Monthly Archives: January 2020

The Truth in Wine Labels

20 Monday Jan 2020

Posted by musingsonthevine in Wines

≈ 2 Comments

*(Author’s Disclaimer: This article is not meant to imply that Nielson has done anything misleading or underhanded in the production or sale of its Santa Barbara County Pinot Noir. The wine conforms in all ways to the legal bottling requirements for what is listed on the label. My use of the Nielson label in no way constitutes a criticism or endorsement of the wine or winery, nor does this article in any way seek to positively or negatively influence a reader’s impression of Nielson, or Byron wines. The article is an educational piece meant to demonstrate how to interpret the legally-disclosed information on an American wine label.)

Anyone who has been to one of my classes has heard me talk about the legal meaning of terminology on a wine label… Our Federal Government has created certain requirements for wine labeling and additional legal definitions for terminology found on a wine label. The requirements and definitions are there, presumably to protect the consumer, or at least inform the consumer about the product they are buying.

There are seven pieces of information that are required to be displayed on a wine label in the United States:

  1. Brand Name
  2. Wine Class or Type
    • Fruit Wine, Rice Wine, Mead
    • Sparkling Grape Wine
    • Still Grape Wine (Generic, Semi-generic, Varietal)
      • Table wine (wines less than, or equal to 14% alcohol by volume)
      • Dessert Wine (wines more than 14% alcohol by volume)
      • Fortified Wine (wines more than 15% alcohol by volume)
  3. Name & Address of Bottler
  4. Alcohol Content (tolerance +/-1.5% for <14%; +/-1% for >14%)
  5. Sulfite Statement
  6. Government Health Warning
  7. Net Contents

Other important definitions, are as follows:

Place of Origin Requirements (for a place name to be listed on the label):

  • United States 100% from the named area
  • State Name (Except CA) 75% from the named state
  • California 100% from California (if so labeled)
  • AVA 85% from the named AVA
  • Specific Vineyard 95% from the named vineyard

Varietal Requirements (for a varietal to be listed on the label):

  • 75% of named varietal (90% in Oregon)

Vintage Date Requirements (for a vintage to be listed on the label):

  • 95% of the wine must originate from the listed vintage

Bottling Requirements (for bottling terms to be listed on the label):

  • Produced 75%, or more of grapes crushed
  • Made 10%, or more of grapes crushed
  • Cellared, Selected, Vinted 10%, or less of grapes crushed

The terms: “Estate Bottled” and “Grown, Produced, and Bottled By” have special defined meaning on an American wine label.

Use of these terms is limited by the following criteria:

  • The wine must list an AVA
  • The winery must be located within the listed AVA
  • The winery must have grown 100% of the grapes used to make the wine on the
    land owned or controlled by the winery within the AVA (control is defined as “a
    lease of at least three year’s duration”)
  • The winery must have crushed the grapes, fermented the resulting must and
    finished, aged and bottled the wine in a continuous press.

Other proprietary terms, such as “reserve” or “meritage” have no defined meaning.
Trademarked terms have no defined meaning.

So what does this all mean? It means that wineries can craft their labels to tell whatever story they want, so long as the seven aforementioned label items are included. It also means that you need to be astute to fully understand where marketing ends and truth begins.

I was recently out to dinner with friends and is often the case, I was asked to select a wine from the restaurant wine list. Always looking for something interesting that also appears to be a good value, I landed on a domestic Pinot Noir from Santa Barbara county.

Let’s examine and dissect the following wine label:

NielsonBlog-FrontLabel
NielsonBlog-BackLabel
*Author’s Note: The use of the Nielson Pinot Noir label in no way reflects the author’s impression of quality, but is merely used to illustrate the legal requirements and definitions of American wine labels.

For the seven required items, we have:

  1. Brand Name: Nielson (by Byron)
  2. Wine Class or Type: Table Wine
  3. Name & Address of Bottler: Nielson Wines, Santa Rosa, CA
  4. Alcohol Content: 13.5%
  5. Sulfite Statement: Present
  6. Health Warning: Present
  7. Net Contents: 750ml

Some other important terms found on this label:

  • Santa Barbara County (Legal): 85% of the grapes in this wine came from Santa Barbara County – There is no vineyard statement, therefore, we can only conclude that the wine has no specific vineyard of origin.
  • Pinot Noir (Legal): 75% of the varietal in the wine is Pinot Noir. The wine could be 100%, but legally, all we truly know is that 75% of varietal is Pinot Noir
  • Vinted and Bottled By (Legal): This statement means that no more than 10% of the grapes in the wine were actually crushed by the winery listed. In actuality, none of the grapes needed to be crushed by the winery in order to use the term “vinted.”
  • Original Vineyard Planted in 1964 (Marketing Statement): Absolutely no meaning to this statement, other than somewhere in the “history” of the winery, a vineyard was planted in 1964. There is nothing that legally connects this “original” vineyard to the wine in the bottle.
  • Primary Soils, Barrel Regime and Flavor Notes (Marketing Statement): Absolutely no meaning to these statements. While the winery may be implying that the grapes were grown in a vineyard whose primary soils were “marine-derived sediments,” there is nothing on the label to legally connect this statement to the wine in the bottle. Furthermore, the Barrel Regime is merely a statement to how long the winery held the wine and in what medium they used – in this case – 16 months in French Oak. The Flavor Notes are merely one taster’s impression of the wine and again, have no legal meaning, but may be helpful in connecting style with personal preference.

