'California Heritage' as a wine tasting theme?

[Jenise]

A friend and I are discussing using this as a wine tasting theme later this year. We'll co-host the tasting in California. Chatting about it yesterday, we kind of realized we have two different opinions on how this could/should work. One way, her way, would be winery-oriented: wineries that were established prior to 1977 (a 40 year cutoff) which remain in the hands of or family of the founder. She cited Ravenswood as an example. I pointed out that Ravenswood was sold 10 or so years ago to a conglomerate. (I thought it was Fosters Beer people, but apparently it's Constellation Brands--or are they connected? I recall seeing Ravenswood Shirazes....)

I might mention, and this isn't intended as disparagement, but while this group all adore wine, no one's likely to have a cellar full of old Heitz or Phelps--if indeed they're both still in the family.

My way would concentrate on vineyards of 50 or more years, regardless of who owns them now, though extra points for "still in the family". Like Wente, whose current winemaker is a Wente and the fifth or sixth generation of Wente. Selfishly, I would hate to have to exclude a winery like Bedrock.

I think my way has many more candidates, and possibly more interesting candidates. (Oh, the grape varieties would be limited to Chardonnay, Zinfandel and/or Cabernet, possibly both.) What say you guys?

Old Vines sounds like the way to go. Especially given how ownership and even management of the winery can be obfuscated (especially in marketing materials).

[David M. Bueker]

Jenise,

Check this out.

http://www.historicvineyardsociety.org

Is it old vines or old vineyards? That is, under your approach, does a vineyard from 1890-something that was replanted 5 or 10 (or 49) years ago still make the cut?

Either way, I like that better than ownership. All money tastes the same
to me.

[David M. Bueker]

One could do a tasting like this just with wines from Bedrock and a small handful of other producers.

[Jenise]

Is it old vines or old vineyards? That is, under your approach, does a vineyard from 1890-something that was replanted 5 or 10 (or 49) years ago still make the cut?

Either way, I like that better than ownership. All money tastes the same
to me.

Interesting question. One presumes old vineyards contain old vines, but in fact they don't always. My balk at the first way was just trying to narrow down who's who, or to put it another way, if who is still who. As the Ravenswood example shows, you can't just assume.

A lot of the best CA wines, in my local opinion, are blends, often "field blends". For instance, Ridge Geyserville is "California red wine", though we often think of it as Zin. Would you be excluding blends?
Side note: Joseph Swan is one winery that's still in the original family, since Joe founded it in (1973?).

[Jenise]

A lot of the best CA wines, in my local opinion, are blends, often "field blends". For instance, Ridge Geyserville is "California red wine", though we often think of it as Zin. Would you be excluding blends?
Side note: Joseph Swan is one winery that's still in the original family, since Joe founded it in (1973?).

Another interesting question! This group has a tendency to single out varieties and I don't know if they've ever acknowledged the loveliness of new world field (and other) blends, beyond 'meritage' at any rate.