Five Wines Under $15 - October 2011

In tough times, we continue the search for good, inexpensive wines.

Walla Walla based Rulo Winery continues to offer exceptionally high quality wine at compelling price points with the 2008 Syrca Red Wine. Self-distributing their wine is just one of many ways Kurt and Vicki Schlicker look to keep their prices down. But quality is never compromised. In fact, their 2007 Syrah (reviewed here) and 2008 Syrca – a Syrah/Cabernet blend – are about as good quality-to-price ratio wines as you will find in Washington.

Seattle wholesaler Acme Wine Company was founded in 1999. The company represents some top Washington wineries, including Amavi Cellars, Den Hoed, Gramercy Cellars, Lullaby, and Pepper Bridge. Acme created the Brand Cabernet to fill a niche: a quality Cabernet Sauvignon offered at a reasonable price. As with the 2008 vintage, they more than accomplish their goal with this high quality 2009 offering.

I wrote about Dusted Valley Vintners’ Boomtown label last month. Quality Syrah at a tariff of $15 and under is a reasonably rare bird in Washington, especially when compared to Cabernet Sauvignon and Merlot, which can be found in abundance. Running against this trend, the Dusted Valley boys impress again with their 2008 Boomtown Syrah.

Corvidae Wine Company was founded by David O’Reilly of Owen Roe as a label focusing on glass-pour priced wines. The winey is named after the Latin name for a family of birds, including crows, ravens, jays, and magpies. The winery’s website reads, “These ‘dark’ birds are everywhere in the vineyards of Eastern Washington. Their reputation as crafty, adaptable, and somewhat dubious characters is a fitting icon for our suspiciously terrific value wines from this region.”

Read previous Five Wines Under $15 here.

Rulo Syrca Columbia Valley 2008 $15
Rating: * (Excellent) Aromatics of dusty cherry, blueberry, a jumble of dark fruit, dry chocolate, and light herbal notes. The palate is loaded with rich, penetrating fruit flavors along with firm, slightly dry tannins. Fruit flavors persist a long finish. 72% Syrah, 28% Cabernet Sauvignon. 14.5% alcohol.

Brand Cabernet Sauvignon Columbia Valley 2009 $15
Rating: +/* (Good/Excellent) Lightly aromatic with dusty cherry, milk chocolate, and light herbal notes. The palate is tart and fruit filled with a compact ball of tannins. Drops off toward the finish on this otherwise enjoyable wine, but brings a lot of bang for the buck at this price point. 80% Cabernet, 20% Merlot.

Dusted Valley Boomtown Syrah Washington State 2008 $15
Rating: + (Good) Aromas of toasty spice, eucalyptus, and chocolate give way to a palate full of tart, red and blue fruit flavors with a silky feel. 96% Syrah, 2.4% Mourvedre, 1.6% Barbera. Aged in French and American oak. Recommended

Corvidae Wine Company Chardonnay Columbia Valley 2010 $12
Rating: + (Good) Shows aromas of yellow and red apple aromas along with a touch of tropical fruit. Palate is crisp and tart with a textured feel. Alcohol shows through at times.

Corvidae Wine Company Lenore Syrah Columbia Valley 2008 $15
Rating: ./+ (Decent/Good) Aromas of boysenberry, smoke, and blueberry syrup. The palate is distinctly grapey with a somewhat sweet finish.

Recent Radio Interviews

Below are links to two recent radio interviews.

The first is a brief spot on KUOW 94.9's Weekday show discussing Initiative 1183. My spot on the show is about 40 minutes in.

The second is from Table Talk Radio with Jamie Peha and Thierry Rautureau. We discuss Cabernet Sauvignon, the 2011 growing season and harvest, and Initiative 1183 starting about 15 minutes in.

Enjoy!

Old school! Recent print articles and Email Subscription Issue

The new edition of Wine & Jazz magazine, Vintage 3 Track 2, has an article I wrote about Prosser's Vintners Village. Check it out on newstands now. Read other recent print articles here.

Also, email subscribers should note that there was an issue this last week with emails getting sent out. See yesterday's email for these articles or click on the links below.

