[Randall Grahm] Is Eco-Wine better? Getting through the maze of organic wines...

[El Guerillero]

Randall,
I think you were a bit overly general in dismissing the Salinas Valley as a region for growing grapes. The east side of the valley, where your vineyard is located, is known for being poor agricultural land with bad water. I think the Le Mistral vineyard is having many of the same problems you had, but the Cigare Blanc has been your best wine (IMHO) for the last few years and, if I recall correctly, is sourced mainly from conventionally farmed vineyards on the west side of the Salinas Valley. I also feel it bears mentioning that in the last few years, possibly as a result of fastidious biodynamic practice, possibly as a result better management and winemaking (fewer harsh tannins), your wines off the Ca' del Solo plot have improved a great deal. 
Also, I think you should talk more about rootstock selection when discussing dry farming -- plants that are own-rooted or planted on things like AXR-1 or 5BB are much less likely to require irrigation late in the season. As an extension, how much effect do you feel rootstock selection has on the expression of a site, or the balance of the wine?
I have a couple of questions regarding biodynamic practice:
Could you please go into more depth regarding how biodynamic practice awakens plants?
Have you integrated livestock into the Ca' del Solo vineyard? If so, which animals and in what way?
For the scientifically grounded organic farmer, which practices from the biodynamic philosophy would you recommend employing as an entry without diving headfirst into crystals and constellations?
Thanks-
Ian

[winesmith]

Dear Eye Doc,

Thanks very much for your post.  There are definitely certain AVAs that conduce to biodynamic practice, but I would suggest that it is individual vineyard sites that make the difference, rather than larger areas.  You want a site that is just brilliant for grapes - a deep soil with good water holding capacity but not with excessive fertility.  Since it doesn't rain in the summer in California, I think that you generally need about 5-6' of rooting depth.  You will want to plant your vines far enough apart to make sure that they can get the moisture that they need.  Again, as I have intimated, dry-farming is really the best (maybe only) way to go to get real expression of terroir, and to allow the vines to really be themselves.  But, at the end of the day, you want to get real congruence of variety/culture and site, such that the grapes come in in most years well balanced and don't require heroic levels of intervention - either chaptalization, acidification, or alcohol reductase (that's a little inside winemaking joke involving so-called Jesus units.)   As far as sulfites and Brett, for conventional wines, or put another way, wines lacking in sufficient concentration and life force (read minerality), they will generally need sulfites to ward off rampant brett (much as patients in hospitals need antibiotics to protect them from hospital-transmitted opportunistic infections - a brilliant trope from Clark, b/t/w.)  I think that I more or less agree w/ Clark on the point, that if a wine has sufficient minerality/concentration and is fermented and raised in the cellar in such a way to allow for nutrient depletion (i.e. you want to keep it on a really lean diet of nutrients and make sure ferment goes to real dryness), you may well be able to get away w/ minimal sulfite addition.  I think that an understanding of this phenomenon is still  in its infancy.  I've tasted more than my share of non-sulfited biodynamic/organic wines that were just too funky for my taste.  But, as I mentioned, the best syrah I've ever had was made w/ no sulfites at all.  Hope that this is useful. 

Thanks for the attribution, Randall.  You've done a masterful job of boiling down the essentials here -- thanks for restraining your penchant for verbal playfulness in the interests of clarity for these poor souls.  I have to chime in with the third leg of the Integrated Brett Management stool, which is good structure.  Poor wines aren't so much over-Bretted (or overoaked) as understructured.  The healthy, energy-rich fruit you're talking about, if not overstressed or overhung, contains the building blocks for good structure, and a skill hand is needed to guide their assembly.  Besides your marketing genius, skillful pen and sweet heart, it is little appreciated this post-modern winemaking skill set is something at which you are a greater student than just about any other American winemaker.

