Category: Winery Info

Wine Tasting Trials

Cyndi

Testing in tens, making it easy

a women in a lab coat standing in front of a table with several beakers of fluid and a syringe

By Thomas J. Payette, Winemaking Consultant

While in the wine business struggles often start with speaking and working in the odd amounts that we often hear in conversations with other winemakers.  Trials and fining agents are riddled with unfamiliar language and terms to many winemakers.  Grams per liter, pounds per thousand gallons and milligrams per liter project off most winemaster’s tongues as if the world is in tune.  Let’s review how to make this simpler and to understand.

When?  We should perform trials anytime a question is raised about how to improve or change a wine.  If a wine has a problem – identify the solution in a laboratory first.  Then apply the desired corrective action in the cellar.

Why?  The reason we do trials is to experiment with refinement and correction of a juice or wine.  Always work in small quantities with a wine so one does not create a larger problem, in a tank, in need of potential further corrective action.  These trials can be tasted and evaluated to see what the results would or will have been if the addition were made to the actual tank or vessel of juice/wine.  This eliminates guesswork and unnecessarily “shooting from the hip.”

Where?  One should do these trials in the laboratory where control, on a small-scale amount of wine, is essential.  The opportunities of what one can discover in the lab are almost endless.  Let’s always make our mistakes on a small scale in the laboratory before stepping into the cellar for any actions that may change the flavor, aroma, or chemistry of any juice/wine.  This lab area should be designed for this feature of experimentation. The metric system will be used.  Once this is attempted, one will not step back into some of the complicated aspects or other forms of measurement.  These trials can be used for many things including but not limited to sugar additions, acid additions, fining agents, concentrates, de-acidification’s etc.

Tools Needed

•   Scales that measure in grams preferably to a tenth of a gram

•   3 – 100 milliliter graduated cylinder (plastic preferred)

•   1 – 50 milliliter graduated cylinder (plastic preferred)

•   1 – 10 milliliter pipettes (Class A volumetric)

•   2 – 5 milliliter serological pipettes (Plastic preferred)

•   Small glass beakers 250 milliliters plus or minus

•   Representative sample(s) of each wine to be sampled.

•   Clean wineglasses

•   Watch glasses (to cover each glass)

•   Spit cup

•   Other testing equipment to answer questions at hand.

•   Magnetic Stir plate with stir bars and retriever for the stir bars.

•   Sharpie™ pen or pencil for marking beakers.

•   95% ethanol to remove Sharpie™ pen marks off glassware.

How?  Start with something simple where results can be easily determined with the wineglass to give the confidence needed to build upon the procedure.  An example of this may be a tartaric addition trial for pH correction and/or palate modification.  Let’s go over one example.

1.    Start with an ample quantity of wine to work with in the lab – perhaps an 800-milliliter representative sample from a wine vessel.

2.   Weigh accurately 1.0 grams of tartaric acid and fully dissolve the acid in approximately 85 milliliters of the base wine with which you are working.

3.   Once dissolved, place the full amount into a 100-milliliter graduated cylinder or as one becomes more experienced you may just make the solution in the 100-milliliter graduated cylinder.

4.   Bring the amount up to volume in the 100-milliliter graduated cylinder up to 100 milliliters mark with additional base wine.  [One should be clear they have made a solution of 1.0-gram tartaric acid dissolved into 100 milliliters of wine.]

5.   In a clean graduated cylinder, pipette 10 milliliters of the newly prepared acid stock solution into the cylinder.  Bring to the complete 100 milliliters volume mark with the base wine.  This should represent a 1.0 gram per liter tartaric acid addition.

6    .Pipette twenty milliliters from the stock acid solution made in step four into another graduated cylinder and bring to volume at the 100-milliliter mark to represent the next addition level of 2.0 grams per liter tartaric addition.

7.   Continue to add to the number of samples you care to do the trial on in standard logical increments.

Set up the Tasting Trial

1.    Pour about 50 milliliters or a quantity one desires to smell and taste, of the base wine, into a control glass and place it in the left-hand glass in the tasting area.  (One should always taste and compare against a control)

2.   Pour the trials to be tasted, made in steps 5,6 and 7 above, in increasing increments in each wineglass progressing from left to right.  Mark their contents.

3.   Add to this flight any wines from past vintages you may want to review or any other blind samples from other producers you may care to use as a benchmark.  Mark their contents.

4.   Taste and smell each wine several times.  Go through the “flight” and detect what wine may best match or improve the desired style one is trying to achieve.

5.   Select the match and leave the room for 1 to 2 hours.

6.   Return and re-taste to confirm your decision.

  Should chemistries play a significant role in reviewing certain additions be sure to run a necessary panel of lab tests to ascertain the proper numbers are also achieved.  One may need to balance taste, flavor, and chemistry to make some tough choices.  Have all the data necessary available to make those choices.  

Calculation:  Once the fear of the metric system is overcome and confidence is achieved, the calculations become extremely simplistic.  Let’s take the above as an example.  If we dissolve 1.0 gram of tartaric acid into 100 milliliters of wine, we now have 0.1 gram of tartaric acid in every 10 milliliters of wine.  From this base if we blend 10.0 milliliters (one-tenth gram of tartaric) into 100 milliliters of fresh wine – this represents the equivalent of one gram per liter.

If we were to have used twenty milliliters that would represent two grams per liter in the small 100-milliliter blend.  If we keep track of what we are tasting or testing and selecting the trial we prefer, one can mathematically calculate how much of the given addition is needed in a tank of known quantity of juice or wine.  One can also extrapolate this out to larger volumes in the laboratory should that be desired to work beyond a 100-milliliter sample.

Spicing it up!  Once the first set of trials is mastered one may build on to the next step projecting out what one may want to do with the wine.  This could eventually, and perhaps should, be built out to treating large enough samples that one could cold, and protein stabilize the wine in the lab, filter to the projected desired micron size and taste with a panel.

Double checking the results:  From experience, one can get so creative in a lab it can be difficult to trace exactly how one arrived at a certain desired concoction.  Copious notes should be kept and most often one can trace their steps.  When in doubt; however, re-perform the steps with each addition to reestablish and confirm the same results.  This extra time is well worth performing before stepping into the cellar.

Summary:  Given time and experimentation with this system many blending trials with additions will become easy and systematic.  Trials will often take less than ten minutes to prepare, and one may taste at several points during the day or use extra time to perform lab tests to confirm desired objectives.

Other helpful tips:  Keep in mind not to over scrutinize your accuracy in the laboratory.  By this I mean make sure that if we measure something very tightly in the laboratory make sure this action will be able to be duplicated outside the lab.  It is not uncommon, early on, for winemakers to get extremely exact in the lab only to step into the cellar with sloppy control over what they had just experimented with.  Something to consider on the practical side!

  One can use other base solutes should that be desired.  It does not always have to be wine.

  This system can be used for dosage formulation for sparking wines.

  If accurate scales may be an issue the winemaker may always start by weighing larger quantities and dissolving into solution, then breaking down that solution.  Example:  If a winemaker wants a 1.0 gram per liter solution and the scales are not accurate enough to weigh one gram the winemaker may dissolve 10.0 grams into 100 milliliters and then measure out 10 milliliters of that solution and this should roughly equate to one gram.

  Make sure all solids are dissolved and dispersed equally into any solution.

  One may also be able to blend two trials in 50% to 50% solutions to get an example of a trial in the middle without having to make one up specifically to match the amount desired.

  Always remember your palate may become desensitized while tasting and step away from tasting for an hour or two and then return to taste one’s preference.  You may be shocked you had become used to certain levels because of tasting such extremes.

Dedicated to:  Chris Johnson, a long-time colleague and friend who collaborated with me many years ago.  Chris passed away in April of 2009.  He was head of all red winemaking at Kendall Jackson, and he had his own family winery label called Blair in Northern Napa Valley.

Short Course:

•   Only be as accurate as your cellar can be – but do not be sloppy.

•   Build on trials to understand the ramifications of the next step.

•   Small trials before big decisions are made.

•   Experiment – Time is the only “cost.”

References:  Verbal discussion with Mr. Jacques Boissenot, Mr. Jacques Recht, Mr. Chris Johnson and Mr. Joachim Hollerith.

Wine & Hospitality

Cyndi

The last bastion of human connection in an AI-driven world

a man and a women sitting at a table next to a vineyard while a woman pours wine into their glasses

By Cory Krejcik, Founder of Thirsty Bandit

In a culture increasingly shaped by screens, algorithms, and artificial intelligence, wine and hospitality may represent one of the last places where people still gather, slow down, and remember what it feels like to be human together.

  We are living in the most technologically connected era in human history, and paradoxically, one of the most socially disconnected. Our interactions increasingly pass through screens. Meetings happen on video calls. Friendships live inside text threads. Entertainment streams on every device. Meals are ordered through apps, dropped at the door, and eaten in front of laptops. Even leisure time is optimized for efficiency.

