suggestion for the OCB

[JerCraigs]

I would also like to see designated on the label:
GMO’s
Allergens - dairy, wheat, soy, nuts, sulphites, eggs
Suitability/unsuitability for vegetarians.

Getting the suppliers to tell the brewers would be the harder part...

[PRMason]

Liam has been advocating this since 1998, as seen in this CBC marketplace interview dated that year.

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/file ... tives.html
Perry

[georgemilbrandt]

Sorry for the delay in response, have been travelling.

With the greatest respect for your establishment, ethos and service George, must respond.

1/ Single batch brewing - that would eliminate blended lambics - often stand alone batches too powerful on their own - necessitates blending of old and young batches usually. Origins of stout dispensing involved blending yesterdays barrels with todays barrels freshly tapped. In both winemaking and distilling, blending is an extremely important aspect of the 'art'. Why not beer? What about high-gravity brewing? I know a lot of small brewers doing high gravity brewing but not high gravity fermenting like large brewers.

2/ All natural ingredients - many small brewers utilize things like silica hydrogel and PVPP as stabilizing/filtration aids - both appear in miniscule but detectable quantities in final beverage. CO2 is artificially added to most commercial (large or small) beers. Nitro-pours include added dissolved nitrogen. I won't delve into the whole water treatment aspect of 'all natural' except to say I know of no brewer who does not undertake this
inherently artificial process in some way. Alginates and enzymes are worthy of discussion as well even on the 'craft' side.

3/ Fresh - I agree with your thinking regarding pasteurization but for a different reason. There are certain heat labile components in beer that are positive nutritionally (some vitamins and enzymes) but diminished by pasteurization. That being said, I must admit, many of the truly fantastic beers I've enjoyed have been pasteurized. From a flavour standpoint, if done correctly (sadly this is not often so), it has no flavour impact at all.

4/Locally brewed - 100% agreement there. As I've mentioned before - I wouldn't buy bread from Europe, why would I buy European beer?


It worries me as a consumer that the large brewers corruption of this simple, elegant thing we know as beer may insidiously creep into my local micro brew - from managerial pressures of efficiency and productivity and market pressures of product aesthetics. In the absence of an effective standard, I can easily see it. Enzymes in the brewhouse from genetically engineered bacterial sources, antioxidants like ascorbic acid, propylene glycol alginate, gum arabic, dextrans , carboxymethyl cellulose etc. These things could, theoretically, legitimately and legally be found in a beer bearing an 'All natural' moniker. As a consumer, I could not object more strenuously. Perhaps I'll just stick to those I know for certain aren't messin' with my pint. As a brewer, this is a lot easier for me than your average punter.

This is where an OCB quality mark could help. I think small brewers really need to define that line in the sand between us and them. As much for the integrity and distinction of the craft industry as for consumer friendly information.

If this pisses 'them' off, that would be a good thing.

Here's the kind of 'guts' I'd be looking for:

Absence of the following:

1/ Non-mash sources of enzymes - not limited to the following: alpha-acetolactate decarboxylase, amylase, glucamylase, glucanase, pentosanase, protease, ficin, bromalain, papain, pepsin,
2/ Preservatives and antioxidants - sulphites, ascorbates, erythorbates, etc.
3/ Foam enhancers - Alginates - other than Irish Moss
4/ Viscosity enhancers - non-mash sources of dextrins, methylcellulose,
5/ Hop extracts containing traces of solvents like methylene chloride or hexane
6/ Non fermentable sources of colour - Caramel, tannins
7/ Other processing aids - dimethylpolysiloxane, hydrogen peroxide, Acacia gum/gum Arabic, yeast food(s) etc.

I would also like to see designated on the label:
GMO’s
Allergens - dairy, wheat, soy, nuts, sulphites, eggs
Suitability/unsuitability for vegetarians.

A little more than my '2 cents' but two cents doesn't get you much these days.

Pax.

Liam McKenna

In the absence of a defined standard developed by the OCB, C'est What stepped in with an easy to understand set of rules that will cover the vast majority of craft beer. It is not meant to be exhaustive, it is intended to promote the idea of a measure of quality that is based on the process and ingredients not the size of the brewery or its marketing budget. Think of it as the preamble to a well crafted beer law - the intent if not the content.

Much, if not all, of what you mention in terms of specifics are valid - and I hope the good people at the OCB will have this kind of healthy discussion about objective standards.