[enobytes]

Randall,
I think you were a bit overly general in dismissing the Salinas Valley as a region for growing grapes. The east side of the valley, where your vineyard is located, is known for being poor agricultural land with bad water. I think the Le Mistral vineyard is having many of the same problems you had, but the Cigare Blanc has been your best wine (IMHO) for the last few years and, if I recall correctly, is sourced mainly from conventionally farmed vineyards on the west side of the Salinas Valley. I also feel it bears mentioning that in the last few years, possibly as a result of fastidious biodynamic practice, possibly as a result better management and winemaking (fewer harsh tannins), your wines off the Ca' del Solo plot have improved a great deal. 
Also, I think you should talk more about rootstock selection when discussing dry farming -- plants that are own-rooted or planted on things like AXR-1 or 5BB are much less likely to require irrigation late in the season. As an extension, how much effect do you feel rootstock selection has on the expression of a site, or the balance of the wine?
I have a couple of questions regarding biodynamic practice:
Could you please go into more depth regarding how biodynamic practice awakens plants?
Have you integrated livestock into the Ca' del Solo vineyard? If so, which animals and in what way?
For the scientifically grounded organic farmer, which practices from the biodynamic philosophy would you recommend employing as an entry without diving headfirst into crystals and constellations?
Thanks-
Ian

El Guerillero – you bring up some interesting points about rootstock selection which leads me to a question about the use of non-phylloxera resistant rootstock when farming biodynamically / organically.

Randall, what are the rules on this? When farming organically / biodynamically, is there always a requirement to graft onto phylloxera-resistant rootstock if the region is at a risk? I assume so, but thought I would ask.

[eyedoc47]

El Guerillo,
Interesting and great point regarding rootstock. Randall, You mentioned that in order to get real expression of terrior minimal levels of intervention is required. In Burgundy and Bordeaux, in most years, Chaptalization is used to bring up alcohol levels. Do you feel that in the years where little or no Chaptalization was used,ie 2005, that the wines gave a greater expression of terrior? You also mentioned that wines lacking in sulfites die a quick death. Would the use of Velcorin be allowed in biodynamic/organic wines and if so, would this be enough to control oxidation and Brett in the absence of added sulfites.
Thank you again for your time and knowledge.
                                                               L'Chiam,
                                                                      Eyedoc

[Randall Grahm]

Randall,
I think you were a bit overly general in dismissing the Salinas Valley as a region for growing grapes. The east side of the valley, where your vineyard is located, is known for being poor agricultural land with bad water. I think the Le Mistral vineyard is having many of the same problems you had, but the Cigare Blanc has been your best wine (IMHO) for the last few years and, if I recall correctly, is sourced mainly from conventionally farmed vineyards on the west side of the Salinas Valley. I also feel it bears mentioning that in the last few years, possibly as a result of fastidious biodynamic practice, possibly as a result better management and winemaking (fewer harsh tannins), your wines off the Ca' del Solo plot have improved a great deal. 
Also, I think you should talk more about rootstock selection when discussing dry farming -- plants that are own-rooted or planted on things like AXR-1 or 5BB are much less likely to require irrigation late in the season. As an extension, how much effect do you feel rootstock selection has on the expression of a site, or the balance of the wine?
I have a couple of questions regarding biodynamic practice:
Could you please go into more depth regarding how biodynamic practice awakens plants?
Have you integrated livestock into the Ca' del Solo vineyard? If so, which animals and in what way?
For the scientifically grounded organic farmer, which practices from the biodynamic philosophy would you recommend employing as an entry without diving headfirst into crystals and constellations?
Thanks-
Ian