  Convenience has never been greater. Yet loneliness continues to rise across nearly every demographic group, and public health experts now describe social isolation as one of the defining challenges of modern life. According to recent data from AARP and Cigna, roughly 40 percent of Americans over 45 report feeling lonely, while younger adults, particularly Gen Z, report some of the highest levels of loneliness of any generation, showing that social disconnection spans every age group.

  Against this backdrop, cafés, wine bars, pubs, restaurants, tasting rooms, and neighborhood gathering places take on renewed importance. They remain some of the last public spaces where people still encounter one another organically, where conversation unfolds without an algorithm shaping it, and where shared experiences happen in real time.

  For those of us in wine and hospitality, this moment feels both familiar and urgent. Because what we steward every day is not simply product or service. It’s critical human connection.

What AI Can (And Cannot) Replace

  Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping nearly every industry, including ours. It can generate tasting notes, forecast sales, streamline purchasing, personalize marketing, and recommend wines with startling accuracy. It can optimize menus, automate reservations, and predict guest behavior. However, it cannot read the subtle energy shift in a room celebrating good news. It cannot sense when a guest wants guidance versus quiet. It cannot recreate the comfort of being welcomed by someone who genuinely remembers your last visit or your favorite bottle.

  Hospitality thrives on qualities technology struggles to reproduce: the human touch that turns service into care, emotional intelligence that guides interactions naturally, and presence that allows guests to feel seen rather than processed. Technology can make us more efficient behind the scenes, but the reason people return again and again remains deeply human.

How Gathering Spaces Strengthen Community

  In early January this year, Dr. Mehmet Oz described alcohol as a “social lubricant that brings people together,” pointing to the ways shared social experiences can support emotional well-being when enjoyed responsibly.

  The remark sparked debate, but it underscored a long-standing truth: humans have always gathered around shared food and drink. Wine, in particular, encourages conversation and lingering. The 750ml bottle is a universally sharable format meant to be opened, poured, discussed, and passed around the table. Stories emerge. Conversations lengthen. Time slows.

  Furthermore, hospitality spaces have historically served as community living rooms. Local pubs, enotecas, and cafés have historically served as sacred places where neighbors meet, friendships deepen, business relationships form, and milestones are celebrated. They are where newcomers feel welcomed and regulars feel known. In an era increasingly marked by digital isolation, these physical gathering spaces reinforce the everyday social ties that hold communities together. They offer neutral ground where people from different walks of life can still share a table and, if only for a moment, feel part of something collective.

Emotional Connection as Competitive Advantage

  As technology commoditizes knowledge and routine service interactions, emotional connection becomes hospitality’s true competitive advantage. No app replicates the feeling of walking into a place where someone greets you by name. No algorithm recreates the comfort of a familiar table after a long week. In a future increasingly mediated by AI, these human advantages only grow more valuable. Hospitality’s power lies not just in feeding or serving people, but in creating spaces where people feel connected again.

  Industry leaders now carry responsibilities that extend beyond operations and profitability. We are not simply operators, beverage directors, sommeliers, or restaurateurs. We are culture carriers. Hiring practices, training philosophies, lighting, pacing, music, and room design all influence whether spaces encourage people to linger, converse, and belong, or simply move through as transactions. Every operational decision shapes the emotional temperature of a room.

  The question facing hospitality leaders is increasingly clear: are we building businesses optimized purely for efficiency, or spaces designed for connection? The future of wine and hospitality may depend on how we answer.

Action Items:

Reigniting Social Connection Over a Glass of Wine

  Here are practical steps wine and hospitality leaders can take to reinforce social connection in their spaces:

1. Redefine Success Metrics:  Shift from purely operational metrics (turn times, covers per hour) to connection-oriented ones.

•     Guest feedback on feeling welcomed and heard

•     Return visits for conversation, not just consumption

•     Word-of-mouth referrals rooted in experience

2. Train Teams for Emotional Intelligence: Invest in training programs that go beyond service technique.

• Active listening skills

• Reading room energy

• Recognizing moments for genuine human engagement

  Your team should be incentivized not just to serve, but to connect.

3. Curate Shared Experiences:  Design programs that encourage group exploration and story-sharing.

•     Guided tasting flights with shared narrative arcs (regions, themes, stories)

•     Winemaker dinners emphasizing conversation

•     Community-focused events that spotlight local producers

  These experiences make people feel part of something larger.

4. Create Intentional Spaces for Interaction:

  Spatial design matters.

•     Communal tables

•     Intimate seating nooks

•     Fireplaces or shared counters

•     Low-pressure tasting salons

  Make layouts that invite conversation, not isolation.

5. Champion Local Wine Culture:  Celebrate the stories of the people behind the bottles.

•     Bring in local winemakers for tastings

•     Host producer Q&As

•     Feature regional pairings that tie to community identity

  This reinforces that wine is of a place, not just in a place.

A Human-First Future

  AI will undoubtedly shape the future of hospitality, helping operators run smarter, leaner, and more efficiently behind the scenes. But what happens across the bar, at the table, and inside the room must remain unapologetically human.

  Wine and hospitality continue to remind people what it feels like to slow down, engage their senses, and connect without a screen between them. They offer places where strangers become regulars, neighbors become friends, and ordinary evenings become lasting memories. In a culture defined by speed and digital convenience, the simple act of sharing a glass of wine with others becomes quietly radical.

  The opportunity (and responsibility) for wine and hospitality leaders is to protect and amplify these experiences. To design spaces where people linger. To empower teams to engage authentically. To create environments where guests feel welcomed not as transactions, but as participants in something communal.

  In a digital-first world, wine-led hospitality remains proudly human-first. And as technology continues to reshape how we live and work, the places that help us reconnect with one another may become the most valuable spaces of all, not just commercially, but culturally and socially. The future of hospitality, at its best, is not simply about serving food and wine. It is about reminding people, again and again, how good it feels to be together.

  Corey Krejcik is the founder of Thirsty Bandit, providing strategic marketing, brand development, and revenue optimization for hospitality and wine brands. With over 20 years of executive leadership experience, he believes the best outcomes are found at the intersection of strategy, adaptability, and identity. Outside of work, he enjoys cooking, running, home renovation projects, and spending time with his wife and two teenage children in Malvern, PA.

Certificates of Label Approval for Wines

Cyndi

A few tips and label basics

wine bottle laying on top of legal agreements with a large approved stamped on the wine lable

By Brad Berkman & Louis J. Terminello of Greenspoon Marder LLP

Virtually every wine that it makes to the shelf of a US wine shop has had its label reviewed by the Alcohol and Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) of the U.S. Government. After a review and compliance is found, a Certificate of Label Approval is issued, commonly known by its acronym, COLA (Wines below 7% a/b/v do not need label approval, but the labels must comply with FDA requirements).

  COLAs do not grant the holder any legal ownership rights but rather indicate that the wine meets all federal labeling regulations with the ultimate goals of ensuring that labels do not contain any misleading, deceptive or inaccurate statements, they properly identify product identity. and contain the ubiquitous “health warning” statement a/k/a the “GOVERNMENT WARNING.” Importantly, COLA’s travel under the permittee, not by brand. This means that each producer or importer must hold the COLA under its TTB permit, regardless of whether the product was previously issued a COLA.

Label Basics

  Labels must have certain required information under the law. This is referred to as “mandatory” information. All other information, absent a mandated exclusion, is generally referred to as voluntary information, which the producer may wish to include on its label.

Mandatory Information-Required Information:

The following must be placed on the label(s):

•     Brand name and class/type designation.

•     Alcohol content.

•     Net contents statement

•     Producer’s name and address.

•     Government health warnings.

•     Country of origin (for imports).

•     Sulfite declaration (for most wines).

•     Appellation of Origin

  An appellation of origin is not always needed on all wine labels, but it must be stated when the following is on the label:

•     A vintage date

•     A varietal designation.

•     A type designation of a varietal.

•     A semi-generic designation.

•     An “estate-bottled” claim.

  It should also be noted that each piece of information be placed on the appropriate label as required by the law. Some information is placed on the back label, while other information may be on the brand label.

wine bottle laying on its side clearly showing it's front label

Notes on Stating Varietal:

Only grape varietals approved by TTB can be used. The list of grape variety names and their synonyms, approved for use, can be found in subpart J in 27 CFR 4 (Code of Federal Regulations).

  Another important point worth noting is the 75% rule. If the varietal is stated on the label, with certain exceptions, 75 percent or more of the wine must be made from the named grape variety. Also, the entire 75 percent of the grape variety must have been grown in the labeled appellation of origin.

  Producers and importers may use multiple grape varietal names on the label. When this is the case, all the grapes used to make the wine must be on the label, and the percentage of the wine derived from each grape is shown on the label as well, with certain tolerances permitted (2%).

