Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Coachtzu t1_j29fvlp wrote

You could report if you feel so inclined. There's case law in Vermont that companies have to have real maple syrup in the product if they're going to advertise it as such.

110

Kixeliz t1_j29l5n8 wrote

Yup, McDonald's tried to pull some shenanigans with its oatmeal a decade ago, claimed maple without actually supplying anything with maple syrup in it. Franchise owners, not corporate, had to foot the bill to supply real maple sugar, because capitalism.

https://www.npr.org/2011/02/03/133456136/Vermont-To-McDonalds-Dont-Mess-With-Maple-Syrup

26

Left-Link5070 t1_j2dkm3b wrote

Right. I suspect the store will be the one bearing the cost here by having to toss the product.

3

zonitronic t1_j29x596 wrote

Not enough tar and feathers with this option.

7

vtramfan t1_j29ijru wrote

Well, it is Woodstock and that’s kinda like a suburb of Boston anyway.

66

hudsoncider OP t1_j2b18je wrote

With the amount of MA plates I saw there today I have to agree

11

Habenzy t1_j29mgcj wrote

That’s illegal! We take our maple syrup very seriously in these parts.

55

vtramfan t1_j2br48i wrote

Woodstock’s not really part of these parts anymore.

7

hudsoncider OP t1_j29fx9g wrote

Contains SUGAR, artificial flavors and artificial coloring. Distributed by a co in Louisiana. Shame on Woodstock Scoops for tricking tourists (who probably don’t read the ingredients)

39

czo79 t1_j29lzs1 wrote

I don't know, shame on them for serving fake maple, but not for tricking tourists.

33

Left-Link5070 t1_j2dk8pk wrote

I am sure you’re joking but tourist do not deserve to be scammed. Remember we are tourists when we travel elsewhere. Rich idiots deserve to be scammed. A lot of crossover, sure, but tourists are people too and the should not be targets of scams.

5

laurandorder12 t1_j2b4dtl wrote

the owners of this establishment are pretty awful tbh.

5

IndefinableMustache t1_j2bgo7o wrote

What have they done?

3

laurandorder12 t1_j2c8bi2 wrote

They consistently bullied a food truck owner who was coming to Woodstock regularly (recruited by the trustees or the select board to come during the pandemic) so much that they didn’t want to return.

They’re NIMBYs who own several businesses - the red wagon, 37 central, Hanover scoops.

14

Left-Link5070 t1_j2dkttl wrote

Can you explain more? A local business deserves a fair shake imo.

−2

Easternglow_0014 t1_j2befc3 wrote

They get you by not having "Vermont made" on the container. Because in VT you are not allowed to use their name unless you actually manufacture it in VT. Learned that from working at VT soap.

4

Sewbuttonsnsouls t1_j2dou60 wrote

But you can use the word “Vermont” such as the Vermont curry. Vermont is used just like “artisan”. I believe it’s trade marked word now?

1

ztarlight12 t1_j2dr60p wrote

Then it should say “maple flavored” somewhere on the label. Pretty sure there’s a law about that.

1

Green_Message_6376 t1_j29kaar wrote

Mmmmm Maple Syrup Adjacent Product!

Every Spring they tap the 55 Gallon drums and watch the M-Sap ooooze out.

5

zonitronic t1_j29xp2n wrote

"... Syrup Adjacent..." Best laugh I have had in a few. Thank-you for that. :D

3

Twombls t1_j29pous wrote

Its Woodstock

3

amhais t1_j2a02w2 wrote

Where is Woodstock Scoops, is that where Mountain Creamery used to be?

Either way, screw that! Like others have said, VT treats Maple products the same way that the Germans treat beer, so you can report it.

3

MizLucinda t1_j2ahrgj wrote

Nope. It’s across the street in the corner storefront that’s been periodically empty over the years.

3

vtddy t1_j2ayu7h wrote

Nothing to report as it does not say real Vermont maple syrup.

−4

andrews301xrd t1_j2b3q6w wrote

Maple laws extend beyond that, this product is clearly in violation because it does not include artificially flavored in it's title/primary label. Here's the applicable section of the the regulation:

All maple flavored products shall be clearly labeled on their principal display panel

or panels in a manner which will alert the purchaser to the fact that the product

is not a 100 percent pure maple product, in accordance with the Act and other

applicable statutes and regulations.

e. Artificial maple flavored products shall be clearly and conspicuously labeled on their

principal display panel or panels with the term "artificial flavor" shall be of a

size equal to, or larger than, other words used to describe the product. It is

unlawful to use the terms "maple syrup" or "maple sugar,” however modified, to

describe an artificially flavored product*. Any restaurant menu listing such a*

product, or any advertising of such a product shall clearly state that the product is

artificially flavored.

​

Paging Inspector Diego!

11

ThePecanRolls5225 t1_j2dimph wrote

It’s Woodstock, what do you expect. That town is exclusively for rich assholes and celebrities visiting a resort

3

BTVwifey t1_j2dpjeo wrote

Is there waffle cone in it?

2

whys0brave t1_j2dcwmy wrote

I saw a product at trader Joe's yesterday (a beverage) and it said 4 grams added sugar but none of the ingredients listed could have accounted for it.

1

hudsoncider OP t1_j2depui wrote

What product?

1

whys0brave t1_j2dshwh wrote

I can't remember exactly, but it was right in the center of the drink display on the back wall

1

conabegame1 t1_j2dlz0x wrote

Ew Also Woodstock is practically a really bad neighborhood of Boston, and it has the same number of MA plates there too

1

tracefact t1_j29nl0m wrote

Based on the photo, it appears to be a waffle cone to put your syrup in. Therefore it’s not violating the Real Maple law as it’s not claiming to be a maple product.

Hoping the bottom is plugged though or that could be a sticky mess!

−11

madamefa t1_j29rc0n wrote

It’s cotton Candy I think

8

tracefact t1_j29xss6 wrote

LOL Yes, it is. I'm just being a smart ass. Perhaps a not very funny one, but it's been a slow week for me and it made me laugh.

4

Jsr1 t1_j2a93s5 wrote

You are wrong, this is illegal per Vermont labeling law

5

tracefact t1_j2ansu3 wrote

I perhaps should have added the /s to my comment but I thought it was obvious enough it was a lame attempt at a joke.

−7

RetiscentSun t1_j2dg98t wrote

It definitely didn’t sound sarcastic. Just somebody confidently incorrect.

5

vtddy t1_j2az19x wrote

No it's not. It says maple syrup. It does not say real, pure, or Vermont so it's fine

−11