Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Mead Lovers Digest #1428
Subject: Mead Lover's Digest #1428, 18 June 2009
From: mead-request@talisman.com
Mead Lover's Digest #1428 18 June 2009
Mead Discussion Forum
Contents:
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1427, 13 June 2009 ("Louis J. LeBlanc")
Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1427, 13 June 2009 (sid_washer@hughes.net)
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to mead@talisman.com.
Use mead-request@talisman.com for [un]subscribe andadmin requests.
Digest archives and FAQ are available at www.talisman.com/mead#Archives
A searchable archive is at http://www.gotmead.com/mldarchives.html
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1427, 13 June 2009
From: "Louis J. LeBlanc" <leblanc@keyslapper.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:59:00 -0400
> In Mead Lover's Digest #1427, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> <SNIP>
> There is nothing in that citation about distillation, or concentration,
> so it is not a definitive answer to the question at hand. I don't think
> that anyone is arguing that we can't make beer (or wine, or mead) for
> personal consumption within the quantity limits stated. I would love to
> see a definitive answer, in print, showing that we can use fractional
> crystalization to concentrate the alcohol in our mead, but this is not
> it and I have not seen it elsewhere, either. Since I, too, contacted
> the BATF and got the opposing answer I will stand behind my comments
> until I see otherwise, in print. My conversation, however, was 20+
> years ago and I do not recall the name of the person that I talked to.
> It is also possible that the interpretation of the regulations has
> changed since then, but I have seen no definitive proof of that.
You're absolutely correct, Marc, there *is* nothing about concentration. I
believe that's the point. Remember that these regulations aren't in place to
*grant* us rights, they're there to *restrict* them (hopefully only to the
extents necessary to ensure a safer society). The fact that there is nothing
about it in that citation is enough. Concentration *is* legal by the simple
fact that there are no regulations prohibiting it.
In fact, most people think this regulation makes it legal to home brew beer in
the US. That's not true. This regulation makes it *illegal* to brew more
than the specified 100 or 200 gallon limits without paying taxes.
When you concentrate something, you don't change its label. Apple juice
concentrate is still apple juice. When you concentrate beer or wine, it's
still beer or wine. When you distill beer or wine, you're winding up with a
purified quantity of spirits. Not beer or wine.
While I understand your desire for a definitive statement in legal regulations
that allows you to make ice beer, applejack, honeyjack, or whatever, I think
you'll never see that, beyond the name of someone at the TTB that did verify
its legality. Such a thing would actually be a very bad legal precedent,
implying that a citizen does not have any rights but those granted by the law.
As I understand it, this is no longer under the auspices of the ATF as of
9/11. This falls under the TTB as far as I know, so unless the person you
spoke to *did* give you an explicit citation (maybe a state law?) then I'd say
you got questionable information.
So, how about this:
http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/glossary/letter_c.html#C_18
This is from a TTB glossary page, and it *does* explicitly state that beer
concentration and reconstitution are "considered authorized practices", though
it isn't that explicit (either way) with respect to wine. It also doesn't
clarify whether this applies to home brewing or not. It's also possible this
is referring to malt extract, it's hard to be sure.
You can also see how the gov't defines "spirits or distilled spirits" by going
to http://www.ttb.gov/forms_tutorials/glossary_nf.shtml.
It's pretty obvious that sticking your 14% mead in a deep freeze and removing
1/3 of its volume is not going to meet this criteria.
So, you're obviously not under any obligation to throw your mead into a deep
freeze, but I think it's also obvious that you're not explicitly forbidden
either.
Wassail!
CYA clause: IANAL, so do your own research ... :)
Lou
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Mead Lover's Digest #1427, 13 June 2009
From: sid_washer@hughes.net
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 03:58:44 +0000 (GMT)
Hi: Is it my imagination or did somethng radical cause the change in the
masthead beginning with #1425? I'm a slow reader. bye, Sid.
------------------------------
End of Mead Lover's Digest #1428
*******************************