Nutritional Information-Is it Required?  For now, nutrient information may be placed on a wine label, but it is not mandatory. The reader should be aware that there are two TTB proposed rules open for public comment. One rule requires the disclosure of per-serving alcohol, calorie, and nutrient content information in an “Alcohol Facts” statement on all alcohol beverage labels. The other requires a labeling disclosure of all major food allergens used in the production of alcoholic beverages, such as milk, eggs, fish, crustaceans’ shellfish, tree nuts, wheat, peanuts, soybeans, and sesame, as well as ingredients that contain protein derived from the aforementioned foods.

  If nutrient information is voluntarily placed on the label (as well as advertising materials), specific requirements apply.  Only calories, fat, carbohydrates, and protein may be included, and according to a TTB webpage, they must be stated in the following manner:

•     Calories: A statement of the caloric content per serving must be expressed to the nearest calorie, except that amounts less than 5 calories may be stated as zero.

•     Fat: A statement of the number of grams of total fat in a serving must be expressed to the nearest 0.5 (1/2) gram increment below 5 grams and to the nearest gram increment above 5 grams. If the serving contains less than 0.5 grams, the content may be expressed as zero.

•     Carbohydrates: A statement of the number of grams of total carbohydrates in a serving must be expressed to the nearest tenth of a gram, except that if a serving contains less than 1 gram, the statement “Contains less than 1 gram” or “less than 1 gram” may be used as an alternative, or if the serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content may be expressed as zero.

•     Protein: A statement of the number of grams of protein in a serving must be expressed to the nearest tenth of a gram, except that if a serving contains less than 1 gram, the statement “Contains less than 1 gram” or “less than 1 gram” may be used as an alternative, and if the serving contains less than 0.5 gram, the content may be expressed as zero.

  According to TTB ruling 2013-2, Serving Facts statement appearing on a label or an advertisement may be stated per container size if the container is equal to or less than a single serving size. Serving Facts statement may be presented in dual-column format, which provides information both per serving size and per container size. The per serving size requirement is- a single serving is 12 fl. oz. for malt beverages; 5 fl. oz. for wine; and 1.5 fl. oz. for distilled spirits.

The European

Approach-Mandatory Since 2023

  As a point of comparison, wines sold in the European Union, since 2023, must provide consumers with detailed nutritional and ingredient information.

  The stated goal is to offer consumers clear information regarding the wine they are consuming. Interestingly, the regulations allow for QR codes to be placed on wine labels that take the consumer to a website where all the nutritional values can be found. Alcohol content, allergens, and nutritional values must be placed on the label.

Blanc Du Bois in Texas

Cyndi

Disease-tolerant grapes have been enthusiastically embraced by Texas wineries

close up of blanc du bois grapes in a vineyard

By Danny Hillin, Justin Scheiner, Ph.D., and Michael Cook

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

It’s not often that a new grape variety is developed, and it’s even rarer that a new grape becomes widely adopted in the wine industry. In order for a new grape variety to succeed, it must first prove to be durable and productive in the vineyard, qualities that are absolutely essential for growers. Equally important, the grape must produce wine of acceptable, and ideally exceptional, quality. Yet, even if a grape excels in both these areas, the largest hurdle is consumer acceptance and market demand. In Texas, however, Blanc Du Bois has managed to overcome these obstacles, establishing itself as a stand-out example of a success story of a relatively new hybrid grape.

  For those unfamiliar, Blanc Du Bois is an interspecific hybrid white wine grape whose most important characteristic is its tolerance to Pierce’s Disease. Blanc Du Bois was developed by the University of Florida grape breeder, Dr. John Mortenson, specifically as a Pierce’s Disease-tolerant wine grape capable of thriving in Florida’s humid and disease-prone climate. Interestingly, Blanc Du Bois has proven to be even better suited to the Texas Gulf Coast, where the humidity and rainfall are typically more moderate than in Florida, creating an ideal environment for this resilient grape.

  Where Blanc Du Bois truly shines among Pierce’s Disease-tolerant grapes is in wine quality, a key reason it has been enthusiastically embraced by a growing number of Texas wineries. Blanc Du Bois wines have aromatic flavors characterized by citrus, grapefruit, floral, and spicy notes. The ripe grapes also offer a pleasantly flavorful snack for harvest crews. While most wineries use Blanc Du Bois to produce table wines, sparkling wines made from Blanc Du Bois have surged in recent years. The grape’s relatively low soluble solids at ripeness (usually 16–21%) make it particularly well-suited for sparkling wines as well as lower-alcohol still wines. One of the most celebrated Blanc Du Bois wines is Haak Winery’s Blanc Du Bois Madeira, which has garnered just about every award out there.

  Blanc Du Bois is impressively versatile in the winery, and recent research at Texas A&M University suggests that Blanc Du Bois wines can have a very high antioxidant capacity. This may help explain why its aromatics can remain vibrant in the bottle for several years. Another clear marker of Blanc Du Bois’s rise in reputation is the increasing number of wineries now producing and labeling varietal Blanc Du Bois wines, reflecting industry-wide recognition of its quality.

  In the vineyard, Blanc Du Bois is certainly not without challenges, but ongoing research and grower experience in Texas have paved the way for continued improvements in production. The most persistent issues faced by Texas producers are downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) and bunch rots. Although Blanc Du Bois is also susceptible to several other fungal diseases, these two are especially troublesome in wetter regions or during particularly rainy years. Along the Texas Gulf Coast, this typically translates into eight to twelve protectant spray applications per season, with higher numbers required in areas with more rainfall and longer frost-free periods.

  Blanc Du Bois ripens as early as late May in the southernmost reaches of Texas, up to July in the northern Gulf Coast and North Texas, approximately 115–125 days from bud break to harvest. This gives vineyards in far south Texas a longer post-harvest season than the pre-harvest growth period. At Texas A&M, researchers have successfully double-cropped Blanc Du Bois on an experimental basis in this region suggesting a potential to produce two crops each year there. Although Blanc Du Bois tends to break bud early, making it vulnerable to late spring frosts, it fortunately produces relatively fruitful secondary buds.

close up showing one large bunch of blanc du bois grapes hanging on the vine

  Managing the high vigor of Blanc Du Bois has led to innovative solutions in Texas. The Watson Training System, developed by Jerry Watson, the state’s longest-standing Blanc Du Bois grower, is a high-wire, horizontally divided canopy system featuring 48-inch cross arms and two pairs of rake wires to keep shoots in position. Although this system demands extensive canopy management, the payoff can be worthwhile for small vineyards: higher yields and better air circulation within the fruiting zone compared to single-canopy systems. Several publications from Texas A&M University and the University of Georgia describe this system and provide comparative data for its performance.

  Blanc Du Bois is most often grown as own-rooted or ungrafted vines, but when soil pH is above 7.0, alkaline tolerant rootstocks are generally recommended to mitigate nutrient deficiencies. This represents many areas of Texas and fortunately grafted vines are available from several nurseries.

  With good vineyard management Blanc Du Bois routinely yields around two to five tons per acre. However, growers in Texas commonly report poor fruit set, although the cause remains unclear. The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service has tested various canopy management strategies and prebloom zinc applications to improve fruit set, though results have been mixed. It is possible that observed fruit set issues are related to virus infections and excessive vine vigor, both of which commonly occur. Fortunately, Foundation Plant Services at UC Davis maintains clean Blanc Du Bois plant material to supply nurseries.

  Over the past four decades since Blanc Du Bois was released, Texas grape growers and winemakers have built up a wealth of knowledge and practical experience with this variety. Fortunately, that expertise has been captured in a comprehensive new book scheduled for publication later this year: A Compendium of the Blanc Du Bois Grape, from Texas A&M University Press. The authors, Fran Pontasch, Justin Scheiner, and Russ Kane have chronicled the extensive experiences of Texas Blanc Du Bois growers and winemakers, along with numerous applied research studies focused on improving Blanc Du Bois production. Fran Pontasch, the principal author, and co-author Dr. Justin Scheiner are viticulturists with a combined 27 years of hands-on experience in Texas vineyards. Dr. Russ Kane is a technical researcher and writer, author of The Wineslinger Chronicles: Texas on the Vine and Texas Hill Country Wineries. He also pens the long-running wine blog VintageTexas.com and recently launched BlancDuBois.com, further connecting Blanc Du Bois enthusiasts.

  The success of Blanc Du Bois in Texas represents the combined work and dedication of grape and wine producers and as the industry continues to expand and diversify, it will remain as an important testament of success for the Gulf Coast.

What is Subsidized Crop Insurance?

Cyndi

How does it work & are there differences between providers

six people around a table with a laptop and a booth called Vineyard Crop Insurance in a vineyard

By Trevor Troyer, Agricultural Risk Management

The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) was created in 1938. When coverage began, it was limited to major crops. It was essentially an experiment at that time, until the passage of the Federal Crop Insurance Act in 1980. The 1980 Act expanded the number of crops insured and the locations in the United States. In 1996 the USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA) was created.  The USDA RMA’s purpose was to administer the Federal Crop Insurance programs and other risk management related programs.