The reasoning behind the C'est What standard goes something like this:
1. Single batch single brand brewing eliminates "wort stream" beer brands. High gravity brewing/fermenting and blending are not as big an indicators of quality and could be allowed with proper indentification (an example from the whisky world is single-malt vs. vatted malt)
2. All-natural. The key part of what ingredients to allow is to actually list the ingedients for the public. Do this and the public will take care of what is acceptable or not.
3. Fresh vs. pasteurized. Beer is not pasteurized for health concerns, it is pasteurized for shelf life. It doesn't matter if you can make a decent tasting pastuerized beer, it isn't a craft method and there is no reason to do it if you are going to consume the beer fresh.
4. Canadian. Local beer is our specialty, it has nothing to do with a craft beer standard (but it is easier to find fresh, well made products)

I look forward to hearing from the OCB on this subject.

[old faithful]

While there are many excellent ideas expressed in this thread, I think it is a mistake to lay down specific standards for Ontario craft beer.

Beer is not like wine in the sense that terroir (to use a term much-discussed in its own right) does not usually determine beer's essential nature and quality, or not to the same extent. The "ur"-quality of a wine, grapes, are locally grown for any serious wine.

This is not so for beer. As Jackson wrote years ago, brewing depends on "stocked" ingredients. English beers can but do not invariably use barley grown and malted in England, for example. Ontario beers, even craft beers, use barley and hops and yeast from everywhere. Only the water is invariably local and brewing chemistry makes that less important than formerly.

I respect greatly those who hew to traditional practices but as Rob points out, a practice regarded as traditional by some (e.g., fruit additions for some beers) may not be to everyone's taste. I don't think it is clear grain adjuncts and sugars are not part of the character of some beers (think e.g. of dry stout). And as Rob again points out, even strict adherence to approved traditional practices does not mean the beer will taste good or the brewery really knows what it is doing.

To lay down specific rules either for a specific trade group or in a national law would be difficult to do and may end up being arbitrary.

I would rather an association promote good brewing practices but in a way that doesn't suggest other practices are wrong or may not produce good-tasting beer. This extends to pasteurisation, to me one might as well say refrigeration should be rejected as to ban heat-pasteurised beer from the craft or traditional category.

I am all for brewers explaining to their consumers and intended public why their beers are traditional, and let the buyers decide.

The only limits I'd place in law are those that affect health or potentially can do so on good scientific grounds. As has been pointed out, rarely if ever have additives been thought actually to endanger health. I believe even the Dow event in Quebec City in 1964 has not conclusively been linked to the additive that was used in that case (as far as I know anyway).

Brewing has gone on for a long time, on different scales, and many practices have emerged. I as an informed consumer do not feel entitled, even in the context of a voluntary trade association, to suggest which practices are craft/traditional and which are not. By all I means I am for brewing practices which many here (including me) would agree form a core of good practice. I would prefer that brewers and their groups tell people in ads and through other means why their beers deserve attention for adherence to these (or any) practices rather than laying down a given set of practices in order, say, to belong to a given association. Even more so this applies to any idea to reform national laws governing brewing ingedients.

Gary

[liammckenna]

If there was some sort of mandatory labelling requirement, I'm sure consumers would speak with their dollars and I'm also sure that brewers who use a lot of crap in our pints would have to answer a number of questions from them.

Try and think of another consumer product that you ingest to the tune of 90 kg per year that you've no clue (outside vague descriptions) of what goes into it. I can't.

I'm tired of listening to brewers large and small say 'we list our ingredients on the label' ie. malt water hops and yeast.

That's not an ingredient list like every other consumer product is forced to maintain. ALL added ingredients must be listed in descending order of weight on the label. Not just the four main ones. Exceptions are processing aids which do not appear in any form or in any quantity in the final product.

Realistically this will never be mandated with beer. Neither large nor small brewers want to endlessly explain to their consumers that calcium sulfate is just gypsum, a form of mineral salt added for various reasons to name but one example.

As has been pointed out, rarely if ever have additives been thought actually to endanger health. I believe even the Dow event in Quebec City in 1964 has not conclusively been linked to the additive that was used in that case (as far as I know anyway).

Dow brewery erroneously added too much of an allowed foam enhancer called cobalt sulphate. A dozen people died of a mysterious heart ailment (all chronic drinkers) but there was no conclusive proof that the beer was to blame. Nonetheless, the brewery closed and the additive is no longer used in any quantity. Draw your own conclusions.

Finally, I must say, that voluntary trade associations/organizations define themselves all the time through groups of acceptable practices. Certain food based organizations (think vegetarian, vegan, organic) also define based not just on practise but on ingredients. Most of these organizations are that much stronger and stable for the exercise. Most have also increased their consumer awareness coefficient immeasurably by doing so. Would love to see similar undertaking from the OCB.

All consumers are entitled to suggest whatever they like to producers at any time. Whether it be a comment on process, style, craft/traditional, ingredients or whatever. They are the ones driving this bus.

Pax.

liam