Why I Am Voting No on Initiative 1183 (And Why You Should Too)
Focusing on Initiative 1183 Part IV: Safety Issues
Washington Wine Round-up October 15th to 21st 2011
Focusing on Initiative 1183 Part III - Miscellaneous
Focusing on Initiative 1183 Part II: Central Warehousing
2011 Harvest Report - October 20th Edition

Frost Brings Growing Season To an End for Some, Spares Others (10/27 Harvest Update)

The 2011 harvest is underway in Washington State. Over the coming weeks, I will provide periodic updates on what is picked, where, and when as well as thoughts on the growing season from the state’s growers and winemakers. Read previous updates here.

10/27 Update: First the good news. The season’s first frost occurred in eastern Washington early Tuesday morning, but most vineyards were not affected. Now the bad news. Wednesday morning temperatures were considerably colder, bringing the growing season to an end for some while sparing others. Current forecasts look to give vineyards that made it through unaffected potentially another week or more of hang time. For those that didn’t, time’s up.

The freezing level Wednesday looked to be at about 1,100 feet, putting low-lying areas of the Yakima Valley and Walla Walla Valley particularly at risk. However, it appears, at least at this early hour, that Walla Walla Valley saw minimal damage Wednesday. Areas of the Yakima Valley, Wahluke Slope, and Horse Heaven Hills do not appear to have been as fortunate.

“Frosted! Time's up,” one winemaker tweeted in the early hours on Wednesday. “Yakima valley frozen this am - not good at all,” another said. In the Yakima Valley, temperatures in Outlook and Zillah dipped as low as 27 degrees, with Prosser a chilly 26. No word yet on the extent of the frost damage. Many said wind machines were effective if vineyards had them to use.

Elsewhere in the valley, at Red Willow Vineyard’s weather station, which lies below the vineyard, temperatures reached 26 degrees. However, the hills above where the wine grapes are located did not see any damage due to slightly warmer temperatures.

Red Mountain’s Ciel du Cheval – a warm site that is in its last week of harvest – had areas that got down to 28 degrees Wednesday morning. However, vineyard manager Ryan Johnson reports that wind machines prevented damage. “I love those things!” Johnson says.

On Snipes Mountain at Upland Vineyard Todd Newhouse says, “We are in pretty good shape. The frost didn't get too far up the hill and wind machines really helped down low.”

On the Wahluke Slope, Mattawa reached a low of 25 degrees. In anticipation of the cold temperatures, Fielding Hills picked Cabernet Sauvignon off its Riverbend Vineyard on Tuesday. Vineyard managers elsewhere were still assessing whether there was any damage at the time of posting but temperature readings across the slope indicate a number may have been affected.

Evergreen Vineyard was picking fruit as fast as wineries could take it. Lawrence Vineyard on the Royal Slope got down to only 34, making it one of the warmer areas Wednesday morning.

In Paterson, temperatures went as low as 25 degrees. Several winemakers reported seeing frost damage in and around the Horse Heaven Hills area.

In Walla Walla Valley, Jan Roskelley of Tero Estates reported that Windrow Vineyard in the southern section of the valley got down to 32 degrees – not cold enough to cause damage. Richard Funk of Saviah Cellars, who has numerous vineyards in this area as well, noted that an inversion and wind machines prevented damage. On the other side of the valley, Anna Schafer at aMaurice Cellars reported that their estate vineyard was at 33.7 degrees. Nearby on Blue Mountain it was 34 with no signs of damage.

In the Columbia Valley, winemaker Brian Rudin at Cadaretta reported that Sagemoor escaped the freeze. Conner Lee employed their wind machines but didn’t see temperatures below 32.

It’s important to note that areas affected by frost are always highly variable depending on a variety of factors such as slope, aspect, and elevation. There can be significant differences, even within a vineyard. Minor factors can be the difference between damage and additional hang time.

If areas did freeze out, any potential effect on the 2011 vintage would be highly variable. The late ripening varietals, particularly the state’s large plantings of Cabernet Sauvignon and Riesling, would be particularly at risk. Overall, some vineyards were on the verge of picking their fruit anyway; some were hoping for a bit more development; and some were hoping for a good bit more. Given this, it will take time to untangle the full effects of Wednesday’s freeze. Stay tuned.

Photo of frost on Malbec grapes at Windrow Vineyard by Jan Roskelley of Tero Estates.
Photo of Syrah grapes with fall colors by Richard Funk of Saviah Cellars.
Photo of low-trained clusters on Force Majeure Vineyard by Ryan Johnson @fierceterroir.
Photo of grapes with fall colors by Chip McLaughlin @chipmclaughlin.
Photo of and by Anna Schafer at aMaurice Cellars foot stomping grapes.
Photo of Red Mountain by Jack Colby @nwwines.