  Perennials are quite different from traditional row crops or other vegetable crops.  But a lot of the risks are very much the same.  Drought, freeze, wildlife damage, fire/smoke, and the list of perils goes on. From what we see the risks are more with perennials.  It doesn’t matter if it’s an apple orchard, avocado grove or vineyard, your investment is subject to the elements all year round. You don’t have time to wait till the weather gets better to plant your crop. Things may happen after you harvest that might affect the following year’s crop production. 

  Grape Crop Insurance goes back to 1998; the current policy was written in 2010. Crop insurance is a partnership with authorized Insurance companies and the FCIC. Crop insurance is partially subsidized through the USDA. Currently there are 13 Approved Insurance Providers (AIPs) authorized to administer crop insurance policies reporting to the USDA RMA. Prices and premiums are set by the USDA Risk Management Agency per crop, state, and county. There is no price/premium competition from one company to the next because of this. Independent insurance agencies sell for these 13 different insurance providers.

  Grape crop insurance is available in the following states: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. Starting in 2026 grape crop insurance is now available in Dona Ana County in New Mexico. 

Crop insurance is not available for grapes in all counties though. Insurable varieties are also different between states and counties. As mentioned before prices are different between states and counties as well. The USDA price for a ton of Cabernet Franc in Napa County California is different than a ton of Cabernet Franc in Seneca County New York.

map of states that have grape crop insurance and the sigh-up deadlines
Map of states that have grape crop insurance and the sigh-up deadlines

  Grapes are insured under an Actual Production History (APH) plan of insurance. An average of the vineyard’s production per variety is used. Grapes need to be in their 4th growing season to be insurable. A minimum of 4 years is needed to do the average, if the grapes have just become insurable then a Transitional Yield (based on the county and variety) is used in place of any missing years. A maximum of 10 years can be used to determine the average if the vineyard has been in production for that amount of time. Basically, you are insuring an average of your tons per acre per variety.

  With crop insurance you cannot cover 100% of your average production. You can choose coverage levels from 50% to 85%. There is a built-in production deductible. Coverage levels are in 5% increments. Coverage levels are relative to premium, the lower the coverage the lower the premium, the more coverage you buy the higher the premium. It comes back to how much risk you feel safe with. For example, if you have Cabernet Sauvignon and your average is 5 tons per acre. At the 75% coverage level you would be covered for 3.75 tons per acre. You would have a 25% deductible (1.25 tons per acre). To have a payable loss you would have to lose more than 25% of your average production in a year.

  Crop insurance is designed to help a grower have enough money to be able to produce a crop the following year.  I have had winery owners complain to me that it doesn’t cover the cost of how much their wine is worth.  While I can totally understand this, it is the growing costs that are being insured against loss. Crop insurance does not cover the production costs of making wine or juice etc.  What is being covered with grape crop insurance is the price per ton of a specific variety as if you were to sell it.   Only the Causes of Loss that are listed in the policy are being insured against.  You can have an insurable cause reduce the value of your grapes (reduced brix, smoke taint etc.)  and be paid a claim based on the set county price and the difference in the dollar amount received.

  Here are the Causes of Loss for Grapes from the National Fact Sheet from the USDA:

Causes of Loss

  You are protected against the following:

•    Adverse weather conditions, including natural perils such as hail, frost, freeze, wind, drought, and excess precipitation;

•    Earthquake;

•    Failure of the irrigation water supply, if caused by an insured peril during the insurance period;

•    Fire;

•    Insects and plant disease, except for insufficient or improper application of pest or disease control measures;

•    Wildlife; or

•    Volcanic eruption.

  Additionally, we will not insure against:

•     Phylloxera, regardless of cause; or

•     Inability to market the grapes for any reason other than actual physical damage for an insurable cause of loss.

  Crop insurance is partially subsidized through the USDA. Premiums are subsidized from 100% at Catastrophic Coverage (there is an administrative fee though) to 41% depending on coverage level chosen.  A lot of growers “buy-up” coverage from 65% to 80% and their premium subsidy is around 50% to 60%. The subsidy makes crop insurance an affordable risk mitigation tool. 

  Hopefully, you don’t have a lot of situations where you would have a loss.  But as a grower you need to assess your risks.  These must be taken into consideration for the growing region your vineyard is located in. Here are some other questions to ask yourself.  What are your break-even costs?  Do you know your cost of production with projected inflation? Have you evaluated the risk of a severe crop loss? What varieties are planted in your vineyard?  Some types of Vitis vinifera are more susceptible to weather issues than others. Are you able to repay current operating loans without crop insurance in the event of a loss?

  Our job as a crop insurance agent or crop insurance agency is not to convince you that you need crop insurance.  It is to help you make an educated decision, based on your risks, on whether you need crop insurance.  And then, if it is a good fit to mitigate your risks, to determine how much coverage is needed.  No one wants to have a loss, but they do unfortunately happen.

Vineyard Health

Cyndi

Grapevine virus diseases that are best detected in the spring

Typical foiliar symptom of Grapevine fanleaf virus in a California Vineyard
Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine fanleaf virus in a California Vineyard

By Judit Monis, Ph.D., Vineyard and Plant Health Consultant

One of the most important factors to take into consideration when establishing a new vineyard is the health status of the planting material.  The most common way to transmit and perpetrate grapevine diseases caused by viruses is by making multiple cuttings of one infected vine. 

  The detection and diagnostics of important pathogens affecting grapevines is seasonal and their concentration varies throughout the year. This article will describe important grapevine diseases caused by viruses that are more effectively detected in the laboratory in the spring.  In addition, the viruses described in this article are transmitted by nematodes.  Therefore, overall sanitation and good cultural practices are needed to maintain a healthy and productive vineyard. 

Grapevine Viral Decline & Degeneration

  Viral diseases are normally have named based on the crop they infect, and the symptoms observed in diseased plants.  However, with a deeper characterization of the different pathogens (disease causal agents) that infect grapevines it has been possible to determine that many different viruses (bacteria or fungi) can cause similar symptoms. 

  In this article I will  only focus on the description of viruses associated with grapevine decline and degeneration diseases.  The viruses causing decline are closely related and grouped in the genus “Nepovirus “ because  they are transmitted by nematodes (ne) and have a polyhedral (po) shape.  The most important viruses reported in the United States are Grapevine fanleaf, Arabis mosaic, Tobacco ringspot and Tomato ring spot. 

  Other viruses that are less prevalent in the USA include the European Nepoviruses: Raspberry ringspot, Peach rosette, and Tomato black ring viruses.  All these viruses, regardless of their names, can cause significant economic loss in the vineyard and must be kept out of propagation and planting material.

Fanleaf Disease

Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine Fanleaf virus in a California vineyard
Typical foliar symptom of Grapevine Fanleaf virus in a California vineyard

  Fanleaf disease, caused by Grapevine fanleaf virus (GFLV), is one the most serious and devastating grapevine viral diseases. Most grape varieties are susceptible and display rapid decline, sparce, and low quality of fruit.  Affected vines are smaller than healthy vines. Up to 80% of yield loss can be expected in severe infections.  Furthermore, the life span of the vineyard is decreased considerably in infected vines.  Foliar symptoms included misshapen leaves with the appearance of an open fan (thus the name fanleaf). Other visible vine symptoms include yellowing (chlorosis, mosaic), bright yellow bands near veins (vein banding), abnormal branching, and short internodes.   Vines affected by fanleaf disease have poor fruit set and the fruit ripens irregularly.  Grapevine fanleaf virus is transmitted by the dagger nematode Xiphinema index. The disease is found in all areas where Vitis vinifera and American hybrid rootstocks are grown.

Arabis Mosaic Decline

  Symptoms associated with Arabis mosaic virus (ArMV) are similar to fanleaf decline and include leaf chlorosis, necrosis, and distortion, shortened internodes, reduced growth, and overall decline.  The virus infects many hosts and has worldwide distribution.  Although this virus has been reported in different areas in North America there is no evidence of spread.  In USA, ArMV has been found in Missouri Vineyards.  The virus is transmitted by several nematode vectors, but the principal natural vector is Xiphinema diversicaudatum.  In French vineyards it is common to find mixed infections of ArMV and GFLV, causing a disease known as court-noué.  Due to the soil movement of the viruses by their nematode vectors, the infected areas are seen as yellow patches that increase in size as the nematodes continue to spread the disease from vine to vine.

