AND ANOTHER - Printable Version

+- WineBoard (
+-- Forum: RESOURCES AND OTHER STUFF (/forumdisplay.php?fid=300)
+--- Forum: Wine and Politics (/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: AND ANOTHER (/showthread.php?tid=2980)

- Jerry D Mead - 01-04-1999 04:36 AM

DREGS to those wineries opposing the proposed "California Coast" (though "Coastal California" would be better) appellation. It would provide valuable information to consumers by alerting us to the fact that whether the grapes originated in South, Central or North Coast appellations (or even a blend of the three) that the grapes benefited from cooling marine influence, as opposed to the hot central interior valleys which are permitted in the broad "California" appellation.

- Doc Rock - 01-05-1999 12:31 AM


DREGS to the whole AVA "system" as it were. Given its origins (ATF), no wonder it confuses the hell out of everyone. And the winery owners haven't done themselves any favors, either, with their curious parochialism.

Want a "California Coast" AVA? Fine, but tell me, is there much real meaning to a "Napa Valley" or "Sonoma County" appellation? Heavens, there are so many different soil types, terrains and microclimates in Napa and Sonoma, those appellations tell me precious little OTHER THAN that the grapes didn't come from that refinery in Modesto.

Over time, AVAs that are truly distinctive will come to the fore (Russian River Valley for Pinots and Chards, for example, IMO). Most will be forgotten faster than Kato Kailin.

- Jerry D Mead - 01-05-1999 01:26 AM

We all know that AVAs are more marketing than anything, but Napa Valley does say it didn't come from Kern County.

Also AVAs comply with some requirement of the EC.