I wanted to post Terry Hall's response out here, in the light of day, because the Association deserves an opportunity to respond to what was a strongly worded condemnation by me. My response to Terry's well presented reply follows below.

Tom, ouch, Ann Coulter?? You apparently have strong feelings about the topic of Calistoga Cellars, but the NVV’s premise is not to single out one brand, but for there to be truthful wine labeling for consumers and fair play for wineries to all play by the same rules. The notion of grandfathering brands came to an end more than twenty years ago. And, while you portray a big guy vs little guy or underdog scenario, this logic is flawed. The Napa Valley Vintners is a trade association representing more than 300 wineries in the Napa Valley, about 2/3rds of which are as small, or smaller, than Calistoga Cellars. More than 90% of all Napa Valley wineries are family-owned businesses. Additionally, these rules proposed by the TTB are opposed by nearly every winery trade association in the U.S., the California State Farm Bureau, the California Dept of Food and Agriculture, wine retailers both on- and off-premise from across the country, along with Congressman Mike Thompson (D-St Helena), Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), and Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA).

Rules regarding truth in wine labeling in the U.S. go back to the Federal Alcohol Act of 1937. Additionally, the wine industry has been on notice since 1986 when new rules were established regarding grandfathering of brands after the establishment of the AVA system. The NVV believes that all brands, Calistoga Cellars included, must follow the same guidelines for brand identity that have been outlined in the TTB’s Beverage Alcohol Manual (BAM) for the past 12 years and which were open to comment for three years prior to that. In the BAM, it states that a brand is essentially on notice if a brand takes the name of a place of geographic significance and if the geographic place becomes an AVA that brand must then abide by the rules of the AVA. The BAM defines “geographic significance” as being two or more reference to the place as a significant grape growing region in wine reference books. One cannot pick up a book on Napa Valley written over the past 150 years without a reference to Calistoga.

The TTB may be at fault for not ensuring that Calistoga Cellars was fully aware of its guidelines, but Calistoga Cellars was also at fault for either not doing its homework or taking a calculated risk they should not have. The TTB Administrator John Manfreda was questioned before the House Ways and Means Committee on Oversight on May 20 where he came under fire for not following his bureau’s own guidelines when approving Calistoga Cellars. Soon after the hearing, the TTB simply “unplugged” the rulebook from the website as if it no longer existed. Rules that everyone else in the industry had followed for 15 years were, oops, no longer viewable. Not to be a conspiracy theorist, but I offer that the stink you smell is coming from someplace else.

Furthermore, if the name Calistoga was insignificant to the Calistoga Cellars folks, then why did they not call the brand by a family or fanciful name? They obviously felt there was cache in the name. Though you write, “Of all the common place names in the Napa Valley appellation Calistoga has the least prestige,” I would offer names like Chateau Montelena and Araujo among others as proof of names synonymous for quality from Calistoga.

For clarification you should know that the TTB has the right to revoke their name in just such a situation as this, and you should be aware that the NVV has offered to help Calistoga Cellars negotiate a phase-in period with the TTB so they could come under compliance. Growers in the AVA have offered to satisfy grape supplies as well. Everyone from the Chamber of Commerce to the City, and so on, has offered to help Calistoga Cellars comply with the AVA as it was intended.

The fight for consumer truth in labeling is paramount as we take our industry’s responsibilities seriously. America is poised to be the largest wine consuming economy in the world, consumers deserve to know where their wines are from in an honest and forthright way.

And though it is easy to toss out the number and say they have ten years invested in the brand and now the NVV takes notice, that’s just a broad oversimplification and you know better than that. One gets a business name, a few years later the winery releases its first wine, the AVA petition process was underway at the same time and was petitioned in 2004, all of this was in tandem and Calistoga Cellars knew it was coming all along, they had options, they gambled. This isn’t exactly “ripping the name away from them.”

But for the record, the rulemaking is not Napa-centric, it threatens the integrity of the American wine industry and its effects will be far-reaching, not the least of which will be in international trade and in ongoing wine place protection worldwide. The U.S. wine industry is very young in comparison to our European counterparts, but we are trying to do the right thing and respect place of origin. Does Pommerol as a sub-appellation of Bordeaux seem silly? The whole process is evolution, so the goal is to play fair and build upon our successes for the sustainability and credibility of our industry. Are the existing rules perfect, no, but we have been moving forward for more than twenty years, avoiding grandfathering mis-descriptive brand names and giving greater credibility to the American wine industry.
____________________________________________________________

Terry,

That was a great reply and I appreciate the fact that you took the time.

Can we expect every single brand in the NV that is associated with a place name to come under the same scrutiny by Napa Valley Vintners, whether they use the Rutherford, Oakville, Mt. Veeder, Atlas Peak, Stag's Leap, Carneros, St. Helena or Howell Mountain place names? I hope so.

I'd also like to hear why the "District" solution, as applied in Stags Leap and Spring Mountain can't be applied in this case.

And I must reiterate a couple things. Accusing Calistoga Cellars of "Purposefully" trying to deceive the public is as wrong as gets. Let me suggest that if the owners of Calistoga Cellars wanted to take advantage of a well known appellation for the sake of deceiving consumers into thinking their wines were more prestigeous than they might be, they could have chosen a better place name to do the trick. But to answer your question as to why the owners didn't call their winery something more "fanciful" and instead opted to use the "Calistoga" name in their brand, well, maybe it was because their property was LOCATED IN Calistoga.

And of course, what about Howell Mountain Vineyards, which makes a chardonnay from southern Napa? What about Rutherford Hill's Pope Valley Sangiovese? What about the Spring Mountain and Howell Mountain Cabs produced by Atlas Peak Winery. Is NVV prepared to condemn these wineries as they've condemned Calistoga Cellars for puposefully misleading the consumer? Are they prepared to do it the same public way? I hope so. Consistency is everything.

Finally, I remain unconvinced that Calistoga Cellars did anything wrong. They should not be punished for following the rules or for the TTB making what might have been the wrong decision, discretionary as it was. It strikes me that NVV is trying to punish CC too late in the process. If this issue was so important, where was NVV when CC was petitioning the TTB? And let's not pretend that by stealing CC's brand equity, there will be no harm done or that it won't cost CC anything. Ask any winery that has been around for a decade what it would cost to change their name and turn their business plan around.

