Canadian Wine? Look again...

From the latest issue of The Economist - Canada's wine industry - Outsourcing terroir

http://www.economist.com/world/americas ... extfeature

[David M. Bueker]

Well they certainly don't start the article out well with things like "passable plonk." There are issues not terribly unlike this in other viticultural areas. Sure a wine labeled "California Red Wine" may all be from some prime growing areas (as many are), but it can also come from some locations in California that produce nothing but industrial garbage. It's questionable which practice is more misleading.

I've had some very fine wines from Canada, and they were all from Canadian fruit.

A few years ago, after visiting a few wineries in Niagara-On-The-Lake, I discovered, after I got home, that a couple bottles of Riesling I bought did not bear the VQA designation. Upon examining the label I discovered that a large percent of the grapes used were grown in Germany. Upon further investigation, I learned that it was a one-time occurrence, as the Ontario Riesling crop had been devastated by bad weather that year. Apparently a few of the Ontario wineries have some sort of business ties with some German wineries, either owned by the same people or something like that.

The situation is even worse than indicated.
The underlying motivation is taxation - 'Canadian' wines (however defined) have lower government mark-ups (carefully avoiding the term 'taxes' as Provincial Governments are only allowed 'direct' taxation - and this is hidden). So a substantially imported wine, designated as 'Canadian' can be sold cheaper than the same source wine marketed 'honestly'.

Also the 70% so-called limit (i.e. 30% of genuine Canadian product) can be changed by REGULATION (so no need to pass any laws) to any quantity - and has indeed been lowered by fiat to 1%. So, in reality some 'Canadian' wine can legally contain only 1% Canadian sourced wine.

Early indications are that 2009 will get this treatment.

The farcical nature of this was beautifully shown by Tawse Vineyards in Ontario who bought a barrel of Hospices de Beaune Morey-St-Denis, blended it with 1% Ontario wine and sold this as "Tawse 99:1". So we were able to buy this 99% Burgundy for about half what the price would have been for the 100% version. All perfectly legal. I've heard the Tawse had their knuckles rapped (sorry: 'moral suasion was brought to bear' on Tawse) to prevent them from repeating this obviously immoral act.

That's the Ontario situation. I've heard that, in British Columbia, the rules are drafted to permit the 'overall winery percentage' to be 70% imported (rather than by bottle), so that 100% imported wine can be labelled as Canadian - as long as the volume sold doesn't exceed 70% of total bottles sold; but I've been unable to find the exact situation as there is no requirement to publish regulations.

Although not as brazen and bizarre as what Canada allows, it's not uncommon for folks in the US to drink wine from other countries without realizing it.

Some of the major brands can---and do---import wine, usually in huge bladders, from other countries, bottle it under their own label and sell it without bringing too much attention to whither the wine originated.

Generally, this is done when the prices for the domestic sourcing is high and cheaper alternatives can be found elsewhere. The imperative is to keep the price point intact for the brand, usually a bargain or "fighting varietal" grocery brand, but not always.

It began several years ago with the shortage/high price of California wines, when several wineries went to Chile---although then it was fairly obvious where the wine was from; even to the point of publicizing it as a plus in some instances.

Now, though, it's generally more....er, discreet...for the big brand houses to signify the difference only with a small indicator of source on the back label.

Some people might be surprised if they bothered to check closely. But most don't, I think. Or simply don't care.

I can say with great assurance that there has been a great deal of German, French, Italian and Spanish wine consumed under American labeling over the last several years. And it continues.

So you might casually check on that Riesling, Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay, Pinot Grigio with the declaratively American label. It might have a foreign accent.

Well they certainly don't start the article out well with things like "passable plonk." There are issues not terribly unlike this in other viticultural areas. Sure a wine labeled "California Red Wine" may all be from some prime growing areas (as many are), but it can also come from some locations in California that produce nothing but industrial garbage. It's questionable which practice is more misleading.

I've had some very fine wines from Canada, and they were all from Canadian fruit.

Spot on David. Naturally there are wines out there for $10 that contain non-Canadian fruit. Most serious wine-buyers just move on.

I think that so many of these things are written by organizations with vested interests who know how to get their agendas through. The best thing the concerned consumer can do is side with groups pushing for clarity in labelling, an ultimate change in the regs, and, most significantly, to put their money where their beliefs are.

Basically, I refuse to knowingly buy the CIC wines. Wine buying is not a quick or mindless thing for me; I tend to really take my time and research what's on those shelves, and look scrupulously for a VQA label.

That said, however, there are other issues at work that run far deeper: having a marketing-driven wine industry, as opposed to an agriculture-/terroir-driven wine industry. For better or worse, we live in a very marketing-oriented society, and at times what the market wants isn't necessarily what grows best in your neck of the woods. And that's why sometimes hiking off the beaten path is the only thing you can do.

Re Hoke's comment, I was very disappointed to discover a couple years that Beaulieu Vineyeards, that previously produced a very nice Central Coast Pinot Noir, was releasing a Vin de Pays d'Oc Pinot Noir instead. And it was quite inferior (although I've had VdP d'Oc PN that was quite pleasant). I'd rather they raised their prices. Last I looked, Turning Leaf was sourcing their PN from Pfalz (although that is probably an improvement in their case).

While I wouldn't buy the "Canadian" wines in question anyway, I worry that this has already created a significant amount of bad publicity and could harm Canada's wine industry. There are some stellar wineries in both B.C. and Ontario producing world-class bottlings and they could be tarred with the same brush.

This is a monumentally stupid, short-sighted action that ultimately could be self-defeating.