Dear Ian,  Thanks very much for your note.  Maybe I am a bit harsh on the east side vineyards, but as I mentioned, what is most interesting to me now is to think about how one might conceive a truly sustainable vineyard and an area that has 6" of annual rainfall is probably not an optimal place to start.  Glad that you like Le Cigare Blanc - I do too.  It is in transition to biodynamic and should be certified this year.  At least as far as vineyards and wines, it is very easy to come up with pseudo-explanations about why things are the way they are.  I'm not quite sure precisely why Cigare Blanc is so interesting, but possibly at least in part due to a progressive irrigation system, whereby we irrigate middles rather the vine rows; at least in theory, we are getting more rooting volume (though have not confirmed this.)   You are absolutely correct in your emphasis on the need for a thoughtful rootstock for a dry-farming situation and the answer is generally to find the highest vigor stock one can - rather the opposite of current "best practice".  Best case would be own-rooted vines, if you can swing it, but failing that, probably St. George is the best option.  And of course appropriate vine spacing is crucial as well.

    To say that biodynamic practice "awakens" plants is perhaps indulging in a bit of anthropomorphism, but I believe that some like that happens.  We are using the biodynamic preps in a way that is analogous to the use of homeopathic preps.  The individual preps are believed to stimulate a particular physiological process within the plant - the "501" or horn silica is believed to trigger a reaction in the plant that enhances its photosynthetic capacity.  That is relatively straightforward; the other preps are more esoteric in their action; one believed to enhance the potassium process or the calcium process, i.e. the ability of the plants to extract the various elements from the soil.  This really gets to the basic difference between biodynamics and organics.  If you were analytically low in potassium, an organic farmer would just dump a large volume of potassium in the vineyard, whereas a biodynamic farmer might add a more discreet volume and try to stimulate the plant (through the preps) to extract the potassium that was already in the soil.   

    In truth, we have not done a good job at integrating livestock into the vineyard at CDS, and this is something that we will absolutely have to do both at CDS and ultimately at a new vineyard should that ever come to pass.  It is arguably the core element of the biodynamic practice and heals and elevates the soil in so many ways, if done thoughtfully.  Our proxy for this, of course is the biodynamic compost, which is exceptionally salutary.

     To answer your question, about what aspects of the biodynamic practice a scientific minded individual might embrace without having to buy into the quasi-mystical ideology:  I think that the use of the biodynamic compost is perhaps the most demonstrably beneficial practice one can observe.  And yet, unless it is well-made compost, it may in fact be counter-productive to one's efforts.  You have to be a good farmer above and beyond being a clever biodynamic practitioner.  Lastly, while the explanation of the biodynamic calendar might strike one as being quite literally "out there," if you really take a careful look at the plants and the fruit, they often really do behave quite differently on "leaf days" as compared to "fruit days."  Hope that this has been useful.

[Randall Grahm]

To Enobytes:

There is really no requirement from the biodynamic standpoint as far as what kind of rootstock one is permitted to use or not or whether it is encouraged or discouraged.  If you stand a significant risk of phylloxera infecting your vineyard, i.e. history of vines in the neighborhood, non-sandy soils, etc. you are probably best off using a phylloxera-resistant rootstock.  I have heard of real die-hard practitioners who believe that if a vineyard were so finely tuned to an optimal state of health, it could resist phylloxera, but this I think is asking for trouble.

[Randall Grahm]

El Guerillo,
Interesting and great point regarding rootstock. Randall, You mentioned that in order to get real expression of terrior minimal levels of intervention is required. In Burgundy and Bordeaux, in most years, Chaptalization is used to bring up alcohol levels. Do you feel that in the years where little or no Chaptalization was used,ie 2005, that the wines gave a greater expression of terrior? You also mentioned that wines lacking in sulfites die a quick death. Would the use of Velcorin be allowed in biodynamic/organic wines and if so, would this be enough to control oxidation and Brett in the absence of added sulfites.
Thank you again for your time and knowledge.
                                                               L'Chiam,
                                                                      Eyedoc