Yellow Vein Disease

  Yellow vein disease, caused by Tomato ring spot virus (ToRSV) -also known as Tomato ring spot decline and Tomato ring spot disease.  Symptoms vary but are most drastic in cold climates. Foliar symptoms include leaf distortion, mottling, and reduced leaf size.  Affected vines are stunted, have increased susceptibility to cold damage, and display small grape clusters.  Typical yellow vein symptoms are rarely found in in California. However, this disease is endemic in the northeastern U.S. and Canada. Tomato ring spot virus is transmitted by several nematode species, but Xiphinema americanum is the main natural vector.

Tobacco Ring Spot Decline

  Tobacco Ring Spot Decline, caused by Tobacco ring spot virus (TRSV), induces decline in grapevines.  Symptoms are indistinguishable from those caused by ToRSV.  The disease has been reported in New York and Pennsylvania.  Tobacco ring spot virus is also transmitted by Xiphinema americanum.

Diagnostic Methods

  The viruses that cause grapevine decline and degeneration diseases have been well characterized. The nucleic acid sequence is available for these viruses and reliable disease diagnostic methods have been available for a long time.  The most commonly used methods commonly used in the laboratory for the detection of these viruses in infected grapevines are ELISA (Enzyme-linked immune-assay) and RT-PCR.  ELISA is available for the detection of ArMV, GFLV, TRSV, and  ToRSV.  In spite of potential mutation of the viruses, sensitive primers for  reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) have been developed for the detection of ArMV, GFLV, TRSV, ToRSV.  RT-PCR is currently considered  the “gold standard” for virus detection as viral sequences allow the development of detection primers much faster and less laborious than the elaboration of antibodies that could be used in ELISA.  Sampling methodology remains one of most important factors for the sensitive detection of grapevine viruses.   Work in my laboratory has shown that young tips and leaves collected in the spring season provide the most reliable material for the detection of any of the Nepoviruses that infect grapevines.  However, it is possible to detect Nepoviruses in dormant cuttings, albeit in lower concentrations, allowing to test for a larger number of viruses in the fall.

Infection Prevention and Control

  As mentioned earlier, the main method of transmission of grapevine viruses is by the movement or propagation of infected vines.   Virus transmission may occur by grafting infected scion buds onto healthy rootstock  cuttings or vice-versa.  As mentioned above, nematodes are known to transmit specifically certain grapevine-infecting viruses, particularly those that cause grapevine decline and fanleaf diseases.  Infected nematodes can spread on the roots of plants, through soil, water, and by routine vineyard cultural practices. Furthermore, many of the viruses that cause grapevine decline diseases are known to infect weeds present in the vineyard.  Therefore, routine nematode and weed control is a recommended practice to keep the viruses and vectors out of the vineyard.

Conclusions

  Prevention of virus spread in the vineyard is the most important disease strategy. 

Once a viral disease is established in the vineyard or nursery block there is no treatment or cure.  The only and most drastic solution will be the removal of infected and/or declined vines.  Obviously, infected vines are a source of infection and will allow the spread the viruses to nearby healthy vines/vineyards. To avoid devastating health issues in the vineyard only virus-tested vines should be planted.   When grafting over o “top working” vines in an established vineyard, the existent vines as well as the incoming cuttings must be tested.  Laboratory tests conducted in the right season using appropriate sampling methods will help rule-out infection, detect the disease causal agent(s), and avoid the spread of harmful disease-causing viruses.

  Judit Monis, Ph.D. is a California-based international plant health consultant, that provides specialized services to help growers, vineyard managers, and nursery personnel avoid the propagation and transmission of diseases caused by bacteria, fungi, and viruses.   Judit is fluent in English, Italian, and Spanish and is available to consult in other important grape growing regions of the word.   Please visit juditmonis.com for information or contact juditmonis@yahoo.com to request a consulting session.

Small Intruders, Big Damage

Cyndi

Managing vineyard pests from the ground up

an ai picture generated to show different birds and rodents in a vineyard

By Alyssa L. Ochs

From rodents to birds and larger wildlife, vineyards must address a wide range of pest challenges that can impact fruit quality and yield.

  As climate patterns shift worldwide, vineyards are refining their pest-control strategies and adopting a more integrated, initiative-taking approach. To better understand this trend and effective solutions, The Grapevine connected with two pest management companies that specialize in vineyard protection.

Early-Year Vineyard Pest Strategies

  Pest threats in vineyards vary significantly by region and season. However, the most common pests in vineyards include rodents, such as gophers, mice, and voles. Birds target ripening fruit, causing damage to grape skins, and reducing yields. Meanwhile, larger animals, such as raccoons, deer and wild pigs, can devastate entire vineyard blocks in just a brief time.

  George Horetsky, senior sales representative at Trident Enterprises, told The Grapevine that many vineyard pest problems begin quietly at the start of the year, in February and early March, even before there is green tissue on the vines. While your crews are working elsewhere early in the year, wildlife feeding and rodent damage often begin, resulting in crop losses and labor disruptions later.

  Trident is a well-established wildlife exclusion expert and has been providing high-quality fencing for over 40 years.

  “Walk your perimeter and take note of any weak points, including corners, gates, dips and drainage crossings,” Horetsky advised. “Be sure to look for rodent or rabbit activity near trunk level, especially along edges and under cover. Now you can confirm your early-season scouting plan for bud swell and budbreak. If netting or deer exclusion is part of the plan, lock in specs and delivery windows before the rush.”

Common Pest Control Questions

  We also asked Horetsky about the most frequent questions his company receives from vineyards about pest control. Vineyard’s first practical question is typically where to even start with pest control, and Trident always encourages customers to begin with timing and pressure mapping.

  “Here you can identify which pests are causing the costliest damage during the most sensitive window, and where pressure begins,” Horetsky said. “Once when and where are clear, the plan becomes more targeted, including where physical exclusion makes the most sense.”

  Trident customers also ask if they truly need an eight-foot deer exclusion. Horetsky said that if deer pressure is consistent, they recommend eight feet as a reliable baseline, especially on edge blocks and high-valve areas.

  “Deer find weak points first, so height matters, but corners, gates, low spots, and terrain transitions matter just as much,” he said.

  To reduce insect pressure without constantly reacting, Horetsky and his colleagues advise pairing consistent monitoring with prevention and targeted interventions.

  “As buds begin to swell, it is important to scout early for bud-feeding insects and have a response plan ready, because that damage cannot be undone later in the season,” Horetsky said. “Talk with your pest management partner for your best solutions. Insect netting is not a universal solution, but it can be a strong fit in specific applications where recurring pressure or high-value blocks justify physical exclusion as a complement to broader IPM practices.”

  Horetsky mentioned how to about practical bird control approach.  “Bird pressure tends to spike right when quality matters most,” he said. “Many vineyards choose netting in targeted blocks, especially high-value rows, early varieties, and perimeter areas where birds stage and return daily. The best choice is the one crews can deploy quickly under real harvest pressure and store, so it remains usable year after year.”

  Regarding birds, we also asked the bird control experts at Avian Enterprises for their insights into common vineyard questions. Avian Enterprises is a trusted industry leader in providing safe, effective, and environmentally responsible bird control solutions.

  Dan Kramer, the company’s technical director, shared that the most common question they receive is whether Avian Control is harmful and if it alters the taste of wine.

  “Avian Control is a completely non-toxic product that is formulated with only food grade ingredients,” Kramer said. “The ingredients in Avian Control are widely used in food and flavoring designed for human consumption.”

  “While Avian Control is highly irritating to birds, it has no effect on humans,” he also explained. “Avian Control is highly biodegradable and breaks down completely in the field or during the fermentation process eliminating any possible unwanted wine flavors.”

The Evolution of Vineyard Pest Control

  Although specific pest threats have remained constant in many vineyard regions, pest control strategies have evolved from reactive chemical treatments to integrated pest management solutions. In the past, vineyard pest control relied heavily on chemical applications to quickly eliminate threats. But today, pest control companies and vineyards are more interested in combining biological controls, mechanical deterrents, and habitat management, with targeted chemical use only applied when necessary.

  George Horetsky from Trident shared that over time, his company’s role has shifted from simply helping source materials to partnering with dealers and installers to help them build systems that last.

  “Today we spend a lot of time ensuring our customers receive the right materials for their project and getting them shipped out as soon as possible,” Horetsky said. “We focus heavily on the places where failures start, including corners, terminations, gates, and grade changes, and we help troubleshoot field questions, so projects do not stall.

  “In short, we have become more outcome-focused,” Horetsky concluded. “The goal is fewer breaches, less rework and longer service life.”

  Kramer from Avian Enterprises also told The Grapevine how his company’s pest control approach has evolved over the years.

  “Avian Control was first marketed as a bird repellent designed for commercial pest control applications,” Kramer explained.

“At the behest of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, we began to offer Avian Control to the agricultural industry, where it was met with great enthusiasm. Sales of Avian Control continue to grow in the agricultural industry due to its effectiveness and non-toxic nature.”