Thanks to all who took these great shots and gave permission to use them! Click on the photos for higher resolution images.

See information on the Washington State Growing Degree Days here.

Monthly forecast for Yakima Valley (Sunnyside), Red Mountain (Benton City), Walla Walla, Paterson, and Mattawa.

* * *

The information in the table below is aggregated from personal correspondence with growers and winemakers, as well as information posted on Twitter and Facebook. It is not intended to be comprehensive but rather is intended as a snapshot of what is going on around the state. If you wish to send data for your grapes or vineyards (or correct any of the information below), please email me at wawinereport@gmail.com, leave a comment here, or leave a comment on the WWR Facebook page.

Winery	Grape	Vineyard	Date	Notes
Columbia Valley
Woodward Canyon	Cabernet	Sagemoor	10/20	5.5 tons
Rasa	Cabernet Franc	Flying B	10/21
Cave B	Chardonnay	Estate	10/21	12 tons
Tildio	Malbec	Stillwater Creek	10/21
Saviah	Chardonnay	Conner Lee	10/21
Rasa	Cabernet	Dionysus	10/22
Guardian	Syrah	Stillwater	10/26
Guardian	Cabernet Franc	Stillwater	10/26
Yakima Valley
Rasa	Merlot	Dubrul	10/21
Sleight of Hand	Merlot	Blackrock	10/25	3 tons
--	Carmenère	Gilbert	10/25
--	Cabernet Franc	Dineen	10/25
Sleight of Hand	Cabernet Franc	Blackrock	10/26
Masquerade	Syrah	Burgess	10/26
Naches Heights	Grenache	Two Coyote	10/27
Red Mountain
Force Majeure	Cabernet	Force Majeure	10/21	3,226 vines per acre
Force Majeure	Grenache	Force Majeure	10/22	First ever hillside pick
Swiftwater	Malbec	Kiona	10/22
Rasa	Cabernet	Kiona	10/22
Rasa	Touriga, TC, Souza	Red Heaven	10/22
--	Cabernet	Ciel du Cheval	10/24	Last week of harvest
Kiona	Sangiovese	Ranch at the End of the Road	10/25
Sleight of Hand	Cabernet	RMV	10/28
Walla Walla Valley
Woodward Canyon	Cabernet Franc	Estate	10/20
Rasa	Syrah	Funk	10/22
Rasa	Grenache	XL	10/23	2 tons
Rasa	Grenache	Monette’s	10/23
Saviah Cellars	Syrah	Estate	10/21
Saviah Cellars	Merlot	Estate	10/21
Saviah Cellars	Merlot	Estate	10/21
Va Piano	Merlot	Estate	10/25
Dumas Station	Syrah	Birch Creek	10/26
Dumas Station	Merlot	Minnick Hills	10/26
Dumas Station	Cabernet	Minnick Hills	10/26
--	Malbec	Windrow	10/26
aMaurice	Viognier	Estate	10/27
aMaurice	Malbec	Estate	10/27
aMaurice	Syrah	Estate	10/27
Wahluke Slope
Milbrandt	Merlot	Northridge	10/22
K Vintners	Syrah	Clifton Hill	10/24
Rasa	Cabernet Franc	Weinbau	10/27
Fielding Hills	Cabernet	Riverbend	10/25	Picked in anticipation of frost
Guardian	Syrah	StoneTree	10/26
Guardian	Cabernet Franc	StoneTree	10/26
Snipes
Florentino	Grenache	Upland	10/22
Smasne	Viognier	Upland	10/25
Horse Heaven Hills
Angel Vine	Zinfandel	Alder Ridge	10/21	25.1 Brix, pH 3.31, TA 7.40
Robert Karl	Cabernet	Phinney Hill	10/23	4 tons
Robert Karl	Cabernet Franc	Phinney Hill	10/23	4 tons
Coyote Canyon	Mourvedre	Coyote Canyon	10/24
Sleight of Hand	Cabernet	Phinney Hill	10/27
Lake Chelan
Hard Row to Hoe	Malbec	Chelan	10/26
Columbia Gorge
Dowsett	Gewurztraminer	Celilo	10/26

Why I Am Voting No on Initiative 1183 (And Why You Should Too)

This month's Virtual Tasting is the 2008 Rulo Syrca tonight 7-8pm Pacific. Read how to participate here.

