A specific code for 'natural wines'?

V

VS

Victor de la Serna
"Organic producers fret over natural wine", Jancis Robinson reports today on her web site.

She writes: "Vinceremos, a UK wine importer that has for years specialised in organic wines (including a range of 'no added sulphur' wines), has just published the results of a survey of its European wine suppliers on the hot topic of natural wines. They are not happy about the vague nature of what constitutes a natural wine and the current informal nature of the movement. (...) Vinceremos are suggesting that this unruly bunch need proper regulation - and indeed it must be rather galling for those producers who have gone through the painstaking process of formal organic accreditation to see those who haven't, benefiting from the current natural wine buzz."

I find these reactions from the 'organic' crowd about the 'natural' fashion interesting as they add yet another twist to a lively debate.

After a couple of years following the 'natural' movement as a journalist and winemaker, its informality and lack of definition are quite obvious to me. Its proponents believe this is a strength, but now we see how some of those who've submitted to the tests and constraints of certification as either organic or biodynamic protest that it can be an easy marketing ploy.

If there is a specific, measurable rule defining 'natural', it's the sulfur content. All other specifications about minimal intervention, ambient yeasts and the rest are common to many other winemakers as far as I can tell. Curiously, it seems that the first 'natural wines' association to put a figure on this was Spain's fledgling one, PVN (a dozen members only, including none of the most celebrated 'natural wine' producers in this country): 20 mg/liter total (not just free) SO2.

Éric Texier once explained on this very bored that SO2 is indeed a natural by-product of fermentation, but the most SO2 ever analyzed in a naturally fermented wine with no extra additions was 20 mg total, so apparently this is why the 'natural wine' proponents accept that figure. I don't know if the explanation is correct (I have some doubts that more SO2 can't be naturally produced), but if there's a litmus test, this is it. I believe that the French association has, in turn, officially adopted this same figure.

Yet I'd like to see analyses made of many 'natural wines' that are exported and SO2 levels checked. Some producers (like Texier) honestly reject the 'natural wine' tag and add, often prodded by their distributors and importers (wary of oxidation and re-fermentation problems), modest amounts of SO2 to ensure basic protection. Some of the most acclaimed such producers in Spain have told me that their wines are usually in the 40-60 mg range just like quite a few 'conventional' wines! (But, of course, far below the accepted maximums: in the European Union, 150 mg for red wines, 210 mg for rosés and whites, 300 mg for liquor wines.)

So, what gives? To me, it's not low sulfur alone which explains the favorable stylistic features that many consumers now find in 'natural wines', but some other specific choices made by their producers: in addition to grapes of correct ripeness (never overripeness) and pristine quality, some of them are:

- the reliance on ambient yeasts
- the avoidance of excessive extraction during maceration
- the avoidance of abusive on-lees 'bâtonnage' which can make the wine over-creamy and devoid of a 'terroir' character
- the reliance on whole-cluster fermentation for at least part of the wine.

These are some of the main reasons for the freshness and 'tension' found in the best 'natural wines'. But are these techniques as easily translated into a code or set of regulations as, say, total SO2 contents? And how many producers who don't proclaim to be 'natural' are already doing this?
 
Regulation of production is a dangerous can of worms. It would be more intelligent to regulate less and disclose more. If wine labels, like many food labels, were obligated to tell consumers what we need to understand what any particular producer means by "natural" (from the agricultural regimen to the procedures/interventions undertaken in the cellar), we could make informed decisions without any producer's liberty being constrained.
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
My two centimesRegulation of production is a dangerous can of worms. It would be more intelligent to regulate less and disclose more. If wine labels, like many food labels, were obligated to tell consumers what we need to understand what any particular producer means by "natural" (from the agricultural regimen to the procedures/interventions undertaken in the cellar), we could make informed decisions without any producer's liberty being constrained.
Click to expand...

Here, hear! To me, a lot of the smoke and mirrors of "vin nature" can be removed with a simple labeling requirement. What went into (making) your wine? Metabisulfite added? List it. Megapurple? List that too. 71B-1122? Oak tannins? Beet sugar? Bentonite? Tartrate? Water? All go on. Of course, an additional provision might have to be added for processes such as RO, sterile filtration or microbullage that are used, too.