How to Save Money and Improve Efficiency with Pest Control

  Effective pest control involves more than just protecting vulnerable grapes because it is also a significant operational expense. However, vineyard pest management companies emphasize that proactive planning can help vineyards substantially reduce their long-term costs.

  Horetsky from Trident told us that the biggest savings rarely come from finding the cheapest option. Instead, the real savings come from reducing repeat labor and avoidable loss. He explained that many vineyards improve efficiency by prioritizing protection in the highest-return areas first, such as edge blocks near cover, early ripening varieties, and premium rows where quality drives value.

  “Another major advantage is eliminating weak points instead of just patching symptoms,” Horetsky said. “Underbuilt corners and ends, gate areas treated as an afterthought, gaps at low spots and inconsistent tensioning create ongoing repair cycles. Fixing those details reduces rework.”

  He also said that pest control choices should align with a vineyard’s labor realities.

  “If your tactic requires daily attention during ripening, it will eventually fail,” he said. “Vineyards save money when they choose approaches that reduce emergency trips and last-minute installs. A simple comparison that includes material cost, install time, expected repair hours, and avoided loss often clarifies what is truly cost-effective.”

  Kramer at Avian Enterprises told The Grapevine that his company’s product, Avian Control, eliminates the need for netting vineyards, saving vast amounts of labor and time that can be better used for other crop management activities.

  “The increased yield that can be achieved through the use of Avian Control along with the reduced costs combine to increase profitability and ensure the quality of the harvest,” Kramer said.

The Future of Pest Control in Vineyards

  Looking ahead, innovation, sustainability and education are at the heart of modern vineyard pest control strategies. Pest management providers like Trident Enterprises and Avian Enterprises regularly collaborate with vineyards to develop effective, sustainable solutions to protect grapes and the broader environment.

  Horetsky from Trident shared that today’s vineyards want reliability, not just products. Therefore, Trident’s focus is to make vineyard planning easier with upfront support for layouts, netting selection, corner and gate planning and terrain considerations.

  “We are also committed to reducing project delays with dependable supply,” Horetsky said. “Install quality often depends on timing, and rushed installs create weak points. We continue to invest in inventory depth so contractors can stick to schedules and avoid substitutions that weaken the plan. To support tighter project timelines, Trident Fence has expanded distribution capacity to include our new warehouse in Reno, Nevada, providing our West Coast customers with faster delivery windows.”   As vineyard operations become more complex and environmental conditions continue to shift, grape growers who invest in initiative-taking, integrated strategies will be best positioned to protect crops, reduce costs, and

Producing Pacific Northwest Chillable Reds

Cyndi

What exactly are chillable reds?

By Becky Garrison

So, what exactly are chillable reds? And for wineries, is this simply a flashy trend whose popularity will fade over time or a new way of producing and marketing wine that speaks to the changing consumer wine preferences in the US?

To help answer these questions, I surveyed a curated selection of Pacific Northwest winemakers, who hail from a region known for producing world-class award-winning wines. Evan Rose, reserve winemaker for Stoller Family Estate (Dayton, OR), describes chillable reds as “a style of red wine defined by balance, bright acidity, low tannins, and freshness. These qualities allow the wines to feel lifted and expressive when served slightly chilled, without losing depth or structure.” Piper Underbrink of Sealionne (Newberg, OR) adds that their chillable red called Phoque Red is “fruit forward with a large fruity bouquet that isn’t tamped down by the chilling of the wine. This wine is a Pinot Noir designed to be more vibrant and electric – a wine that is enjoyable and easy to drink.” 

In the estimation of Dusty Jenkins, head winemaker for Gilbert Cellars (Yakima, WA), chilled reds offer a “Goldilocks” solution for modern wine drinking: light yet complex, refreshing yet expressive. “They’re easy to sip, incredibly food-friendly, and versatile across seasons and settings. They are approachable for casual drinkers, but interesting enough to spark conversation for those who want to dig deeper,” he notes. Along those lines, Robert Gomez, co-founder of Hoqueteus Wines (Walla Walla, WA), equates a chillable wine to a “gluggable wine” that is “fresh and quenching that benefit from a good chill slightly lower in temperature than cellar temperature.” 

Producing Chillable Reds

When crafting a chillable red wine, John Grochau, founder and head winemaker for Grochau Cellars (Amity, OR) points to the need to choose grapes known for fresh acidity that are harvested on the earlier side of ripeness to showcase more of what he describes as a “crunchy” expression of the fruit. He adds that fermentations should be overseen lightly to limit the extraction of tannins and the wine should not be aged too long, to preserve the zesty freshness of a youthful wine.

Kelsey Albro Itämeri, owner and winemaker, Itä Wines (Walla Walla, WA) describes how she makes her carbonic Zinfandel using a method called carbonic maceration, a technique popularized throughout Beaujolais in producing light bodied red wines such as Beaujolais Nouveau. She starts with 100% whole clustered grapes that are not destemmed. Then she adds carbon dioxide to top, which serves to create an environment where intracellular fermentation will start to happen within the unbroken berries. As the enzymes from each grape begin to ferment a little bit, they will convert some sugar into alcohol while also absorbing tannins from the skins.

For Gilbert Cellars, Jenkins’ produces a Nouveau made using Pinot Noir grapes that begins with whole-cluster carbonic maceration, followed by pressing and completion of fermentation off the lees. It then undergoes malolactic fermentation in neutral oak. They also offer a TV Wine made using a relatively traditional approach, but its uniqueness lies in the co-fermentation of red and white grapes, finished in stainless steel like white wine. Both wines are bottled unfined and unfiltered. 

Gomez’a Nouveau of Syrah, a 100% carbonic red released every November of the same year of the harvest, is the most “chillable” of his reds. When selecting grapes for us in his chillable reds, Gomez looks for younger vines with a higher juice to skin ratio and earlier picks. Carbonic maceration allows him to get his wine to a lighter, less tannic style while amplifying the wine’s fruity character, thus resulting in a wine that is low in alcohol and high in freshness.

Stoller Family Estate’s Whole Cluster Pinot Noir is also made via carbonic maceration. Rose opines how this method heightens aromatics, softens tannins, and preserves fresh fruit, making it especially refreshing when served slightly chilled.

Some winemakers like Thomas Monroe, co-founder of Division Wine Co. (Portland, OR), ferment their chilled reds in closed-top stainless steel or concrete tanks. For carbonic maceration fermentations, they will begin by adding carbon dioxide, which they push through using a CO₂ gas or dry ice. Once the primary fermentation creates enough CO₂ there is no need to add more. Over 10 to 20 days, the skins will release the juice. which needs to be tasted daily to ensure the ferment is strong and that too much tannin is not being picked up. He has observed a rise in people experimenting with blending red and white grapes together using different CO₂ ferments or post ferment blends.

Itämeri finds the ensuring result from this low-intervention winemaking is a dry red wine with no residuals, which they then age in neutral French oak barrels. Most winemakers age their chillable reds in neutral oak barrels which gives the wine a smooth taste on the palate. Some winemakers like Underbrink choose to age their wine in 100 percent stainless steel for eight months. “This preserves the fruit forward characteristics and creates a super easy smooth red wine,” she reflects. 

When Kiona Vineyards and Winery (Benton City, WA) planted the first Lemberger in the United States, they did not set out to produce a chillable red. Rather as General Manager JJ Williams recalls, “This hearty cultivar produced a pretty affable, easy to drink crowd pleasing wine without a lot of expensive élevage or cooperage expenditure. Their Lemberger style is very fruit-forward, but not light like a Gamay or Pinot Noir; rather, it is bold, like the Cabernets grown in the Red Mountain AVA. Unlike Cabernet, which necessitates a lengthier oak program, Williams notes they can put this wine in neutral oak barrels for eight months to achieve a smooth taste.

Canned Chillable Reds

       Tiquette Bramlett, founder of Portland-based Henderson Ave Wines, chose to produce a chilled canned red blend wine as she saw a gap in the market for a red wine that is not tied to formality or seasonality. “This wine fills the gap between ‘I want something serious’ and ‘I want something fun,’ she opined.

Bramlett and her team approach their canned wines with the same intention as their bottled wine by starting with quality fruit and letting it speak. For the chillable red, that means harvesting at a point that preserves brightness and managing extraction gently, so the wine stays expressive and fresh rather than dense. In this process, they are not trying to force red wine to behave differently. Rather as Bramlett notes, “we’re choosing to make a red wine that’s meant to be chilled. Minimal manipulation, thoughtful fermentation, and restraint in the cellar allow the wine to hold its shape and energy even at cooler temperatures.” 

These chillable reds are designed to move easily across cuisines and conversations, made for tables where stories overlap and nothing feels precious.”They are built with freshness in mind. Lighter on their feet, driven by fruit and acidity rather than heaviness or oak. Chilling them does not mute their character; it sharpens it,” Bramlett adds.