I have decided to vote against Initiative 1183 because I believe that it poses a threat to numerous small wineries, distributors, and wine stores. I believe that the effect on these businesses would be bad for the Washington wine industry and bad for me as a consumer. Here’s why.

Let me start by saying that I am for liquor privatization. If Initiative 1183 were just about privatization, supporting it would be, for me, a no brainer - despite my distaste for the initiative process. However, Initiative 1183 is about much more.

First and foremost, Initiative 1183 is a battle of big businesses trying to use the initiative process to write laws that favor them/stop laws that don’t. Costco, Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America, and other interest groups have spent over $33M to pass/defeat this initiative. We are all pawns in this game.

While this turns my stomach, it is not the reason I am voting against this initiative. The key component of Initiative 1183 from a wine industry viewpoint is that it removes uniform wholesale pricing and allows volume discounting. This creates an incentive for retailers to buy larger volumes of wine at a cheaper cost. I believe that this change may make it more difficult for Washington wineries to compete.

Washington has a very limited number of ‘large’ wineries. 27 of our 740+ wineries account for 90% of the total wine production in the state. Yes, these 27 wineries will be able to slug it out in a volume discount market with wines from California and other areas.

However, the vast majority of Washington wineries are small, family wineries producing less than 3,000 cases annually. These wineries simply do not make enough volume to make a profit by selling wine in large quantities at a reduced margin, unless their business model and marketing approaches completely change.

For many of these wineries, uniform wholesale pricing is what allows them to survive. Take this away and I believe it may be more difficult for many of these wineries to sell their wine. I also believe that it puts small distributors at a disadvantage, as they are the people selling these wines. Many of them will have a tough time in what will increasingly be a large distributor industry focusing on low margins and high volume. That does not help our industry. That does not help me as a consumer looking to buy Washington wine.

I also believe volume discounting will make it harder for Washington wineries to find a spot on grocery store shelves due a decrease in the number of available SKUs (See a comment from Dave E from a small wine store on changes they would anticipate at their store in the comments section of my blog here). Spirits taking up space would compound this issue. Again, that does not help our industry. That does not help me as a consumer looking to buy Washington wine.

Finally, I believe that Initiative 1183 puts independent wine and beer stores at a competitive disadvantage. First, it makes it difficult if not impossible for them to compete on price and potentially even increases the prices of small production wines if distributors charge ‘case break fees’ to encourage retailers to buy in larger volume.

Secondly, by requiring 10,000 square feet of floor space to sell spirits, Initiative 1183 not only eliminates the ability of convenience stores and gas stations to sell spirits – a good thing, it also eliminates the ability of small specialty shops to do so. To wit, even large Seattle-based wine retailer Esquin has only 7,000 square feet of floor space and would not be able to sell spirits (NB: A representative from Esquin indicated that they are against Initiative 1183 as they believe it hurts small wineries). Again, that does not help our industry. That does not help me as a consumer looking to buy Washington wine.

Is my position being protectionist? You’re damn right it is. Washington is not just any other state in the nation in terms of wine consumption and liquor laws. It is the second largest wine producing state and an emerging wine region with a multi-billion dollar wine industry. Isn’t that something worth protecting?

Perhaps I’m wrong and the industry would be fine if Initiative 1183 passes. Perhaps over time, as the industry evolves, volume discounting might present less of a threat. But implementing this significant of a change during the worst economy in 70 years probably isn’t the best time to find out.

Some proponents of Initiative 1183 have said, ‘The government shouldn’t tell me how to run my business.’ Would you rather have Costco telling you how to run your business? This is what Initiative 1183 does. It lets Costco make laws that help their company at the expense of smaller businesses that can’t afford to have laws made for them. To me, that is something we should all be protecting ourselves from.

I know some of my readers have opposing views on this initiative, and I respect those opinions. I realize that some wineries in Washington, including some small ones, might benefit by passage of Initiative 1183. However, I am trying to consider the industry as a whole – which I hold dear – as well as my own consumer interests.

My hope is that, with the series of posts I have written on 1183, I have provided you all with enough information to make your own, informed decision, based on the things that are important to you.

For me, I’ll be voting no, and if you love Washington wine, I encourage you to do the same.

Note: Read a series of posts about Initiative 1183 here.

