beer is a minor ingredient is probably accurate. That said, beers produced in smaller breweries nationwide contain hops that are much more than a ‘minor’ ingredient. However, this ruling, with big-beer’s money and lawyers pushing it through will only serve them, and effectively lie to the american public about what is and is not present in the bottle of suds in front of them.
Please re-review the AMS-TM-07-0062 proposal. Thank you.

By: Синтетичне пиво? - Штати кермують!:)

Синтетичне пиво? - Штати кермують!:) — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 08:15:38 +0000

[...] штатівському шанувальнику пива за [...]