No question at all that the eschewal of chaptalization will result in a purer expression of terroir, and many of the best biodynamic producers absolutely resist the practice.  To clarify my point, many if not most New World conventional wines die a rapid death with or without sulfites.  Old World wines generally can hang on a lot longer, and this is probably due to the difference in mineral content in many old world vineyards (or possibly the mineralizing effect of thousands of years of sheep grazing).  I don't know precisely why some wines made without sulfites can seemingly survive the brett infection that undoubtedly arrives.  Clark mentioned that wines with sufficient structure seem to be more immune, but I'm not sure exactly what he means by this.  Musts rich in polyphenols tend to support more brett growth than ones that are not - you see more brett in Cabernet and seldom see it in Pinot Noir and almost never in Nebbiolo (though that may well be a function of pH in the latter case.)  I think that the question of whether a wine will or will not develop debilitating brett in the absence of sulfite is so incredibly complex that I am really at a loss to develop a predictive algorithm.  (This is further complicated by the fact that some of the really cool things that you do with wine to enhance its structure and antioxidative potential, i.e. retain lees, also seem to work in the direction of allowing brett to bloom.  To answer the rest of your question, the use of Velcorin - which will most assuredly kill brett, but not do anything to inhibit oxidation -  is strictly prohibited in biodynamic practice.  It kills everything in the wine and undoubtedly creates a rather subtle death-energy that you probably don't want to take into your body.  In the interest of full disclosure, we used to use Velcorin years ago when  we were interested in making wines w/ lower levels of sulfites that we did not want to become brett monsters, nor wished to sterile filter.  We no longer use Velcorin, still like low levels of sulfites, but are occasionally compelled to filter the wine when the brett count just gets too high. 

[johnj]

John,

The problem, if I may be so bold, is that many winemakers feel that they must do what is economically expedient, and the flavor of oak, whether it derives from barrels or oak chips is believed (erroneously, in my opinion) to confer some aspect of "quality," read higher price, to a wine.  You have a slightly dysfunctional feedback loop, where winemakers are chasing customers, who think that big oak must be a great thing, as so many wines seem to possess it.  When I am tasting wines in Europe of late-comers to the wine game, I almost always asked to be spared the privilege of tasting the more expensive "reserve" bottlings, which have been subjected to some tenure in new oak.   

Believing oak is somehow linked to "quality” is preposterous! I have hope that American wine critics and consumers change their opinions on this and someday realize the importance of terroir.  One can dream, right? Thanks for a great conversation.

[enobytes]

I want to remind everyone that we are wrapping up this session today, so please submit any last minute questions as soon as possible.

[enobytes]

This concludes our segment folks!

Randall, I'd like to personally thank you for your participation on our forum and for educating our readers. It's been a pleasure to have you aboard!

[winesmith]

Clark mentioned that wines with sufficient structure seem to be more immune, but I'm not sure exactly what he means by this. 

To clarify my comment, what I was talking about was aromatic integration.  The color and tannin in red wine doesn't exist in solution, but in tiny colloidal beads.  The smaller these beads, the finer the structure and the more refined the palate impression.  The mantra you taught us "I will fear no tannin" refers to the positive effects of these small beads and the winemaker's mastery over structure, much like a French sauce chef.  A well made sauce, say a bearnaise, doesn't smell of tarragon, mint, fresh onion and vinegar, but integrates these into a single flavor. If the sauce curdles, suddenly the individual flavors come roaring out like spiked hair.

When tannin is refined, for example with oxygen or lees, the resulting fine structure is capable of integrating vegetal aromas, oak aromas and Brett aromas into a single voice, which speaks to the soul because the soul is simple and loves focused harmony, exactly like when a symphony plays as one, unified in meter and emotionality, and we get goosebumps.  It is possible to integrate very large amounts of Brett through refined structure.

In my opinion, complaints about veg, oak and Brett in modern wines are largely failures of structural finesse and the lack in modern enological circles to address these ancient techniques.  I view your early inquiry into this realm as an important part of the Randall Grahm legacy, at least to me and my post-modern homies. 

I am also fairly certain that your point about the preservative properties of mineral energy is quite correct, and want to acknowledge you for opening my eyes to this critical aspect.

-Clark