How to Serve Chillable Reds

       At the Kiona Vineyards’ tasting room, Williams found they had the prefect setup to evaluate the perfect temperature for their chilled wine by experimenting with chilling reds with their red wine fridge (58 degrees) and their white wine fridge (50 degrees). Through experimentation, they discern that the perfect balance for the chilled reds was to move them from the red fridge to the white wine fridge until the bottle reaches 48 to 50 degrees. Most winemakers concur with serving chilled reds in the 45-to-50-degree range though Gomez serves his chilled reds in the tasting room at the cellar temperature of 55 degrees. 

For those who do not have a wine refrigerator, Itämeri recommends placing the wine in a regular refrigerator for 15 to 20 minutes. Given most refrigerators are at 38 degrees, be mindful not to leave the chilled wine for much longer as the aim is for a light chill not icy cold as in the case of cider or beer. 

Chilled reds connect with Monroe the most when he is looking for a chilled wine for summer sipping that has a little bit more body and structure than most white wines would, and less than most reds. He pairs these wines with foods that have little bit more delicateness to them and nuance. Along those lines, Rose thinks their Stoller Family Estate 2024 Whole Cluster Pinot Noir would work well with an herb-crusted chicken. “The herbs mirror the wine’s baking spice and dried floral notes, while the crispy skin plays nicely with its bright acidity,” he notes. Underbrink also takes a lighter approach by pairing her chilled wine with oysters.

Grochau finds his chilled wines pair great with a charcuterie plate with spicy meats and younger cheeses, as well as chips and hummus. In addition, he discovered that his Convivial, a blend of Gamay Noir and Pinot Noir, is the perfect Thanksgiving wine because the sour edged fresh fruits bring a nice amount of lift to lighten up an extraordinarily rich meal. Gomez also likes to pair his wine with similar hearty spicy and savory dishes like Merguez sausage. In a similar vein, Itämeri pairs with their chilled red with meats have a little bit of char on them like a hot dog. As she proclaims, “Our carbonic Zinfandel is not so expensive that you feel like you have to plan a fancy menu to feel like you have an impressive wine.” 

Future of Chillable Reds 

Overall, these winemakers find these wines are successful with a younger audience, people in their mid-40s and younger. Grochau notices how the younger wine drinking audience is not tied to ‘traditional’ styles of wines that their parents liked. “They want something that shows a different point of view even from the same grape.” Also, as chillable reds tend to have lower alcohol content and are made more in the low intervention or natural wine camp, they appeal to those consumers concerned about their health.

Since chillable wines tend to cost less to produce than a lot of other reds the overall price point for these wines tends to be a bit lower than other red wines. This makes chillable reds a nice entry wine for budget conscious consumers looking to expand their wine palate. Also, as people are just now tuning into chillable reds, they taste this wine without any preconceived notions of what chillable reds should taste like unlike wines such as Chardonnay that already have well proven flavor profiles. 

Finally, Rose points out how climate change may be affecting a growing interest in chilled reds from red wine drinkers of all demographics. “As summers grow warmer, red wine drinkers aren’t moving away from reds, but they are seeking styles that hold their character when served slightly chilled. Pinot Noir’s natural versatility makes it especially well-suited to this shift, and these two wines, by style and intention, deliver freshness, balance, and complexity at cooler serving temperatures.”

Easy Reduction Testing for Wines

Cyndi

The wine smells good however…

a man and 2 women in lab coats working in a lab

By Thomas J. Payette, Winemaking Consultant

Just because your wine smells good doesn’t mean it can’t smell better.  Always keep this in mind as a winemaker or winery owner.  The largest violation of “house palate”, a process where winemakers overlook their wine flaws because they taste their own wines too often, is the oversight that their wines may be reduced.  Reduced or reductive is a broad term that covers many sulfide compounds ranging from hydrogen sulfide, rotten egg, to other more complex aromatics that may smell like cabbage, dill weed, onions or garlic.

  Early detection of these flaws is imperative to clean up the wines and to make sure these compounds do not evolve toward other more difficult to remove compounds, mercaptans, often needing ascorbic acid additions to make the wine reactive to the most commonly used remedy copper sulfate.

  Copper sulfate trials are extremely easy and there is no excuse for each wine created not to go through at least three quick trials with copper sulfate to see if the wine aroma will indeed become improved.

When?  I recommend each wine be reviewed:

1.    Anytime one suspects a wine to be reduced or smells hydrogen sulfide in the fermenter.

2.   Review all wines just after the fermentation process as a blanket rule process to discover any wines that may improve from the copper sulfate addition.

3.   Three months prior to bottling and preferably before any stability processing actions have been taken.  Bentonite removes copper ions.

4.   Roughly three days before bottling.

Why?  As suggested, in the first sentence of this article, winemakers should review each wine’s aroma to see if faults exist.  Some of the faults do not express themselves directly as Hydrogen Sulfide or Mercaptans.  Some wines may have just enough of one of these compounds, or both, to lightly mask the underlying fruit expression.  Winemakers may not know a nice smelling wine can actually smell nicer.  It is an easy test – so why not run these trails!

Where?  Most winemakers will perform this test in the winery laboratory, away from the chill of the cellar floor, where a wine will have the ability to open up and allow for undisrupted critical analysis of the wine’s aroma.  If winemakers cannot find this tranquility in their winery, it is recommended to take a sample home and do the trials in a home environment.  One must be able to focus and have conditions for the wine to open up.  This is critical.

Tools Needed:

•     Clean wineglasses with a narrow focused opening to the bowl (I.N.A.O. style). All the exact same size and style.

•     Glass watch covers for each glass (optional but highly recommended)

•     Representative samples of each wine to be sampled. Between 65-70 degrees F.

•     1.0% Copper Sulfate solution  (One percent)

•     Spit cup – but not suggested to taste these trials.

•     Clear and “in tune” nasal passages

How?  This test is very easy to perform as long as the environment is proper for the aroma analysis.  If possible, work closely with someone else to mix up the wineglasses after treatment so you will be blind on this analysis.  If this can’t be done – do proceed since experience will help take any bias out of the results.

1.    Place three (“aroma free”) dry clean wine glasses on a table and label them x, 4 and > or any other random characters that may not lead a person to select one wine glass over another but allow them to identify what glass or glasses may be different. 

2    .Fill each glass with the same quantity of wine.  This is often between 80-100 milliliters per wine glass depending on the wine glass size.

3.   Have another person place 1 drop of the 1% Copper Sulfate into one of the glasses and to swirl all three glasses equally to mix the addition into the wine and to treat each glass equally with a swirl.

4.  Place watch glasses over each of the glass openings and leave the glasses to sit for about 5 to 10 minutes.

5.   Approach the wine glasses and remove the watch glasses one at a time to smell the aromas in the headspace of the glass.  Go through the wines at least three times and perhaps more to select the wine that smells the best.  Record your results.

6.   Leave the wine glasses for another 15 minutes or longer and re-approach in the same fashion by smelling each wine individually and select the glass or glasses that smell the best. 

7.   After determining that the wine is actually changed and changed for the better, have the person that added the copper sulfate to the glass reveal the glass that was treated.

8.   Mentally extrapolate after collecting all the data whether the addition of copper sulfate had a positive impact on the wine or not.  Be aware not to select the copper sulfate addition wine – just because it is different.  The wine should smell better – not just different.

9.   Once an addition is deemed helpful, proceed to making the adjustment in the cellar as referenced below under calculation.  This test is not quantitative.

This test is sometimes known as a triangle test.

Spicing it Up!

  Once you and your assistant get comfortable with the test, he or she can be instructed to switch around the treatment regime to perhaps treat two of the three wineglasses.  This will keep the person smelling the wines “on their toes” to actually identify what wine smells better and to truly focus on the improved wine.

  Referencing the fact that a spit cup was listed under the “Tools needed” list above, one should have their spit cup ready.  This should be used if by habit one should accidentally taste the wines.  Remember, technically, Copper Sulfate is a poison so winemakers should resist tasting our trails and only focus on the aromas.

  One can build on this test to correct Mercaptans, also.  Mercaptans are Hydrogen Sulfide based compounds that have transformed to a more complicated chemical compound.  Ascorbic acid trials may need to be tested for effectiveness in these cases.  Reference other sources to review this process as it will not be covered at this time.

Calculation:

  In my opinion there is no truly reliable calculation for this test to determine quantitatively how much copper sulfate to add.  In most cases it is best to add small quantities of copper sulfate to a wine nearing the range of 1.0 gram per 1000 gallons to as low as one-half a gram per 1000 gallons to clean up small defects.  This is a good starting point.  From experience, you may start to recognize a wine that may need more Copper Sulfate to combat more pungent aromas.  This chemical is a strong oxidizer so use limited amounts.  Overuse could have serious downsides to your wine.

