Variety as Regional Identity

At the Drink Local Wine conference in Baltimore last month one of the panels discussed the idea that Maryland should have a signature grape variety. One person said chambourcin, another said cabernet franc and yet another suggested red blends. In Europe, wine regions are known for specific varieties. Burgundy is pinot noir. Barolo is nebbiolo. Brunello is sangiovese. Of course, these identities were curated over hundreds of years, but they are also dictated by law. Outside of Europe, many other regions are also known for certain varieties. Napa is cabernet sauvignon. The Willamette Valley is pinot noir. Barossa is shiraz. Argentina is malbec. This of course is an over simplification, but these generalizations make some sense.

The reason for regional varietal identity is two-fold. First, those grape varieties reach their pinnacle in those regions. It is no coincidence that through trial and error certain varieties' environmental tolerances were found to perfectly match the environmental characteristics of specific regions. Second, having a keystone variety also gives a region something to rally around. It is easy for consumers to associate high-quality pinot noir with Burgundy, Oregon or the Russian River Valley (and vice versa). These associations help wine regions in marketing terms, and yes, marketing is an important aspect in producing the "best" wines. Not having a signature variety might mean a region has no identity.

I've long said that Colorado could make cabernet franc its signature variety for wineries to rally around. The 2013 Colorado Governor's Cup Wine Competition was held last week and not surprisingly twos cabernet francs were among only four wines to earn Double Gold medals and one of those cabernet franc was named Best in Show. In fact, last year The Winery at Holy Cross Abbey's 2009 Cabernet Franc won the Governor's Cup (no, it did not defend its title). But does having a keystone variety make sense? Do the wineries in southern Oregon appreciate the Oregon wine "brand" being pinot noir?

Outside of Europe, most regions are planted to many different varieties. Sure, the Russian River Valley is known for pinot noir, but other varieties like syrah and sauvignon blanc are grown there with great success, too. A while back I had the 2011 Gary Farrell Sauvignon Blanc.Sauvignon Blanc doesn't often come to mind when one thinks of the Russian River Valley. Yet, this was a lovely example of the variety. It was filled with citrus (more lime than grapefruit), green apples, vanilla and floral aromas and flavors. There was just a bit of the cut grass characteristic many associate with this variety, but it was barely noticeable. It is a bit pricey, at $25, but still a very nice wine.

Just last night, I drank a Napa Valley wine, but it was not a cabernet sauvignon. In fact, it was an exceptionally interesting and tasty blend of tocai friulano, ribolla gialla and chardonnay. The 2011 Massican Annia is a low-alcohol, savory alternative to Napa's full-throttle, fruity cabernet sauvignon. Sure, I often enjoy those big Napa reds, but I don't usually find them as mentally stimulating. Just thinking about why on Earth someone would grow ribolla gialla in Napa (I implore you to read the entire 7-part Ribolla Gialla University series by Lily-Elaine Hawk Wakawaka) and then blend it with tocai friulano and chardonnay when they could make more money by simply planting cabernet sauvignon makes me enjoy a wine more than just its pure hedonistic qualities. And despite what some people claim, wine is more than just hedonism.

So, in summary, I do think having a signature variety can be extremely beneficial for wine regions. But just copying another region's identity isn't going to work in today's market. At this year's Governor's Cup there were more cabernet sauvignon entries than any other variety. Yet, I don't think Colorado can be known for cabernet sauvignon when Napa and Bordeaux already have staked that claim. Cabernet franc or petit verdot (another Double Gold winner, by the way) might make sense, however. I think Colorado is ready to have a varietal identity other than fruit wines. But more importantly, I think individual wineries need to have an identity. Having brand recognition might be just as important as a regional identity. More on that idea later this week...

Ben's Bubbly: 1994 Argyle Brut

Well, we are now at three full weeks of having little Benjamin with us.  He is starting to develop a slightly predictable sleeping schedule and he is more alert and wanting to take in all of his surroundings. He is starting to fuss a little more, especially after feeding, but he has not gotten to the point of outright crying. The cats are finally returning to their normal personalities and even investigating Ben a bit more closely. While he is still very new to us, these past few weeks seem like a lifetime and five minutes at the same time.

Thinking about how new and young Ben is got me to thinking about older and aged wines. A majority of wine is meant to be consumed within a few years of its production date. Only a small portion of the world's wine actually improves in quality as it ages. Some wineries age their young wines in oak barrels to impart aromas, flavors and tannins. This process is supposed to add complexity and ageability to the wine. Nevertheless, consumers (especially Americans) often hold on to wines long past their vintage date. There are really only four ways for consumers to have access to well-aged quality wines and the additional complexity they yield. First, and most likely, is consumers buying wine when it is released and storing it in a proper temperature and humidity controlled wine cellar. Second, some wineries actually take this step for the consumer and release their wines when they are deemed drinkable. Third, sometimes retailers keep wines for an extended period of time (intentionally or not) before being bought by consumers. Finally, one might be befriend a wine aficionado who has come by a bottle, or more, of older quality wine.

Many laws governing European wine regions dictate the aging requirements of quality wines, including sparkling wines from the Champagne region of France. Multi-vintage champagne must be aged 15 months before being released, and vintage champagne must age 36 months. After it is released, it is up to the consumer on how much longer to keep the bottle before popping the cork. Given ideal conditions, such as the bottom of a sea, champagne can age hundreds of years!

While sparkling wine from the eponymous Champagne region of France is often put on a pedestal, wine regions around the world also produce bottles of bubbly. While I was perusing the shelves of an off the beaten path wine shop, I spied a bottle of a 17-year old sparkler from the Willamette Valley in Oregon. As the price sticker had probably been on the bottle since it was released, I figured that I could take a shot and give it a try. So, for this third edition of Ben's Bubbly I give you the 1994 Argyle Brut.

1994 Argyle, Brut, Willamette Valley, Oregon

Made from the traditional champagne grapes, this wine is 60% Chardonnay and 40% Pinot Noir. While the bottle does not release as much gas as younger bottles of bubbly, the wine still foams slightly as I pour it into two flutes. A slight head covers a golden, straw colored wine. Very toasty aromas dominate on the nose, but I also sense hints of caramel, nuts and even herbs. The toast is still present on the palate and pairs with golden delicious apple, orange marmalade and a hint of woody mushrooms.  While this is a nice bottle of wine, it should have been consumed more than a few years ago. The acidity has diminished and it is lacking the vibrancy and liveliness that I prefer in my sparkling wine. Perhaps I will seek out the the extended tirage bottlings from Argyle that are meant to age longer than the simple brut offering. 13% abv Purchased $18. Good (tasted 4/21/11)