I'm hoping that NVV will show the same sagacity it has shown in so many other matters. I hoping it will withdraw its opposition to the grandfathering proposition, work with CC and other wineries to adopt a statement concerning place names, and move on to making sure the issue of sub appellations is properly addressed by the TTB.

Finally, I would like to officially retract the "Ann Coulter" remark. It was out of line. However, I reserve the right to keep it in my pocket for future use in case the Napa Valley Vintners are ever found to have feasted on small children or slayed puppy dogs for entertainment purposes.

Let me say right off the bat, I think the Napa Valley Vintners are a remarkable trade association that has done a better job than any other such association in representing the wineries that make up their organization. I've done work for the Napa Valley Vintners too. And I know the folks over there as well as numerous members.

That said, the NVV's latest attempt to demonize Calistoga Cellars STINKS to high heaven!

A couple hours ago I received a press release from NVV that contained a position statement the Vintners took late last year in the controversy surrounding place name and brand names. In that document the Napa Valley Vintners accused Calistoga Cellars of marketing and selling wines with "purposefully misleading labels, leading consumers to believe their wines are from grapes grown in certain appellations or winemaking regions, when they are not."

I'm the last person who would criticize an advocate for using strong rhetoric. I like strong rhetoric. But strong rhetoric does require one small element to work: IT MUST BE TRUE. The Napa Valley Vintners rhetoric in their position statement simply isn't true. And you have to wonder, what kind of case do they have to make when they choose not to rely on the truth.

The facts of this case can be found in THIS BLOG POST.

But to note the facts of this controversy again:

1. Calistoga Cellars has been using its brand name since 1998.

2. Napa Valley Vintners did not lodge a protest when Calistoga Cellars was founded or when it first made wine from Napa Valley grapes the didn't happen to be grown in or around the town of Calistoga

3. In 1998 there was no legal requirement that demanded Calistoga Cellars make wine only from Calistoga-grown grapes in order to use that brand name.

4. In 1998 there wasn't even a legally defined growing region called "Calistoga", which I suppose there would have been had the region possessed anything like the kind of viticultural significance that resulted in other areas of Napa Valley receiving American Viticultural Area status.

5. In 2005 a petition was submitted to create an official growing region called "Calistoga"

6. If the new growing region (called an AVA) is approved, it would force Calistoga Cellars to change its business model or its name. The newly created region would force any winery using "Calistoga" in its name to source 85% of its grapes from this new region.

7. The Federal department that oversees AVAs, the TTB, suggested that wineries using the "Calistoga" name in their brand before March 31, 2005, be grandfathered in and allowed to continue making wine that doesn't meet the new requirements that were also not in place when Calistoga Cellars was founded.

The Napa Valley Vintners have put their full weight behind the idea that Calistoga Cellars should be stripped of the rights it has had for a decade, and with no compensation whatsoever. They've been able to get a resolution through the California Senate urging that the TTB's wise compromise on the grandfathering of Calistoga Cellars be rejected. The Napa Valley Board of Supervisors sent a letter on behalf of the Napa Valley Vintners to the TTB urging that the TTB's wise compromise on the grandfathering of Calistoga Cellars be rejected.

This issue has come up before with wineries in Napa Valley. Wineries with "Stag's Leap" and "Spring Mountain" in their names were named after areas inside Napa Valley. To avoid any problems when these areas became AVAs just like is being proposed for Calistoga, they added the word "District" to the name of the AVAs a la "Stag's Leap District" and "Spring Mountain District". The owner of Calistoga Cellars, sagely, suggested they do the same with "Calistoga", making the new AVA "Calistoga District" and thereby solving this controversy in the same way other controversies of the type have been settle.

The vintners rejected this proposal. Why? Why is this solution good for some wineries and regions in Napa Valley but not for all of them? Adding "District" to the proposed new name of the Calistoga AVA is the proper way to deal with this issue. It was done in Stag's Leap and with Spring Mountain. If Napa Valley Vintners is gong to demand this solution not be applied to this controversy, then they should have the cajones to take a consistent and principled stand by demanding that Spring Mountain Winery and the two "Stags Leap" wineries only use grapes from those regions in their wines. Think they will? I don't.

Instead, the Napa Valley Vintners have adopted an unprincipled, FU approach to the problem, telling Calistoga Cellars essentially to do one of the following very costly things:

1. Change the business plan you've had in place for a decade and that no one objected to early on and now only buy grapes from within the area planned to be called "Calistoga".

2. Go to the expense of changing the name of your winery all together, a choice that could easily kill any number of wineries were they forced to do the same

3. Start an entirely new brand for those wines that, though they are made from Napa Valley grapes, aren't made from Calistoga grapes.

So here is the big question: WILL THE NAPA VALLEY VINTNERS PAY CALISTOGA CELLARS TO MAKE ANY OF THESE CHANGES OR WILL THEY CONTINUE TO PLEAD WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND WHINE THAT THE RULES THAT DIDN'T EXIST TEN YEARS AGO SHOULD BE RETROACTIVELY APPLIED TO CALISTOGA CELLARS?

Little Calistoga Cellars has hired a Washington, D.C.-based PR firm to make their case to the TTB in Washington. I hope they win their case going way. I wish they'd have hired Wark Communications to carry out a communications campaign aimed at  the wine industry. THAT would have been fun if only because one rarely has the opportunity to take ground so high that everyone else looks like snakes when from your vantage point and its so easy to offer a hand to anyone who wants to look at the issue from your higher vantage point.

There are not very many people standing up for Calistoga Cellars, a company that might be in the process of being bent over so hard by the wine industry that they won't feel a thing for a year. When did principles go by the wayside at trade organizations? When did the Napa Valley Vintners decide to take their cues on how to act from the likes of the Wine & Spirit Wholesalers Association, The Swift Boaters and Ann Coulter?