Removal of Copper After Use

  In most cases, only small amounts of copper sulfate are used to clean up a wine so we rarely need to address lowering the copper content in the wine.  Please recognize when larger quantities have been used.  Use an outside laboratory to actually measure the amount of residual copper in your wine.  In many cases, for white wines treated prior to protein fining with bentonite, they may clean up on their own.  I have seen copper levels drop significantly after protein fining and filtering of white wines.  Many years ago, wines may have needed a “Blue-Fining” but one rarely has those issues in today’s winemaking plus they are not permitted in the United States.

The Future

  According to some scientist we need to more closely look at nutrients and their role with the yeast.  In some cases too much or too little nutrients may cause Hydrogen Sulfide production and it is thought to link into the micronutrients.  Nitrogen issues may not be the driving factor here.  This will help us stay away from using copper sulfate, which does have adverse affects to the wine in addition to cleaning the wine up sensorialy.  Until that time we need to address the problem in a fashion we can, such as copper sulfate.  Stay tuned.

Other Helpful Tips

  Caution is expressed not to confuse a change in aroma in the wine with this being considered better.  This is called “Stripping”.

  Caution is also expressed not to consume / taste wines that have added copper sulfate added during these trials.

  Do these trials next to any wine that may be a follow-up bottling for that wine to see if consistency is achieved and to focus on other nuances that may easily be changed.The Tax and Trade Bureau does regulate the amount of copper sulfate a winemaker may use or have in its finished wine product.  Please research this amount and have a clear understanding of the use of copper sulfate.  It is a strong oxidizer and considered poisonous.

  A reduced character may become hard to notice if the wine has just been racked, transferred, filtered or in any way brought into a less anaerobic state.  These reductive compounds may be just under the threshold of the human nose sensitivity and difficult to smell.  If this same wine is bottled, the reductive character may become very pronounced.

Screw cap wines may need more serious aroma reviews and evaluations since these seals are more anaerobic than previous seals.

  Caution is urged when making wine to be bottled under screw cap to make sure no underlying reductiveness is present.  Outside labs also offer “headspace sniffing” if one feels they need additional help.  With canning this are even more of an issue as well as residual copper ions.

  Wines exposed to light may become “lightstruck”.  Light struck is a term used to describe that light has attacked an amino acid and caused a mercaptan-type aroma.  This phenomenon is somewhat more common with flint bottles and sparkling wines.

  Do these trials.  They are easy and you may really appreciate the end result.

References: 

  Amerine, M.A., Berg, H.W., Cruess,W.V. 1972. The Technology of Wine Making

  Dharmadhikari, M.R., Wilker, K.L. 2001. Micro Vinification.

  Zoecklein, B.W., Fugelsang, K.C., Gump, B.H., and Nury, F.S. 1999. Wine Analysis and Production

  Verbal discussion with Mr. Jacques Boissenot, Mr. Jacques Recht, Mr. Joachim Hollerith and Mr. Chris Johnson.

Short Course:

•    This is qualitative and not quantitative

•    Make sure the change in aroma is not just “stripping”

•    Copper Sulfate is a poison – be careful to check residual copper present after larger uses.

•    Know when to use outside lab “electronic sniffers”

Winegrapes on High Calcium Soils

Cyndi

Why some high calcium soils produced excellent grapes

a photo showing a row down a long vineyard

By Neal Kinsey, Kinsey Agricultural Services

One quandary that continually presents itself for vineyards as well as other crops is why some high calcium soils produced excellent grapes while others in the same vicinity (and sometimes the same variety in the same vineyard) looked and tested exactly the same, but were of less quality and at times even a definite problem in terms of the wines produced.

  When that happens, could it be the soil test being taken incorrectly?  It could be, especially if there are wide variations in the soil test numbers, and particularly the expression of cation exchange capacity, from year to year.  But what if the soil tests are basically consistent from year to year and look the same in the good and bad areas?

  First, consider that when results seem inconsistent from the use of the same methods that can ordinarily identify why soils have good or average or poor fertility, something more must be considered.  There is usually a good, common-sense answer, we just must search to find what it is and use it to solve the problem.

  We have worked with soils producing from excellent to extremely poor wines that measured exceedingly high in calcium since the 1970’s.  From that experience it has become evident that the problem is more than just too much calcium, as some soils with higher calcium levels produce better wines than others that have lower concentrations in the soil where poorer results have been experienced.

  Considering all the soils that were analyzed from year to year, the problem seemed relatively rare, but still the problem was always present in enough soils to be of concern and continue looking for a sensible solution.  These different areas are not normally submitted for a comparison. Most of the time such soils were either doing well or doing poorly, not enough of both in the same vineyard for growers to be sufficiently concerned to pay the cost and have both analyzed separately.  And the few times it was done, the good and bad soil all looked to be bad.

a man and a teenage boy kneeling in a grape vineyard holding the soil

  Around 2005, while reviewing some of the original work of Dr. William Albrecht there was a clue that just “jumped out” from a page on his explanation of measuring cation exchange.  He explained that the sum of the cations was generally the best approach to determine the soils cation exchange capacity due to the costs involved, but there was a more accurate way it could be used to establish that number.  But he did not say what it was.  Still his comment was sufficient enough to point out that, though generally too costly to use for the general soil test, there is a more effective way to determine how many positively charged cations can be attracted and held on the surface of soil particles until enough acidity from plant roots or soil microbes could release them for use by the plants growing there.

  For years some concerned educators and consultants had asked the question, “But when you measure calcium, what about the influence of free calcium?”  This was referring to the amount of calcium in an available form in the soil which was so plentiful there could not be enough negatively charged clay particle for all of them to be attracted and held – adsorbed – by a more limited number of clay colloids present? 

  Here was a possible way to differentiate between how much calcium was present in a soil, but also how much was able to be attracted and held and how much more was present that had no negatively charged clay particles to attract and hold them – thus the “free calcium” still there that influenced the sum of the cations, but the assumed negatively charged clay particles were not actually abundant enough to be holding them along with the other normally needed cations, namely magnesium, potassium and sodium.

a woman holding a bottle with a label that says soil calcium test

  Since the “sum of the cations” was used to calculate the amount of negative charge provided by a matching amount from the clay colloids in a soil, the Cation Exchange Capacity was thus overstated.  This also eventually showed that the amounts needed of the other cations (especially Mg, K and Na.) when extremely excessive in a vineyard soil can also be overstated, making it appear such soils needed more than they could tolerate.

  This was the beginning of the process that ultimately helped determine and define not only soils that had too much calcium, but also magnesium, potassium, or sodium, or some combination of those.  This was then causing the “sum of the cations” to over-inflate the amount of negative charge (expressed as the cation exchange capacity)?

  This took time to work out and discover, it did not all come to be understood at once, because there was no protocol developed to determine all of this at the time.  The initial efforts began with the crop of 2006, but it took years of actual field work to solve the myriads of problems this has created.  And that field work was based on results that when achieved more than paid for what needed to be done and increased profits by increasing either yield or quality and oftentimes both at once.

  Initially it was thought that only a few dozen such tests would be needed based on the volume of soil we saw before beginning this project.  But as the results became evident and the word spread to others with similar problems in their grapes, that numbers has grown to be hundreds per month, especially from the extremely high calcium soils of the Western United States, Austria, France, and Germany.

  In fact, reputable long-established wineries from Europe have sent samples for analysis with no mention of such a problem, but by doing the tests properly, it was possible to point out what was happening.  One example was a winery that had a history of many prize-winning wines, but the soils they submitted did not reflect that.  And when we pointed out that these were problematic vineyard soils, the owners admitted that on these vineyards the quality of the grapes had been slowly declining over the last 20 years, but the soil tests still appeared to be the same as when the vines were doing their best.

  The normal soil test does not detect such problems, even if you can identify and test the areas good and bad.  An extra test that adds another 50% to the cost of each test must be performed and there is no protocol that has been written up and described to do so.  The reason it can be done is due to actual  hands on “field” or vineyard soil work. 

  The key is in soil chemistry that applies to the verified saturation of all the nutrients most involved in affecting the soil pH.  This type of experience is not written up and published to this point, because the results are from on-site experience, not officially randomized, replicated experiments.  The only way to learn it works is by doing this type of testing and following through with what is necessary on each specific vineyard soil.  Because the circumstances can vary greatly from one soil to another, perhaps the best way to learn if there is merit to the process is to send two soils – one from the good and one from the bad, or to increase the odds of a lucky guess, several bad areas to see if they can be correctly identified and why.

  Until Cation exchange capacity and base saturation of nutrients are accepted as a valid way to conduct that research it is not likely to be considered for research, because it is the only testing method at present to identify the differences that exist and need to be corrected to achieve the proper results.

  True science begins with observation.  Using the proper tests both the good and the bad and the reasons why can be determined.

“We can always prove a definite theory wrong. Notice, however, that we never prove it right.”

Richard Feynman (1918-1988), American theoretical physicist & Novel Laureate