Another point that is very subtle… On the back label the name of the winery (Nielson) has a trademark symbol and then the statement “by Byron.” This tells me that the actual winery behind this bottle is Byron and they are licensed to use the Nielson name, as well as tell the story on the label. Nothing about the origins of Uriel J. Nielson in 1964 necessarily have anything to do with this wine. I’m not saying this is deceptive, but it is very shrewd marketing indeed.

So, not to be too one-sided, like any thorough wine consumer, I visited the link on the label. I found a very flashy web site that told a wonderful story about the origins of Nielson wines, specifically that the wine “pays homage to its namesake, Uriel J. Nielson, who in 1964 planted the first commercial vineyard in Santa Barbara County.” Scrolling down, I find a brief paragraph about this “Nielson Vineyard.” Their wine maker seems to be quite the adventurer, as evidenced by his feats of rock climbing.

I drill downed further into the web site to find specific information about this Pinot Noir. I found the following:

2016
This wine comes from three major Pinot Noir growing regions within Santa Barbara County, each of which is influenced by unique soil types and proximity to the Pacific Ocean. Santa Maria Valley is one of California’s coolest AVAs with well-drained soils and one of the longest growing seasons in the world, brings pretty aromatics and red fruit flavors to the wine. Slightly warmer in climate, the Los Alamos area contributes ripe dark fruit flavors. Just south of Santa Maria Valley and Los Alamos, the Sta. Rita Hills AVA, characterized by steep vineyard slopes and a distinct gravel minerality, adds power, depth and austere tannin expression.

Interesting…

So, my conclusions… Byron is actually the winery behind Nielson. This is not necessarily noteworthy – I like Byron wines and market segmentation is important in wine making. It is fairly common today for wineries to be owned by larger parent wineries or holding companies. It is a fact that wineries demand extraordinary amounts of operating capital and sometimes, small, family-owned operations struggle and seek outside investors to ease the burden somewhat. Nothing wrong with this, just important to keep in the back of one’s mind.

However, the grapes in this specific wine had nothing to do with the Nielson Vineyard so lovingly described on the web site and it is highly likely that the wine was not even made by the winemaker at Nielson. They likely purchased an already made wine, or wines, from  “three major growing regions in Santa Barbara County.” He took said wine and aged it in French oak in a storage facility, probably in Santa Rosa CA, not Santa Maria. Why Santa Rosa? Because the address on the back label states Santa Rosa. The address on the web site says Santa Maria. Santa Maria is the sexier address from a wine making perspective and the office or tasting room of the winery is in Santa Maria. However, the legal address of the wine’s bottler is Santa Rosa, as evidenced on the back label. Again, not terribly important, except you should know where the marketing ends and the actual truth begins – which was the premise when I started this article.

In closing, does any of the above matter? I guess if you like the wine and are happy paying what you pay for the wine, then all of the above can be filed under “legal arcana” and left at that. However, if you closely examine wines and try to understand linkages between soil, climate, grape growing and ultimately wine making, then this wine is a bit of an enigma. Readily available information on the wine would imply all kinds of things about vineyards, soils, climates, grape growing and wine making and yet, none of that is necessarily relevant given the legal statements on the label. Could I have written the winery or even made an attempt to speak to the wine maker himself? Sure, but they were fairly clear on the web site, even providing a PDF of wine information for my use.

That said, Nielson does produce several Pinot Noir wines from grapes grown on the Nielson Vineyard. The wines produced from these grapes are “Grown, Produced and Bottled by,” so we know that these are the real deal. However, they are between 2 and 3 times the listed price of the Nielson Santa Barbara County wine, the subject of this analysis. Again, none of this is a problem if you like the wine and don’t have an issue with the price…

Remember, I started this article by saying that the Federal Government requires and defines the statements on a wine label to “protect the consumer.” I would say they did their job, as long as you know the definitions behind the terminology.

Here endeth the lesson…

*(Author’s Disclaimer: This article is not meant to imply that Nielson has done anything misleading or underhanded in the production or sale of its Santa Barbara County Pinot Noir. The wine conforms in all ways to the legal bottling requirements for what is listed on the label. My use of the Nielson label in no way constitutes a criticism or endorsement of the wine or winery, nor does this article in any way seek to positively or negatively influence a reader’s impression of Nielson, or Byron wines. The article is an educational piece meant to demonstrate how to interpret the legally-disclosed information on an American wine label.)