Here's the principle that should be adopted:

You don't wait ten years after a winery has been authorized to use a brand name to rip that brand name away from them. Whether it was right or wrong to let a winery use a place name in their brand name, the objection that comes ten years after the brand name is granted comes ten years too late. And before stripping away the brand name that was applied for in good faith and granted in good faith, you look for other alternatives to fix the problem. And if you choose not to take this principled route, then you compensate the people who you are purposely trying to ruin and drive out of business for the benefit of others.

I'm every bit as strident as Representative Thompson, Bo Barrett of Montelena and others in Napa Valley when it comes to the idea that  American Viticultural Area designations we see on labels really should have integrity! If the wine label's appellation says "Oakville" or "Anderson Valley" then the grapes that went into the wine damn well should have come from Oakville or Anderson Valley.

Toward that end, there is a move to designate the area in and around the town of Calistoga in Northern Napa Valley as an American Viticultural Area. If approved, when a winery puts "Calistoga" on its label, the consumer will know the grapes for that wine were grown in the well-delineated region identified by law as the Calistoga Viticultural Area (whatever that might imply beyond the obvious is up for debate).

However, in a nice piece of reporting by the St. Helena Star, we are reminded that there are an awful lot of folks who in creating this new AVA, have no problem effectively destroying a couple wineries that have been using the term "Calistoga" in the their brand name...WELL BEFORE there was any hint of a Calistoga Viticultural Area. This is wrong.

"Calistoga Cellars owner Roger Louer of St. Helena has been using the Calistoga brand for years and contends he would lose millions of dollars if he is forced to give up the label. He also sees no point in using Calistoga grapes since he owns vineyards in St. Helena and throughout the Napa Valley."

The contention among those that have little concern about the wineries that, up until now, have been building a business called Calistoga Cellars and Calistoga Estate is that with the new AVA coming these wineries should not be allow to use this brand unless all the grapes they use in their wines come from Calistoga based vineyards.  But no one every suggested this was a requirement when they founded their winery or when they applied for label approvals. Still, the strident don't seem to care about this unfair backdating of the laws.

"[CA Rep. Mike] Thompson said [John] Manfreda (head of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB)) once suggested that Calistoga Cellars and Calistoga Estates might be allowed to print a “disclaimer” on its bottles, exposing the fact that the wine did not come from Calistoga.

Thompson said that wouldn’t solve the problem of false labeling because consumers who buy wine in restaurants off wine lists, see it advertised, read wine reviews and catalogs and use the Internet, would draw the conclusion the wine is from Calistoga."

With all due respect to Representative Thompson, only those who don't understand Americas AVA system would conclude this. All labels must carry a federally approved AVA on their label saying where the grapes came from. The label might read, "2005 Calistoga Cellars, Russian River Valley, Pinot Noir".

The bottom line here is that many in Napa Valley and their representative in Congress want to take away what was legally given to these Calistoga wineries. They have and still do have the right to have the "Calistoga Cellars or Estate brands. They were approved. The labels themselves were federally approved. And now, after the fact, the creation of a new Calistoga AVA means they can no longer use the brand names they've built or they have to completely change their entire business model.

The sensible, the neighborly, the right thing to do is to make an exception for "Calistoga Brands" that were in existence before the application for a Calistoga AVA was submitted. Or, someone should be monetarily compensating these winery owners using now legally using "Calistoga" in their brand name for the theft of equity that is being suggested.

WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD?

Napa Valley Vintners
"The question is not why the chicken crossed the road, but how much we can charge for a taste of that chicken."

Constellation CEO
"We are very confident that upon finally crossing the road, the chicken will fit in perfectly to our growing 'Across The Road' portfolio of chickens."

The Wine Spectator
Non Vintage Chicken—The Road
"This is a superb effort by the chicken that we haven't seen in a number of crossings. A lovely blend of supple movement and a robust gate propelled chicken across the street and to a finishing hop upon a smooth, well delineated sidewalk." 94 Points

Randy Dunn
"The chicken has gone completely overboard. This isn't a real crossing. It's a simple, fat dash that is one dimensional. It's time for the chickens to get back to making elegant, balanced crossings."

Gary Vaynerchuk
"Because we're changing the chicken world!!! One Crissy Cross at a time!!"

Wine Distributor
"The Chicken just wants to tear down the system. If the Chicken gets his way and continues to cross the street we'll see more chicks just get run over. I don't think that's what American Chickens want."

Robert Parker, Jr.
"I can't say why the chicken crossed the road. I've not been to a chicken crossing in that region since I was asked not to come there anymore by a number of chickens that didn't appreciate my appraisals of their crossings. However, I will be adding a new chicken crossings reviewer to the staff of the Chicken Advocate because our readers deserve thorough and expert coverage of crossings on that region."

The Publicist
"We wanted to create the greatest crossing ever! Our chicken is dedicated to hands-on crossings that highlight the terroir of the road. This is by far the finest crossing the chicken has ever offered."

The Wine Blogger
I don't care why the chicken crossed the road. I just blog about it for my own pleasure and to try to make chicken crossings more accessible to the average chicken. Before bloggers appeared on the scene the mainstream press ignored the average chicken crossing and focused only on Roosters. Bloggers are taking back Chicken Crossings and putting them in the hands of the chickens again!"

Jonathan Nossiter, Director of Mondovino
It's the same old crossing—bland, simple, undistinctive. This chicken doesn't care about the character of the crossing. It merely wants to get to the other side and it's the kind of crossing that destroy the distinctive regional character that has defined chicken crossings for centuries.

UPDATE:

Inertia Beverage Group
"We don’t care why the chicken crossed the road, we just want to help that chicken cross it faster, more efficiently, and more profitably.”

Jeff Stai, Twisted Oak
Because that's where the rubber (chicken) meets the road.

Roshambo does do things differently. As is almost always the case, this difference is purely a result of the disposition of those who run the joint. Naomi Brilliant and her partner Scott Keneally simply don't think the way other vintners do. And while working in the same wine industry as other vintners, their approach to working that industry is different too. Here is a perfect example of that difference:

I really would like to see more wineries go outside the box. This is a regular refrain, this request for something different. But there does seem to be a wine marketing template that is closely adhered to by nearly every winery in America. I admit to contributing to the maintenance of that template. That's a shame too. But what's interesting and significant about Roshambo's unique approach to marketing wine is how they motivate and encourage others to take a similarly irreverent approach to wine. Witness this "60 Second Weekend" VideoCast produced by the Santa Rosa Press Democrat concerning the recently completed Roshambo Rock, Paper Scissors Competition

You must love this!! And you should reward the folks at Roshambo with multiple wine purchases...particularly their 2006 Dry Creek Valley THE OBVIOUS Sauvignon Blanc.

