Can we taste terroir? Post your ideas and comments from my article on my site.

Winemakers love to talk about terroir, both of their own vineyards and often that of the region in which they are located. There is a long history of interest in the subject in Europe and especially France. This is probably because of history and culture, but lately one can scarcely talk to an American winemaker without the topic being raised. It can be a challenging subject, though, for consumers. The contribution to a wine of the elements that comprise a vineyard’s or region’s terroir – the soil, climate, weather, environment, winemaker, even the culture – can be difficult (though, not impossible) to identify in the finished wine.

I have found a resource that can help us wade through this complex and often confusing world – an online publication called Appellation America that can be found at www.wine.appellationamerica.com. The journal describes its mission as reporting the “Terroirs of North America.” It covers the wines and wine regions of every state in North America, with an emphasis on the identity and uniqueness of the different growing regions (or appellations). In addition to weekly feature articles, the website also offers an extensive database of the appellations and varietals growing in North America, individual pages and satellite imagery for more than 3,400 wineries, and daily reviews of wine by a group of regional correspondents. I was particularly struck by the Dan Berger’s thought provoking article of December 27, 2006 called “Why Terroir is Essential To Wine Evaluation.” Berger argues that ratings focused wine evaluation has driven winemakers to seek riper, even overripe, fruit that ultimately overwhelms the distinctions of terroir. He says wine critics tend to be impressed with wines of great weight, intensity, richness, and hedonistic flavor, while qualities like varietal character, balance, structure, regional distinctiveness and food compatibility are less important. He further asserts that many wine critics (including the most influential ones) often evaluate wine simply on whether they prefer the flavor or style without considering the wine’s origin, its terroir.

Another article, “Cabernet at its Peak” by Alan Goldfarb on November 22, 2006, which describes the new mountain Cabernet Sauvignon program from Atlas Peak Vineyards, also caught my interest, both because it is a good illustration of Berger’s advice and because I have tasted these four wines. Spring Mountain. The Spring Mountain District is located at 400-2,200 feet elevation on the eastern slopes of the Mayacamas Mountains, directly west of the town of St. Helena. The vineyards, which are comprised solely of residual sedimentary upland soils, are subject to Pacific Ocean influence. This wine shows the red fruit and fine-grained tannins typical of Spring Mountain. It was Goldfarb’s favorite.

Mount Veeder. The Mt. Veeder appellation sits on the eastern slopes of the Mayacamas Mountains (400-2,600 feet), which separate Napa Valley from Sonoma Valley. The appellation is cooler than Spring Mountain to the north, because of winds from San Francisco Bay. Its sandstone, shale, ash and clay soils of volcanic origin are relatively high in acid. This wine has a purity of fruit and is well balanced. It also displays the characteristic chewy, spicy and wild qualities associated with Mt. Veeder. Goldfarb thought it showed the most definitive terroir expression but, ironically, it was his least favorite.

Howell Mountain. Howell Mountain is located east of Calistoga in the northern end of the Vaca Range that forms the eastern boundary of the Napa Valley. The vineyards are at 1,400-2,400 feet elevation and are comprised of mostly volcanic soils. This is the biggest, oakiest, most tannic wine of the group. Yet it also has the most complexity, finesse and balance and deepest fruit. Goldfarb says, “It is the one with the most of everything.” Maybe that is why it was my favorite. Atlas Peak. Atlas Peak is located at the southern end of the Vaca Range due east of Yountville. Cooling afternoon winds from the San Francisco Bay influence the vineyards, which range from 1,400-2,400 feet. The soils are mostly upland volcanic with some alluvium (gravelly loam). This yields a Claret that is powerful and structured, yet quite drinkable right now. That could have something to do with the 34 percent Merlot and 15 percent Petit Verdot in the blend. Goldfarb thinks it is one of the better wines of the vintage and would put it up with great Bordeaux. I wouldn’t go that far but it was my second favorite wine.

