It鈥檚 been a perennial question for Hawaii lawmakers: how to protect coffee products grown in Hawaii from cheap imitators composed mostly of coffee grown elsewhere but still sold with labels like 鈥淜ona blend.鈥
Now, two bills — and — are moving through the Legislature that would tighten label requirements for coffee products bearing Hawaii place names like Kona. To be labelled with a place name like 鈥淜ona,鈥 “Ka鈥檜鈥 or another region, the product would have to contain at least 51% coffee from the region.
The law now lets coffee sellers get by with a scant 10%.
One bill applies to roasted coffee, the other to ready-to-drink beverages like refrigerated iced-coffee drinks.
State Rep. Richard Creagan, the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee who sponsored both bills, said past efforts have been stalled by the typical things that kill legislation: deep-pocketed opposition, power struggles and personality conflict among lawmakers, to name a few.
But this session might be different, he said.
鈥淭here鈥檚 a lot of sense that this is the year it鈥檚 going to pass, that it鈥檚 going to move,鈥 said Creagan, whose district includes a number of Kona coffee farms.
There鈥檚 certainly plenty of support. Dozens of coffee producers and individuals have testified in favor of the measures.
Contact Key Lawmakers
Rep.Richard Creagan
repcreagan@capitol.hawaii.gov
808-586-9605
Among the more outspoken proponents is Hawaii County Council member Rebecca Villegas, whose district includes the Kona coffee growing region. The Kona coffee brand carries significant cache with consumers, she said. And it simply makes no sense to allow the regional designation to be used for a product containing just one-tenth Kona coffee.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 know of anyone who says, 鈥楴o, we should keep the percentage at 10%,’鈥 she said.
Past efforts have been blocked not so much by the small Kona coffee farmers, but by coffee sellers who ship in coffee from elsewhere, blend it with small amounts of Hawaii-grown coffee, and package the product as Hawaii brands.
., for instance, describes itself as the world鈥檚 largest Kona coffee roaster. But it also imports green beans from elsewhere, roasts and packages them and sells them as Hawaii brands, like聽, or blended with 10% coffee from Kona or other Hawaii sources.
Villegas said such companies have had the money and influence to fight tougher labeling laws even as they benefited from Kona coffee鈥檚 prestige. The proposed laws would protect the Kona brand and help local farmers, she said.
鈥淭he only people who claim it would be a hardship are those that have grown accustomed to not being fully transparent and mislabeling what their product really is,鈥 she said.
In truth, this session, nobody has argued much against the changes. The only testimony in opposition, from the Hawaii Coffee Association, called for tightening a definition to make clear that 鈥減repackaged coffee鈥 means 鈥減repared鈥 coffee.
Other States Have Much Stricter Labeling
One argument for tougher labeling laws is that other states do a better job of protecting food and agricultural products. And compared to other state laws, Hawaii鈥檚 proposed 50% standard is modest.
, for instance, 鈥淰ermont maple syrup鈥 has to be produced 100% in Vermont. 鈥淚daho potatoes鈥 , and it鈥檚 not OK even to imply otherwise on the label if it鈥檚 not true. 鈥淰idalia onions鈥 in Vidalia, Georgia. 鈥淲isconsin cheese鈥 in Wisconsin.
And not only does 鈥淭ennessee whiskey鈥 ; it also has to be made a certain way — filtered through maple charcoal and aged in new, charred oak barrels.
Wine is so important, meanwhile, that the U.S. Congress has stepped in. Federal law that names of wine-growing regions can be used on labels only if at least 75% of the wine in the bottle comes from those places. But lawmakers in California have supplemented the federal law with tougher standards to protect .
While the labeling bills may be moving ahead, an even tougher law pushed by the coffee farmers may be stalling. That measure would ban the importation of unroasted, green coffee beans into Hawaii. Farmers say such a law is needed to close a loophole in federal law and protect Hawaii crops from invasive species like coffee leaf rust.
The House Agriculture Committee the House version of the bill, while the Senate has yet to schedule a hearing on the
Villegas said blenders could still import coffee into Hawaii; they simply would have to roast it first to help prevent introducing pests with the potential to devastate one of the state鈥檚 most valuable cash crops.
鈥淚t seems preposterous to me that that would be killed,鈥 she said.
鈥Hawaii鈥檚 Changing Economy鈥澛 series is supported by a grant from the聽聽as part of its CHANGE Framework project.
Sign up for our FREE morning newsletter and face each day more informed.
Support Independent, Unbiased News
Civil Beat is a nonprofit, reader-supported newsroom based in 贬补飞补颈驶颈. When you give, your donation is combined with gifts from thousands of your fellow readers, and together you help power the strongest team of investigative journalists in the state.
About the Author
-
Stewart Yerton is the senior business writer for 天美视频. You can reach him at syerton@civilbeat.org.