All photos by Jen Maiser.

On Saturday, I went to Craft Gym because Lotta Jansdotter was in town hosting a printing party in honor of her new book.  It was a blast to be surrounded by so much color and creativity, and fun to see so many designs.  Not only did Lotta use her own stencils for this (free) event, but she has several stencils in the book -- a very generous move on her part. I am looking forward to trying out some printing projects at home.

Is it true that wine blogging is changing the wine writing genre?

Of course it's true. This medium, blogging, has become the medium of choice for those that want to say something about wine. It has also attracted a notable number of traditional wine publishers as well as respected wine writers. Blog reviews of wine sell the product. Wine Blogs often break important wine-related stories. They even have the potential to set the agenda as to what is being discussed and thought out with earnest among members of the wine community.

So, it should be no surprise that Wine Bloggers from across the country will be gathering to discuss their place in the world at:

THE FIRST ANNUAL WINE BLOGGERS CONFERENCE

Organized by Open Wine Consortium and Zephyr Adventures, this first conference is set for October 24-26 in Santa Rosa, California in Sonoma County. Initial sponsors include The Sonoma County Tourism Bureau, Inertia Beverage Group, Sebastiani Vineyards, Cruvee, the Sonoma County Vintners Association, and the Sonoma Wine Grape Commission. And this is just the start

(Anyone wanting to help sponsor this Bloggers Conference, simply contact me!)

This is the first time that wine bloggers from across the country have had the opportunity to gather together. And this seems odd in a way. The wine blogging community is a somewhat tight group despite the fact that there are hundreds of us communicating with tens of thousands (millions?) of wine lovers and the wine curious.

There is a lot that wine bloggers could and will benefit from discussing face to face:
-Journalistic ethics
-Monetizing their blogs
-Strategies to expand their audience
-Using blogging to bring change to the industry
-New tools for wine bloggers
-The potential of wine blogger networks to expand an audience
-Moving from the blog format to traditional journalism
-How best to interact with publicists
-Using your blog to promote your business
-How to best communicate reviews of wine

The list is long.

I'll most certainly be at this first Wine Bloggers Conference. My real hope is that it attracts a huge gathering of bloggers and others interested in wine blogging. I hope the event will draw attention to this new medium for wine writers. I hope it will spur wineries and others in the wine industry to think hard about the impact that blogging has on their businesses.

NOW...GO SIGN UP!!

H U G E  congratulations go out to Grape Radio and Wine & Spirits Magazine. Both were award winners at the 2008 James Beard Awards.

Grape Radio won BEST WEBCAST for their "Stewards of the Land" broadcast hosted by Jay Selman, Brian Clark and Eric Anderson. This comes on the heels of their being chosen best Wine Podcast/Video Blog at the American Wine Blog Awards. These guys have produced high quality, very serious work since launching Grape Radio...way back when? Seems like it's been around for a very long time.

Wine & Spirits Magazine won (again!) for BEST WRITING ON SPIRITS, WINE & BEER with David Darlington's "Post Modern Deliciousness: The World According to Clark Smith", from the April 2007 issue. Darlington, best known for his book, Angels' Visit, has regularly published his work in W&S. The Magazine itself has published numerous James Bear Award Winners, testament surely to the outstanding editing at this magazine.

Guys like George Clooney. Well, they like what George Clooney portrays.

First, he always gets the girl. He is, in fact, the only guy on my wife's laminated card and I suspect he's on just about every over 35 married woman's laminated card.

Second, he's a very good dude. That is, he's the kind of guy that other guys would like to hang with and watch a boxing match, play some golf, lie about woman with or watch some football with.

Third, Clooney looks great without looking foppish or too put together...the kind of appearance most men want desperately to be able to pull off.

BUT...you never see him or his characters drinking wine and enjoying it, let alone talking about. We in the wine industry need George Clooney to portray a girl-getting, good looking dude in a blockbuster wherein he also makes wine drinking and appreciating wine look like the coolest thing since single malt scotch.

In this never-to-be-made blockbuster, while getting the girl, hanging out with his dudes, wearing really finely cut sports jackets, Khakis and mock turtles, while bantering very wittily and while embarking on a one-man crusade to take down some foppish, powerful jerk that kicked his dog, Clooney also needs to display an independent passion for wine that is in no way dependent on ratings and numbers, but born of palate confidence a knowledge of wine's history, lots of experience drinking and collecting the stuff, while being not quite—but almost—obsessed with the drink.

While taking on the Dog-Kicker, Clooney (the brilliant guy who dropped out of grad school to work for the CIA to save the world but got disillusioned and started his own private detective agency and is very happy not using his brilliance but rather catching cheating wives and tracking down insurance cheats) needs to hang with buddies like Dennis Leary (the rich banker buddy), Ray Liotta (The adulterous, former high school football star buddy) and Viggo Mortensen (best friend and rising star in some clandestine government intelligence agency). They get together often and there's always wine involved. For example, while they are fishing on Viggo's boat and before our hero explains he's about to commit an illegal deed to finally take revenge on the Dog Kicker, Clooney pulls out some bottle and says something like, "Boys, behold the pride of the Rhone—it's great juice that will caress your tongue more fully than Maggie Feinstein used to back at Garrison High—and the great thing is, no one will call you desperate for putting your tongue down deep into this beauty!" And they proceed to drink the wine, talk a little about it without ever using wine-geek words while reminiscing about Maggie, her tongue and Ray Liotta's unpleasant memory of tripping on the five yard line, not making into the end zone to win the state championship and how his life went down hill ever since.

Wine needs George Clooney desperately.

There is nothing like pop culture to revitalize ideas, provoke curiosity among the masses, or take a niche product and turn it into a phenomenon. If you think wine is more than a niche product, then show me the placard adorning the side of a football stadium that advertising Merlot.