A Cautionary Tale

18 Saturday Jan 2020

Posted by musingsonthevine in Wines

≈ Leave a comment

First… This post is not about Greenvale Vineyards in RI. I adore Greenvale and I think they make amazing, estate-grown wines. Their winery is a lovely place to visit – my favorite in RI actually, and the proprietor and staff are among the friendliest and most knowledgeable that I have ever met. So, even though the wine that I will talk about is a product of Greenvale Vineyards, this post is not about Greenvale…

What then is this post about? The dark side of owning a deep, deep wine cellar.

With more than thirty years of collecting, we have amassed a significant number of wines, with a total bottle count well north of 5,000 bottles. The collection is scattered across a wide palate of wines – many from regions where the wines are made to age. Inevitably, when one grows a cellar to these proportions, wines are purchased that do not have prodigious aging potential. One buys wine that one enjoys and not every enjoyable wine begs to be aged. So, lurking in the dark corners of our wine cellar are bottles that are aging into atrophy.

In October of 2013, we conducted a tasting entitled “The Lost Bottle.” The tasting consisted of a flight of wines that were uncovered during a “cleaning and reorganizing” effort. After a week of work, a case+ of wines were found that exemplified the risk of deep cellar ownership. The list of wines was as follows (dates in parentheses note purchase date):

1996 Domaine des Cassagnoles, Cotes du Gascon (4/27/1998)

1996 Chateau La Blancherie, Graves (4/27/1998)

1997 Domaine du Closel, Savennieres (7/8/2000)

1995 Francis Cotat Chavignol, Sancerre (1/31/1997)

2004 Monkey Bay, Sauvignon Blanc, Marlborough (4/23/2005)

1996 Domaine Dauvissat-Camus, La Forest, Chablis (7/4/1998)

1989 St. Clement Chardonnay, Abbott’s Vineyard (3/30/1992)

1990 Herm. Donhoff Oberhauser Brucke Spatlese Riesling, Nahe (12/28/1998)

1990 Le Bocce, Chianti Classico (11/5/1992)

1997 Ricasoli San Ripolo, Chianti Classico (3/29/2004)

1998 Ricasoli Occa Guiccarda, Chianti Classico Riserva (2/23/2005)

1998 Villa Cafaggio, Chianti Classico (10/6/2001)

1998 Domaine Celinguet, Coteaux du Languedoc (1/29/2000)

1999 Les Cailloux, Chateauneuf-du-Pape (7/2/2002)

The outcome of the event was actually far more favorable than originally anticipated, with only two of the wines tasting simply dreadful (the 1996 Domaine Dauvissat-Camus and the 1989 St. Clement, were undrinkable), and the other wines tasting decently, albeit some with that resplendent patina of age. We dodged a bullet…

Fast forward to today… As I was looking for something to have with dinner, I stumbled across a bottle of 2003 Greenvale Vineyards Cabernet Franc from the Southeastern New England AVA.

GreenvaleFront
GreenvaleBack

We visit a lot of wineries and when we visit, we tend to take home our favorites from the visit. Back in 2006, we made one of our many forays into the then burgeoning RI wine trail, which included a stop at the beautifully situated Greenvale Vineyards in Portsmouth, RI. After a few hours of tasting and being given a tour of the vineyards, we left with a few cases of our favorites – including the 2003 Cabernet Franc. I was especially pleased with the Cabernet Franc because the wine did not exhibit the usual markers of cool climate Cabernet Franc – bell pepper and green, stemmy notes. Instead the wine was very nicely balanced with dark, cherry fruit, dried herbs, cedar, vanilla and excellent structure. At the time, I noted a five year window of improvement in bottle aging – which means the peak for the wine would hit around 2010. We actually bought six bottles in September 2006. We drank bottles in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2014 and 2020. The cellar notes indicate the wine showed strongly in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, with some weakening in 2014. The last bottle we opened just recently in 2020 had this tasting note:

Herbaceous nose with hints of bell pepper, cardamom and cedar. Dried cherry and rosemary notes. Firm acidity with tired fruit. Balance is consistent with a 17 year old wine from New England, meaning there is little fruit, tight acid and almost no tannin. Pleasant but tired aftertaste with layered complexity.

This story is actually a favorable example of aging wine over a long period of time… meaning, the last bottle opened was a fitting closing chapter for the wine.

Then why is this a cautionary tale? Because deep in the corners of our wine cellar there are numerous bottles of wine that are likely at, or worse, past peak. Many of which are not the last bottle of a particular vintage. The 2003 Greenvale is a wake up call that a careful, re-assessment of the cellar is in order. If for no other reason then to prioritize the drinking of certain bottles. Recognizing that there will be too many to consume before their fated end.

As has been said at almost every Musings event – the assessment of a bottle’s aging potential is far more art (read “swag” – silly, wild ass guess) than science and part of the beauty in having a wine cellar is to watch wines grow, develop, age and eventually pass. It is the cycle of life in a bottle – the constant reminder that nothing is permanent and that from whence we came, so too shall we return…

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • August 2019
  • February 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • November 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011

Categories

  • Cocktails
  • General
  • Restaurants
  • Spirits
  • Uncategorized
  • Wine Events
  • Wines

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • blog.musingsonthevine.com
    • Join 35 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • blog.musingsonthevine.com
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...