Victor: I love the name Vinceremos -- what a great play on words.

Mark Lipton
 
Things would be much easier if those that consider themselves "natural" wine producers were forced to put a scarlet "N" on their labels.
 
if the labelling requirements get too detailed you could see producers refuse to follow it and not export their wines. unless it's a global requirement.
 
Christian Chaussard, currently the president of the Association des Vins Naturels, said that they are trying to enact EU legislation, against tremendous resistance from industry lobbyists, to disclose the level of SO2 at bottling on the label. He says it's completely ridiculous (and how can anyone disagree?) that producers who add no sulfur and producers who add 200mg share the same "contains sulfites" disclosure.

I agree with Bill that onerous disclosure might backfire, but the process could start slowly, with an obvious signpost like SO2. Winemakers who are proud of what they do (and don't do) would probably love to disclose, while those who use oak chips or whatever might stop if required to disclose. Of course, this all assumes that claims can be tested. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt one can test a wine to verify whether only indigenous yeasts were used.
 
More legislation; sure, that's what we need.
I am so sick of this subject . . . it is chasing the March hare down the rabbit hole and has become so intricate as to be burlesque.
Best, Jim
 
There's certainly nothing stopping those who want to identify as such from labeling their SO2 content. I'm with Jim, labeling and oversight is 10 parts politics to every one part substance.
I have a certified Organic Farm and last year was the first time in eight years of certification that anyone has taken a material sample for testing from our field. The rest has been pretty consisted of them taking my word for what we do and use in our system...oh, and taking my fees.
 
This set of rules should also include standards to verify that the natural wine producers are authentic hippies. You know, musical interests, politics, showering habits, etc. Lot of posers out there.
 
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
I looked for the man's heart, the one bestride the gesture, but I could not measure its diameter.
Click to expand...
I would not have taken you for a poet.
Silly me.
Best, Jim
 
originally posted by Oswaldo Costa:
Christian Chaussard, currently the president of the Association des Vins Naturels, said that they are trying to enact EU legislation, against tremendous resistance from industry lobbyists, to disclose the level of SO2 at bottling on the label. He says it's completely ridiculous (and how can anyone disagree?) that producers who add no sulfur and producers who add 200mg share the same "contains sulfites" disclosure.
Click to expand...

Are they?

Well mostly by drinking during very private meeting at l'Herbe Rouge then, because I haven't seem any of them in any meeting concerning this topic...
Plus I would say that a lot of the cool growers who could loose a lot of credibility are members of AVN.
Especially if all the focus goes to SO2!

I know a handfull industrial makers that are bottling without SO2!!!
Like Stellar Organics in SA which process 4.5M bottles of organic, no sulfur wines. Some big coops are on it...

The main problem is that all the criteria that are often called natural, are totally impossible to check... at least right now, or they are stylistic and therefore subjective.
Impossible to check SO2 or bacterias addition. Very difficult to check RO, filtration and re-incorporation of sterilized lees,...
Is whole cluster the best way to express all terroirs, all grapes, all vintages?
Is carbonic the epitome of naturalness?

To be honest, I gave up on natural wines definition.
I do what I feel I should do. I make terroir wines, and I also make processed wines.
The latter are the wines that are considered by the natural wine industry as the most natural wines I make.
It is far from being my feeling.

Why are they seen as "natural"?

Because they all show the typical fermentation aromas of reductive winemaking and elevage, mostly due to cold carbonic winemaking. Because they are a very good transition from beer to wine, stylistically speaking. Because they are not the wines that bourgeois people would drink.
Because they show a funny label with a funny name.
Because my name is not on the label (I can prove this...)

So I believe that posting the SO2 level on the Brézème label won't make Brézème a natural wine.
I'll have to change the label, to erase my name, to go for a funny syrah wine with tons of cassis/mure aromas like in my Indigène Sulfureux, and to be friend with the people from AVN.
And finally to get rid of the very specific terroir expression of brezeme, IMO
This has a little to do with bacterias, yeasts or sulfur.

My point is to show that naturalness is a mix of facts, intentions and marketing segmentation.
It could be possible (???) to agree on facts, maybe on intentions (I am not in...) but opening this marketing segment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top