I don't think the upcoming movies about the Judgment of Paris is going to do for wine or Napa Valley what Sideways did for Pinot Noir. I could be wrong. But I don't think so.

The key to bringing wine from niche to mainstream is turning men from beer to wine. That means reinventing the image of wine from a rich man's indulgence to something ruggedly cool. I'm not talking "beer rugged" where the drink simply becomes an easy to drink alcohol-delivery vehicle conveniently bottled in easy-to-swig, hand-fitting vessels. Rather, wine needs to be transformed into a different kind of idea; something that the generally self-conscious American male can pick up and drink and not be accused of going soft.

Wine Needs George Clooney.

George, if you read Fermentation e-mail me...we'll work on the script together. Plus, I think I can get you some really great wine out of the effort!

I have a hard time stepping back and trying to appreciate how the average wine drinker will react to articles that examine what it means to rate a wine on a 100 points scale and the consequences of powerful critics. Do they even care? Do they note the headline then quickly move on to something else out of boredom the way I do when I see headlines concerning the mental state of Brittany Spears?

I kind of think it's the latter. Why would anyone who buys wine by multiple liters in a single package care whether wine from California is any good, if Robert Parker has a hold on the imagination of winemakers or biodynamically grown grapes deliver a sense of place. The real concern is whether the box will fit on the top shelf of the fridge and whether or not the spout will leak.

Fuck!!

I can not begin to explain how angry, upset and bitter I'm made by the news that Richard Cartiere has died. At 51, Rich was among the top true wine journalists in America, and a friend who never failed in always being honest, forthright, and filled with conviction.

I didn't know of his condition. He never mentioned it in our regular and many conversations. I spoke with him only a few days ago about playing Golf and promising not to laugh at each other.

Rich was guy who never let me get away with anything. I'll never forget calling him years ago to pitch a story idea for his Wine Market Report newsletter and his response: "Tom, for God sake please tell me you can do better than that. Now try again and get it right this time because the story you are trying to pitch is a great one, but you should really do it justice."

Rich made me think, smile, and laugh and made me better at what I do.

And I'm so pissed he's gone I can barely control my anger. It's beyond unfair and my reaction suggests I'm entirely unsuited to growing older because I have no patience for its consequences.

Rich was so good at breaking news and identifying substantial trends in the wine industry. By every measure he was outstanding at what he did. And to boot he had a rare integrity. At one point in our relationship Rich found himself in a position where he was forced to write a story in a trade publication that would end up making me look like shit in front of the entire industry. He was not in control of the situation but was nonetheless obligated to participate in it. He called me and told me, "Tom I'm about to screw you and there's nothing I or you can do about it so be prepared!" The person who should have made that call had no intention of warning me. And Rich had no obligation to do so. But he did.

Rich made my participation in the wine industry much more satisfying and knowing him and spending time talking with him as we did regularly made my world far more interesting and satisfying.

This news of his death just wrong, in every way.  I'm terribly sorry for his partner Richard and all his friends. 

There is a good deal of truth to these assumptions. I don't spend any time questioning the notion that the explosion in the number of those utilizing the blog publishing format has changed the wine writing genre. If nothing else, this development has created a power shift. The power that once sat in the hands of a very tiny number of publishers and writers to set the intellectual and popular agenda as to what is important about wine and in the wine world has been dispersed as a result of the emergence of the wine blogging community. These publishers still wield tremendous power to set this kind of an agenda, but that power is severely diminished.

However, I think that rebellious quality that is happily embraced by the wine blogger, and bloggers in every other field, has seen its hay day.

The emergence of Steve Heimoff into the world of wine blogging makes me think this.

Today we have a number of Wine Spectator writers blogging. Two Wine & Spirit Magazine writers are blogging. A New York Times wine writer is blogging. A Food & Wine editor is blogging. And with the Wine Enthusiast's West Coast Editor Heimoff now launching a wine blog and with another blog administered by Wine Enthusiast, it's all but confirmed that the mainstream wine media has seen the power of the blogging format and decided it is good and they too will embrace it.

What once was legitimately considered a fringe endeavor should really be understood as mainstream today. And just as with the paper and ink publishing format, the big question in the blog publishing format is who has the gravitas and who has the eyeballs. Answers to these two questions will determine what and who is important in the world of wine blogging.

If Steve Heimoff's blog were to end up attracting a lot of eyeballs then it would be fair to say that HE is important in the world of wine blogging because he comes to it with built in gravitas that very few others scratching out words on a keyboard can match.

I've been reading Steve Heimoff in the pages of the Wine Spectator and Wine Enthusiast for upwards of 20 years now. Steve's writing voice and his approach to covering the world of wine strikes me as perfectly suited to the still somewhat rebellious and "alternative" nature of the wine blog world. Steve has never, as far as I can tell, flinched form saying what is on his mind or from criticizing where criticism is due. He has never been a rah rah, slavishly publishing the make-happy words and assertions of the industry's marketers and public relations folk who really hoped he would.

The point, of course, is that the most talented and most read writers in the traditional wine publishing world are in part migrating over to the blogging world. The reason is simple: traditional publishing is not well suited to active minds that like to communicate.

Think of it this way. Paper-based publications are quickly filling the role of being the accessory that reminds us of what interests us—like the Mickey Mouse watch worn by those who delight in ironic pop culture symbolism. The blog publishing format is becoming the source of the substance of our interests.

I've subscribed to Steve's blog feed and look forward to having a new, regularly updated source of substance.

I didn't see the price on the sign or the pump. I was just leaning against my car thinking what I needed to do later not to embarrass myself with my driver. Then I looked up and saw it: $4.11 for regular.

Now, I knew this was coming. Everyone knew. And the fact is I only paid a total of $1.69 more to fill of my car at this price than the last time I filled it up. Nevertheless, I was shocked. $4.00 per gallon for gasoline!!

Did I care that I was paying an extra $1.69 to fill up my little car? No. What do I care. I spend more than that every day on my nightly dose of candy. It was the Idea that gas had reached this strange, arbitrary, $4.00 per gallon benchmark that I could not shake from my head. And I started thinking...