Despite their differences, these mountain appellations do have some things in common. Their high elevation translates to more sunlight, though cooler daytime temperatures than the valley floor. This elevation and the slopes of the hillsides result in thin, well-drained soils, which make it is easier to control vine growth and achieve in lower yields. The four wines, all from the 2003 vintage, also have some things in common. They are inky dark, intense and tannic, all qualities often attributed to mountain-grown wines. They also all would benefit from about three years of cellaring. While not unqualified successes, they are all very good to excellent and, more importantly, fascinating studies in terroir – although, at $86 each, admittedly expensive studies. The point here is that understanding more about a wine’s origin will help us appreciate the wine better. I came across two more examples of this recently with wines from Carneros and Dry Creek Valley.

Carneros is located at the northern end of San Pablo Bay (it once was under the water) about 45 miles north of San Francisco. The region straddles Napa and Sonoma counties and naturally is heavily influenced by this large body, which, ironically, serves both to cool and insulate the area. So, while Carneros generally is cooler than the more northern areas of Napa and Sonoma, it also is given to less extreme climactic conditions. Overnight lows are warmer and daytime highs are cooler; winters are warmer and summers are cooler. Proximity to the water also means fog and winds further lower temperatures and dehydrate the vines, while low rainfall challenges the vines furthers and the generally shallow heavy clay and gravel soils make it difficult for the roots to grow deep to find much needed moisture. All of this stress conspires to challenge the vines, delay ripening, and make for a longer growing season, ideal conditions for extra flavor development and acidity. It also means Carneros is ideal for growing chardonnay and pinot noir.

Which brings me to Buena Vista Estate, situated right in the middle of the Carneros region. Buena Vista was one of the first wineries to invest in the region when it began planting vineyards in 1969. The winery now has the largest vineyard holdings in Carneros. Buena Vista has released a fascinating new portfolio of limited-production, clone-specific wines that showcase the winery’s estate Ramal Vineyard. These wines (all from 2004) are made from grapes planted in small vineyard blocks with the rootstock/clone combinations dictated by soil type and exposure. The Chardonnays (all $34) display typically crisp Carneros acids, yet a medium body and elegance, with tropical (I sensed pineapple) fruit. The “Ramal Vineyard” also offers nutty and citrus notes and a viscous texture. The “Dijon Clones” also has citrus with toasty, mineral elements. The “Clone 17RY” is the most complex, with a steely quality, brown butter, crème bruleee, and citrus. The Pinot Noirs (all $38) exhibit characteristic Carneros elegance with earthy cherry and strawberry qualities and a silky mouth feel. The “Ramal Vineyard” also carries brown spices, blackberry, raspberry, and a hint of fennel. The “Dijon Clones” leaned more to cinnamon, strawberry and watermelon. The “Swan Selection” was smoky, with pure cherry essence, a velvety texture, and bright acidity.

Dry Creek Valley is a stark contrast to Carneros. Although a large body of water and fog also influence this region, they do so much less than in Carneros. This has a lot to do with its farther north (approximately 70 miles north of San Francisco Bay) and more inland (20 miles from the Pacific Ocean) location, as well as its topography of coastal hills. That topography is a product of uplifting and folding of Pacific tectonic plates, resulting in a long, narrow valley with quickly changing slopes. Thus, there are a high proportion of benchland and hillside vineyards relative to the valley floor. The soils on the benches and hills mostly are gravel and clay loam, while the soil on the valley floor, deposited by Dry Creek over thousands of years, is primarily gravel and sandy loam. Dry Creek Valley also warms up earlier in the day and reaches higher average temperatures than almost all the other growing areas in Sonoma County but also gets cooler at night. Although, cabernet sauvignon and zinfandel are roughly on a par as far as acreage and sauvignon blanc and Rhone varietals show promise, Zinfandel is the most important grape. The terroir of Dry Creek Valley yields fruit that makes for intense, jammy Zinfandels, with crisp acidity and a fruitful finish.

I could have spent the whole column (and have in the past) on the many wonderful Zinfandel producers from this appellation. But I think the 2004 Zinfandels (all $24) from Mazzocco Winery, make a good case in point. Although I have found Mazzocco’s wines uneven in the past, these new releases represent significant improvement and reflect their origin well. The “Home Ranch” has spicy, oaky notes with briary cherry and plum. The “Quinn Vineyard” leans more to toast and brown sugar, cassis and crisp acids. The “Cuneo & Saini Vineyard” also offered toast and brown sugar notes but added black cherry compote. So, bottom line, I recommend taking some extra time to learn a little about what you are drinking. I think you will enjoy the wine more.