Careful with your AVAs

[tomstevenson]

Jerry wrote the following in his latest newsletter:

'The arguments against both AVAs were basically the same. Too many climates
and soils over a too large area, both ignoring the marine influence issue.

'I was especially puzzled by the comments of a highly respected Napa vintner, Jack Cakebread. In a comment letter to ATF he said: "Area is not
distinguishable; makes a mockery of all current viticultural areas...would
destroy confidence in the AVA system."

'Jack, I hate to point out that your proud AVA, Napa Valley, is as meaningless as they come. ATF approved everyone who wanted to be in, including people from other valleys (like Chiles and Pope) and they even considered letting Solano County in! It includes very cool Carneros next to the Bay in the south and goes all the way to hot Calistoga. Includes the rich soils of
the valley floor and rocky mountain tops, as well as most of Napa County.
------------------------------------------

In a very fundamental sense, it does not matter whether a specific AVA has any distinguishing characteristics, be they climatic, topographical or soil. Hopefully in 50 years or so certain AVAs will stand out as being particularly special for specific varieties or styles of wine, but you have not made (and should not make) the same mistake as the French and get into dictating what varieties must be grown, the methods of vine-training, pruning, yield etc., none of which can be controlled however large the bureaucracy created to police the system. All that is required is some guarantee of truth, so that if the wine states it is Napa Valley the consumer can be sure that is what it is and where it comes from. It does not matter if it is ridiculous and smaller inner areas are superior. If producers want to establish a superior reputation for a smaller appellation within any existing conglomerated AVA, such as Mount Veeder, then they can, should and indeed have. But if producers want to blend wines from several different states, as Australians are very adept at doing, then why not? You already have the mechanism to apply multi-state appellations and, frankly, what would be the difference ethically from a wine declaring itself to be the product of California, Oregon and Washington and one that claims a hypothetical AVA of, say, West Coast? Both seem honest to me and the market place will eventually sort out the hierarchy of your AVAs by the premium they fetch. And, of course, the smallest "AVA" is a single-vineyard. If that vineyard is within one of the top-ranking AVAs of the future and made by a winery that has established a long tradition of fine winemaking, it will of course fetch the highest premium of all.

I hope your country does not get too precious about what should and should not be an AVA. Don't follow the French, do your own thing and keep your eye on the ball: authenticity. The best way to achieve a high level of authenticity is not via a costly bureaucracy, but by coming down so hard on anyone caught cheating that the culprits are put out of business. Disgruntled employees can be relied upon to spill the beans more than any inspector of a policing agency.