Following The Chain

Following The Chain was Originally Posted on November 7, 2010 by lavarock

On the TV show CSI, they talk about a chain of custody. That is where they can show deliberate and careful paper trail or handling of evidence. Highlighted on a CSI Las Vegas episode, an official leaves a piece of evidence on the seat of his vehicle (unguarded) while he helps at an accident scene. This leads to the evidence being thrown out because anyone could have touched it.

A chain of events is when one event causes another in succession. An example might be when a golfer is hitting a ball and as he swings, is bitten by a bee. This action surprises him and his swing goes wild, causing the ball to veer into a window, breaking it and dropping into a fish bowl, where it kills a fish. It could be said that a bee caused a fish to die.

Although a somewhat silly example, it is based upon the butterfly theory where the flap of a butterfly’s wings might make a dramatic change to the weather. The idea was spawned when a meteorologist was entering data in the computer and rather than enter a value as .506127 he shortened it to .506 and his rerunning of a weather simulation came out completely different. He realized that a change at an initial point, however small, might make a large difference later on.

Imagine being off in the desert with nothing but sand around you for miles. If you were initially facing a distant point, yet were off by just one small part of a degree, miles later you would be off by feet, then yards, then miles. Astronomers must figure this into their equations and be able to make small midcourse corrections.

Now back on the idea of a chain of events. Recently, Colehour Bondera, vice-president of the Kona Coffee Farmers Association, was in Italy when Giuseppe Alai, president of the Parmigiano-Reggiano Consortium, presented him with the fourth Parmigiano-Reggiano International Award. The award is “presented every two years to a traditional product from another country that shares the characteristics of geographical indication products, expresses its territory of origin, is under attack from fakes and has an organization that is seeking to protect it.”

Colehour’s trip was sponsored by the Kona Coffee Farmers Association, which was created by concerned farmers including myself and Colehour and our neighbors. The reason for creating the group was that the previous group we were members of was taken over by a group of business men who did not like us constantly pushing for 100% Kona Coffee. Their reason was that they blend Kona with 90% foreign coffee, legally call it a Kona Blend and the public does not understand that this is not what Kona Coffee really tastes like.

The ability to create a 10% blend is allowed by the state and we farmers have tried fighting that for decades, however the legislature has continued to allow it because the blenders bring in large amounts of money to the state (and perhaps large donations to the legislators).

The 10% idea came decades ago when there was a big problem with the coffee crop and it was feared that farmers here would go bankrupt. The legislature at the time was asking for 50% but the blenders and producers (not the farmers) pushed for and got 10%. This helped them to make a larger profit. A number of people feel that 10% was also chosen because 10% and 100% look similar when printed on the package.

Even though the crop recovered and prospered since then, the 10% stands and is a massive profit item for blenders.

Hawaii is the only place in the world, which produces coffee AND allows foreign unroasted coffee to be imported. The import is done to create the blends and is imported to the state rather than mainland. This allows blenders to roast the mix here, package it and sell to unsuspecting visitors. With 90% foreign coffee in the bag, it can carry the KONA name on the label (however the word blend must also be added).

Recently, a coffee cherry beetle has been found it will effect production. The USDA does not think it came into the state via imported green coffee and they MAY be correct, however we don’t know. The Kona Coffee farmers Association (of which Colehour is representing) is now asking for a green coffee import ban until the facts are known.

Although the “other” coffee group and the blenders say they are very concerned, you have to remember history and how much profit the blenders made when the last problem with the crop surfaced decades ago.

A somewhat interesting fact is that one of blenders (the one who boasts that he sells more “Kona” than anyone) has products on the self in Target. Recently I counted 45 rows of his blend and 2 rows of his 100% Kona there and that seems constant shelf practice for him.

He now represents two of the four coffee companies who, decades ago, kept the farmers from trade marking the name “Kona” for roasted coffee. The trademark only refers to green, unroasted coffee. Had the trademark gone through, blenders would not be able to say their coffee was Kona or use Kona perhaps in the name of a company that did not produce a real Kona product.

By the way, one of those two companies started out over 100 years ago and was accused of adulterating coffee beans by spraying them with things to make the beans heavier (and thus cost more).

One of the four companies, Kona Kai, is now out of business and the owner (perhaps still) is in jail for selling coffee marketed as Kona yet having no Kona in it.

As a side note, if you want to experience REAL KONA COFFEE, I suggest you buy it directly from the farm where it was grown. That way no “industry” needs to be in the middle to affect the product.

A good place to find a farm is to log into the Kona Coffee Farmers Association website at http://konacoffeefarmers.org. That group is not run by blenders nor large corporations, but just by farmers whose coffee income comes from their own farm.

So from events decades and perhaps a century ago, Colehour travels to Italy to accept an award. It will be interesting to see what events the simple acceptance of an award may spawn.