Focusing on Initiative 1183 Part IV: Safety Issues

Before turning to my own position on Initiative 1183, it’s worth talking about how this initiative relates to public safety. There has been a lot of discussion and advertising dollars spent on this.

Opponents say that Initiative 1183 will lead to increased incidence of alcohol related public health issues – driving incidents, domestic violence, alcoholism, etc. Proponents of Initiative 1183 say that there is no evidence – specifically from U.S. studies relating to privatization of spirits – linking privatization of alcohol to increased alcohol issues. Here’s my take.

First off, there simply can’t be increased availability, lower prices, and increased revenues without there being increased consumption. The numbers just don’t add up.

Initiative 1183 offers increased availability - more than four times the number of currently existing liquor stores - and lower prices due to volume discounting and privatization. The logical presumption then is that the increased revenues come from increased consumption. And it is logical to assume that there will be increased consumption.

Listeners to KUOW’s Weekday show today will note that Yes on 1183 representative Kathryn Stenger sidestepped the question of whether there would be increased consumption by noting that there is no evidence linking privatization to increased public health issues. She was careful not to say that there would not be increased consumption (Note: See my comment below for a correction on this).

The question then is whether there is evidence that increased consumption leads to additional safety issues. Here is the research I have seen thus far that some have cited.

The Province of Alberta privatized liquor in 1993/1994. According to a report, liquor consumption increased in the subsequent years. This study also reports an increase in alcohol related issues. Proponents of Initiative 1183 state that this study was not U.S.-based. For this and other reasons, they say the findings therefore do not translate to what might occur in Washington.

Closer to home, British Columbia partially privatized alcohol sales in 2002. B.C. also saw an increase in alcohol consumption and an increase in alcohol related issues. Some questioned their findings and state that this still does not show that liquor privatization causes increased alcohol problems. Again, proponents of Initiative 1183 again state that there are no U.S. based studies indicating that privatization leads to increased alcohol related issues.

In an oft-cited finding earlier this year, the Center for Disease Control Task Force on Community Preventive Services recommends against privatization of alcohol finding that it leads to increased alcohol consumption. The Task Force cites data from 21 studies. However, the supporting data for the finding is not presented, and the authors note that the data are preliminary and have yet to go through a peer review process. Opponents dispute these findings, noting that several of the studies look at wine consumption and not specifically at spirits and that many of the studies cited are old.

Suffice to say proponents of Initiative 1183 most likely would not be satisfied with any research finding unless it was an exact match for privatization of spirits in the state of Washington.

Looking at the research findings, let’s be clear. It just makes sense that if we have four times as many liquor stores that we will have increased consumption. Right? It also makes sense that if we have increased consumption, it will lead to increased alcohol associated issues. Right?

However, it also makes sense that if we have one quarter the number of liquor stores we will have decreased consumption. Does that mean that we should do it?

No. Since the end of Prohibition we have decided that alcohol sales and consumption should be legal and that the states should regulate it. The question then is whether we regulate it both by enforcing laws to combat excess alcohol consumption and by only having spirits sold by the government. That is, the state monopoly over spirits distribution and sales is a critical form of enforcement. This is what the ‘No on 1183’ people are arguing.

To me, it makes sense that we should combat excess alcohol consumption with enforcement. It doesn’t make sense to me that we should insist that the state monopolize spirits sales and distribution because they are the only ones who can save us from ourselves.

Personally, I don’t believe the scare tactics that have been employed by the ‘No on Initiative 1183’ campaign. I don’t believe that there will be a liquor Armageddon if Initiative 1183 passes - Pottersville if you will. I believe that safety issues are being used by large corporations to drive a particular agenda that promotes their interests.

However, I do believe that there will be increased alcohol consumption, and it just makes sense that there will be some increase in alcohol-associated issues. This is the price we will pay as a society.

It is worth noting that Initiative 1183 does increase requirements for training and supervision of employees selling spirits at retail stores. Additionally it makes penalties for selling liquor to minors stronger than they are today.

However, Initiative 1183 does not add any additional Liquor Control Board enforcement agents. In short, four times as many stores, some tighter controls, but less ability to enforce any individual store due to the same number of workers. This was a serious oversight on the part of the initiative writers because it gives a large gap for opponents, although I have not seen many of them exploit it.

That’s my take.

Next up on this, as promised, my own position on Initiative 1183.