What does this mean to the wine industry that I'm shocked (and not a little disgruntled as well as fearful) about what amounts to an extra $1.69 per fill up? I think it means a lot.

I'm not about to suggest that the increasing price of gas has little effect on individuals and the economy. In fact, I'm sure it has the kind of monumental effect that I can't even begin to calculate. However, just from the perspective of what it costs to get from here to there in our autos, the difference between $4.11 per gallon and $3.00 per gallon isn't that much. In fact, the difference between me taking a road trip from Sonoma to LA and back at $3.00 per gallon and $4.11 per gallon is about $55.00. That cold hard amount isn't about to deter me from taking the road trip.

But I'm betting the psychological difference that $4.00 per gallon represents is going to weigh on people's minds this summer and in turn it will affect the wine industry.

The most immediate impact will be felt in tasting rooms. Here in Sonoma and Napa I suspect they'll be seeing fewer people visiting from Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York, New Orleans and Rochester, and more people from Sacramento, Eureka, San Francisco, San Jose and Fresno. These visitors don't stay for a week. They stay for a weekend. That means they don't book as many hotel rooms, don't visit as many restaurants and don't visit as many wineries as the folks from Rochester, Minnesota.

Here in Sonoma Valley our economy is intimately linked to the tourism that the local wineries and the wine industry attract. Without them this little valley is side trip on the way to Sacramento, the ski slopes of Tahoe and the casinos of Reno. Without them, our population immediately falls by 35% and our economy is diminished even further. Housing prices crash. Many of the very cool food shops and restaurants are shuttered and replaced by Arby's and "Quick Stops".

In other words, It would behoove the wine communities that thrive off attracting folks to their "bucolic wine country" to start increasing their marketing, to work harder to attract folks in the wake of the psychological impact that $4.00 /gallon will have, and to start thinking real hard how to get more "locals" (Californians), to take their vacation in wine country.

Now, I'm just spit-ball'in here, but perhaps now is the time for something that I believe is unprecedented: Maybe it's time for Sonoma Valley and Napa Valley to do some Co-op Marketing.

THERE! I said it. I know. Heresy.

Napa and Sonoma working together to attract visitors rather than working alone to steal them from the other? People in either Valley are never more than a half hour away from the other Valley. Together, they represent the most extensive and impressive and intensive wine country experience perhaps in the World.

I have a feeling that the impact of $4.00 per gallon will have much more of an impact on people's thinking than we might imagine and it's going to take some out-of-the-box thinking to mitigate the damage.

Thinking about this whole situation gives me Gas!

There was a moment back in the early 1990s when many folks in the wine industry believed fervently that America's Neo-Prohibitiionists would play a key role in inhibiting the marketing of wine in the United States. Mothers Against Drunk Driving seemed to have the ear of every law enforcement agency in America. It appeared their goal was nothing less than stopping all drinking. The news about Fetal Alcohol Syndrome was everywhere and threatened turn off every single pregant woman in America from even having a sip of wine during their 9 months of gestation.

None of these threats to common sense came to any serious fruition.

However, were these threats to have played out in a destructive way, it's likely that the fate of the wine industry in the United States would have looked like THIS.

The apparent French ban on publicizing wine on the Internet is so entirely absurd it reads like something that might have come out of the mind of HG Wells during his most cynical moments.

Try to wrap your mind around this. The French government is very concerned about its wine industry's ability to compete against global competition. So, it goes about reconfiguring the ways by which French winemakers may label their wines, then instructs them: "But don't tell anyone about your wines....Shhhh! You can make the wines, but don't market them."

Yes, the french may have a bit of a problem with alcohol abuse.  But are they really dead set on hamstringing perhaps their most famous product, a product that goes a long way toward defining their national identity, in order to address a problem that is unlikely to have anything to do with the production of Bordeaux, Burgundy, Provencal Rose and Chateauneuf du Pape? Really?

I thought it the height of silliness when, after 9/11 America went on an anti-France crusade with out stupid "Freedom Fries" and the ongoing bashing of the entire country. Now I'm not so sure. It appears to me the French do indeed deserve a bit of severe bashing. Not for any stand they may choose to take against American hegemony, but rather because it's down right dangerous to do business and have relations with a country that appears to have a collective IQ of 12.

"historically [the hangover] is not a subject that has captured scientists’ hearts."

For those of us with that over abundance of interest in wine, the importance of this observation should be obvious. But Acocella, in her fine article entitled "A Few Too Many", notes there is another reason why this point is curious: "anyone who discovered a widely effective hangover cure would make a great deal of money."

How much money? Certainly more than they need but not quite enough to buyout Constellation.

One of the things this seeming lack of scientific interest in finding a real cure for the hangover demonstrates is that sex is more desirable to Americans than the desire to stop the clanging bell in our heads and the throbbing temples that come with, say, a bit too much White Burgundy. Otherwise, instead of Viagra we'd have a drug likely called something terribly inappropriate, like "Drinqitalis".

I for one would be quite happy to fill the coffers of the company that produces this new wonder drug. There is nothing I hate more than a hangover. Besides the departure from my normal tolerance for sounds and people the hangover causes, it's one of those things that happens to stay with me a very long time. In all honesty, I'm not even a big fan of the feeling that comes from ingesting alcohol except under certain very controlled circumstances.

And that brings me to a bit of speculation: what would be the impact of a drug that would negate the effects of alcohol on the body? Would the makers of this wonder drug make any money?

I think the answer is very little money. I think for the most part it would be folks like me who adore the taste of wine but really don't care for the affect of alcohol that would buy this drug. The problem is I think I'm strange. I think even among those that love the taste of wine, like just as much the buzz that comes with drinking wine. Moreover, I think the vast majority of people drink FOR the buzz, no matter what the choice of liquid.

Folks would much rather have a drug that removes the ugly after effects of drinking than remove the ultimate source of the problem.

