As a small coffee farmer in South Kona, I am curious to know where state Reps. Richard Onishi, Sharon Har and Sam Kong are getting their information. Is it from the large roasters and retailers on Oahu, and Victor Lim, government relations leader for the Hawaii Restaurant Association?

Rep. Har fears that increasing the percentage of Kona coffee beans in properly labeled Hawaii coffee will result in higher prices, causing restaurants to replace locally sourced coffee on their menus with more affordable blends from outside the state (“Bill would establish 51% minimum for ‘Hawaii’ coffee,” Star-Advertiser, Feb. 23).

Here on the Big Island, some, not all, restaurants already offer 100% Kona coffee on their menus. In conversations I have had with visitors to Hawaii, they have had a Kona blend at their hotel and didn’t think it was worth the cost they paid for it. But when they tasted 100% Kona coffee from one of the local coffee mills, they changed their opinion of our coffee, even when the price is now about $45 per pound for the real deal.

Rep. Onishi is not so sure that the grower is going to benefit with getting a better price. The price that I get for my coffee from the mill is determined by supply and demand. With numerous mills vying for everyone’s coffee, we have the ability to sell our coffee to whoever offers us the better price.

Victor Lim defends McDonald’s’ use of Kona blend, as its customers will notice a change (for the better) in the flavor because it has been seeing the same blend for 50 years and the cost would increase. If that is the case, McDonald’s needs to seriously review its business model if it wants to provide a high-quality product to its customers.

He also states that increasing the percentage of local beans will drive up costs for restaurants. Yes, that is true, but then, everything is increasing in price. What I find especially intriguing is Lim stating that it would also drive up costs for growers. But please, explain in detail how this will drive up my costs? Don’t just spout up scare tactics like so many of our politicians in Washington do.

A recent Star-Advertiser editorial noted that “the 10% standard is not standard. Vermont maple syrup, Idaho potatoes and French Champagne all must contain 100% of the local product to be labeled as such” (Our View, Feb. 26). By not labeling our coffee as 100% Kona or 100% Ka‘u, the only entities that benefit are the likes of large coffee roasters such as Lion Coffee, others that sell the 10% blends, and possibly politicians who accept campaign donations from these large businesses.

In talking with visitors from out of state, when they ask me about our coffee, I ask them: Do you like iced tea? Do you like lemon in your tea? What if you had 90% lemon and 10% tea — how would you describe the taste? Same thing goes for Kona coffee: When you blend it with 90% inferior coffee, the taste will be totally different.

Now is the time to pass House Bill 1517, requiring “Hawaii coffee” to have at least 51% Hawaii-grown beans. Fifty-one percent is a start; 100% would be better.

Michael Federspiel, of Captain Cook, is a small coffee farmer in South Kona.