Acocello says it better than I can:
"A truly successful hangover cure is probably going to be slow in coming. In the meantime, however, it is not easy to sympathize with the alcohol disciplinarians, so numerous, for example, in the United States. They seem to lack a sense of humor and, above all, the tragic sense of life. They appear not to know that many people have a lot that they’d like to forget. In the words of the English aphorist William Bolitho, “The shortest way out of Manchester is . . . a bottle of Gordon’s gin,”

The Op-Ed page is one of the most read sections of all newspapers and nearly every newspaper, be it daily or weekly, publish such a section. Those wineries that have an interest in current events should not think the Op-Ed is for others. But it's important to approach this kind of pitch correctly.

This Placement of an opinion piece in the Op-Ed Section of the Chicago Tribune came only after pursuing it in just the right manner. Before you think about trying to get a piece in an Op-Ed Section, consider the following:

1. Is the topic you want to offer an opinion on timely? It needs to be
2. Will the person writing the opinion piece have some authority on the issue? They need to.

If you can answer in the affirmative to those two questions then you need to move on to other considerations.

1. What is the policy for submission of an Op-Ed Piece?
2. How long (how many words) do the editors want them to be?
3. Is there a style of writing that is preferred by the editors?
4. Is there a format that you must submit the piece in?

Often times you can find answers to these questions on the newspaper's website where they will very nicely list what must be done to be considered for a Op-Ed piece. But there is a better way.

Call the editor of the Opinion page. Have a 10 second pitch ready that answers the first set of questions above. Then ask what is the best way to submit a piece. Nothing is more important than personal contact. Nothing is more important than actually reaching out and being able to offer the editor a compelling, timely opinion piece by someone who is an authority on the issue.

The style in which an opinion piece needs to be written is an entirely different topic. But let me just say that there is one thing common to all good opinion pieces: You are trying to convince people to your way of thinking.

It is one of my favorite things. A stash all things, or at least most thing, or a large selection of things on a particular subject. Dictionaries of all sorts and encyclopedia fall into this category and both items have always intrigued me. I got through "S" of the Encyclopedia Britannica when I was 13, but was interrupted by the sudden appearance of girls. I lost interest in a variety of things at that point, not the least of which was reading an encyclopedia. However, the affection for compendiums of information and stuff stayed with me.

My two all-time favorite compendiums are The Complete New Yorker and The Baseball Encyclopedia. One delivers the best writing produced between1925 and 2005 the other the history of baseball translated into numbers that don't lie.The Complete New Yorker comes on CD-Rom, making it somewhat less decadent than the Baseball Encyclopedia, which in my collection is a 4 inch thick, thin-paged, bound time-suckers.

The world of wine has its collection of compendiums. They usually are reprints of reviews. The best, however is not this at all but rather the Oxford Companion to Wine. Aptly named as it truly is a companion, the OCW is my favorite wine book of all time.

I simple love the level of ambition represented by the OCW. Imagine, trying to put the majority of wine knowledge in a single volume. It's more than ambition. It's foolhardy, which is often the best kind of ambition. The compendiums of wine reviews are something much different and much more pedestrian in effort. They are data dumps. Useful, but simple and not too inspiring.

Now, it's true that the Complete New Yorker and the Baseball Encyclopedia are data dumps in their own way. However, the data being dumped into these projects are composed of real cultural artifacts. Think about it...the complete story, in numbers, of every ball player who ever made it to the Major leagues, the box scores of every playoff and world series game, and the all time leaders of a massive number of single season and career statistical categories. The numerical history of America's past time in a single book. Or, the complete works of America's most important literary vehicle of the past century, all right there, nicely packaged in CD-Rom format, sitting on my bookshelf.

Everyone should possess a physical copy of some sort of compendium, if only to have the opportunity to run their fingers over it from time to time and feel the texture of ambition.

"According to "FollowTheMoney.Org", which tracks state campaign contributions, the lead sponsor of HB 429, Representative Edward Acevedo, has received $32,000 from alcohol wholesalers since 2000, including $10,000 since the legislation was introduced last year. One Senate sponsor of HB 429, James Clayborne, Jr., has received $85,000 from alcohol wholesaler interests since 2000, including $15,000 since the legislation was introduced. Since 2002, Governor Rod Blagojevich, who signed HB 429, has received more than $500,000 just from alcohol wholesalers in Illinois, $50,000 of which was given to him since he signed the bill into law."

HB 429 is the Illinois bill that was passed late last year, goes into effect on June 1 and that stripped Illinoisans of their right to have wine shipped to them from Internet wine stores.

The whole story is here.

Although the bill was written by wine wholesalers who really don't like it when any transaction involving wine doesn't provide them with their cut, and although it was introduced by those to whom the wholesalers contributed lots of money, the bill actually had fairly widespread support.

Among those supporting stripping consumers of the right they had for 15 years were:

-Associated Beer Distributors of Illinois
-California Wine Institute
-Wine & Spirit Distributors of Illinois
-Free the Grapes
-Beverage Retailers Alliance of Illinois
-Illinois Grape Growers and Vintners Association

Those who thought the bill unworthy of passage and that a better bill could have been crafted included:
-Specialty Wine Retailers Association
-Illinois Winemakers Alliance
-Consumers

There is a really interesting set of stories that come out of this situation that have to do with consumer rights, pay-to-play politics, relations between wine industry associations, constitutional issues, how best to fight for consumer rights, the cost of justice, etc. All these issues lend themselves to the press release format and, when packaged just right, to media coverage. An enterprising reporter can find in all this a really juicy, compelling, sensational story. And I have such a reporter is looking up this story as we type.

In any case, the real bottom line here is that Illinois consumers just got bent over by a surprising coalition.

I spent three years in Humboldt County, that (way) Northern California county best know for its world class dope. (I have a good story about Humboldt dope that comes toward the end of this post). I was there in the mid 1980s studying History at Humboldt State University. It was where I lived when I discovered my passion for wine. Yet the entire time I never once tasted a wine from Humboldt County. Now, it seems, there are enough local wineries for it to declare itself an "Emerging Wine Region". Dude! That is so awesome!

The only winery I was even aware of when I was studying at Humboldt State was Fieldbrook Winery. It's still there and producing some beautiful wines. But I hope I'm forgiven for not thinking much about Humboldt County-made wine as I began my initial serious study of wine in between hacky sack and History. I was more interested in discovering just what all this talk about BV Special Reserve, Beringer Private Reserve, Ridge Monte Bello, Chalone Pinot Noir and Matanzas Creek Merlot was all about.

Humboldt is a fairly remote region of California, even compared with places like Anderson Valley, Potter Valley and other far flung, but now fairly well known, growing regions. The County is large and offers a very diverse set of climates where grapes might grow. Closer to the coast, where I spent all my time, it's much cooler, while inland it can become very warm...too warm. But more than anything that makes me believe that Humbolt could indeed be an up and coming region for wine is the the price of land. It's far less expensive than anything Mendocino and southward. FAR less expensive.

As with every region, it seems one would have to carefully choose where they want to grow grapes, but as as the growing number of wineries in the County demonstrate, the diversity allows for a variety of grapes to be cultivated.

The first story linked above seems to hint at the idea that the region is quite suited for organic grape growing and hence organic wines, a winemaking trend I believe is going to explode:

"The natural environment lends itself to the emergence of organic wine making, as well, Lorenzo said — which several vintners have already implemented in their wine-making process.

“They’re really committed to the fully organic wines and process in addition to growing organic grapes,” she said of such wineries as Coates Vineyards and Old Growth Cellars."

Unless you've got some severely crappy soil, I can't see why nearly any region isn't suited for cultivating grapes organically. That is to say, the above statement doesn't make a lot sense. However, it's the CULTURAL environment in Humboldt County that truly lends itself to organic grape growing and winemaking. I have never lived in a place where so many of the inhabitants were committed, at such an early point, to "green living", conservation, off-the-grid lifestyles and tie die apparel. I'll admit that the constant exposure to what I affectionately came to call Hippydom often gave me the Heebie Jeebies, a condition that is alternatively known as tydyphobia: a fear of waking up with tie die patterns tattooed on one's chest.

Be my fears as they may, it appears that in short order Humboldt wineries will have their own website, promotional materials and a set of wine tastings to kick off their attempt at being discovered. But...what if this area's winemakers all made a commitment to doing things the organic way?

Is there another region anywhere in the world that is know as the "Organic Wine Region"? I don't think so. Would it be of tremendous benefit to cultivate this image?  I know so! It is exceedingly difficult for any wine region to create or develop for itself anything like a well defined image, be it for a particular variety of wine, style of wine or anything else. The Organic Image is wide open and Humboldt wineries should grab it. It will take a concerted effort for Humboldt County to replace its image as the source of California's best dope with an image for making great organic wine. But I think the effort is worth it.

I left Humboldt County the day after I graduated. They only reason I stayed for the Graduation Ceremony was because my mother wanted to come up for the ceremony, presumably to confirm that the occasional checks in the envelope that helped sustain me were in fact spent on an education. I'm not an anti-environmentalist or anything, but one has to be of a very specific mindset to live amongst the crunchy set. I wasn't of that mindset. San Francisco was much more my speed, a continuation of my study of History awaited at SF State University and there was also much more opportunity to find new wines to try in The City. So I left....very, very quickly, partly out of fear that I would wake up and find myself wearing Tie Die—which, by the way, I can proudly say I never wore on my body in the three years I lived there.

But I'm ready to revisit Humboldt, or more specifically, its wines. I've decided to make a special effort to find a number of them and see what they have beneath the cork. If I can somehow turn my current somewhat negative feelings toward Humboldt County into something positive due to their wines, then I'll be able to check off one of the items on my "things to fix" list.

Oh, and about Humboldt County dope. The first time "The Guy" made his regular rounds of the dorms with baggies of pot to sell (he'd return regularly on a weekly basis), I knew nothing about Humboldt grown pot. I asked, "how good is it?" The Guy took a big old bud the size of my palm out of his baggy, looked at me with his sunken eyes and then threw the bud at the ceiling of the my dorm room....It stuck. It stuck for a good ten seconds. The stuff became known as HSB--Humboldt Sticky Bud.

The wholesaler-dominated and controlled system of wine distribution in America hurts small business and hurts family businesses.

A new article in Forbes by Dirk Smillie that outlines why it's likely that 20% of all American wineries will be sold off over the next five years makes this point in a backhanded sort of way, but it's a point worth taking not of:

"The expected selloff is driven by aging vineyard owners bedeviled by how drastically difficult it is to make a buck in the new landscape of winemaking. "The wine business today is a funnel," says Robert Nicholson, head of International Wine Associates, a Healdsburg, Calif. corporate finance outfit specializing in vineyard buyouts. At the top are those 5,000 wineries, which produce 7,000 brands. These labels compete with one another, plus foreign imports, at the bottom of the funnel, where they must fit through a bottleneck of 450 distributors who decide which brands get shelf space. In the past decade the number of brands has nearly doubled, while the number of distributors has been cut in half. Result: Family-owned microbrands have seen their pricing power and ability to demand shelf space trickle away."

Were it not for the direct shipment channel, I suspect that the 20% of wineries that are expected to be sold off would exceed 35% - 40%.

I don't think anyone would advocate their be regulations prohibiting the severe consolidation that has occurred among wine distributors over the past 20 years. This is simply the way the market and business works. However, policymakers should take a look at the severe impact that the current wholesaler control of wine distribution has on small business and family wineries. Policymakers should ask themselves if it's good for the economy to allow wholesalers to run family's out of the wine industry simply so wine wholesalers can continue to control wine distribution and reap enormous state-mandated profits that have no relationship to the actual value of the services that wholesalers provide. This needs to be looked at by policymakers in light of the fact that it is the near nationwide policy of granting distributors unjustified profits at the expense of family and small business that is causing great harm.

The answer to this obscene situation is a simple one: Make wholesalers compete and work for their profits.

1. Allow wineries and retailers to ship wine direct to consumers in order to assure alternatives to the wholesaler channel are open to wineries

2. Allow wineries to bypass wholesalers in bringing their wines to market so that true entrepreneurial efforts are at the heart of the wine industry

At the very least these two changes would give small and family wineries a fighting chance against wholesalers who appear to be doing all they can to run them out of business. We'd also learn whether or not the wholesalers deserve or can actually earn the profits they are currently given by the state.