Frontline Wine: Certified Organic Wines

Certified organic wines just aren't cutting it on the market. I have yet to taste a New Zealand wine that adheres to the strict organic regulations through which organic status is gained as anything particularly interesting. Organic oranges may be juicer and plumper than their 'lesser restricted' counterparts, but applying the same principles to grapes that bulge like cows udders on the vines because they're grown on super-fertile top soil creates weak, pishy, characterless wines lacking intensity and depth. Vines need to struggle; their roots need to dig deep into the mineral bed to acquire the nutrients it requires for life. Too much well-intentioned organic interference molly-coddles the vines creating boring, two dimensional fruity wine, regardless of how skilled the winemaker is. Add to this the usual eye-watering price tag and a marketing campaign based on the guilt burdened for one's grandchildren's future welfare and I'm left entirely unconvinced.

Organic methods are to be encouraged, and the best wines in the country are being produced using as many organic methods as nature will allow. The winemakers responsible for these wines won't chase that all important golden moniker of ‘Organic’ on their label because they lose the freedom to use chemical help for the vines if things go completely 'tits-up' with a vintage (and there are some preeeety cold winters here as you well know). Finding a balance between truthful viticulture, sustainable agriculture and flavoursome wine is dictated wholly by the elements. Certified organic wines seem to compromise quality to hold a certification designed for ‘eating fruit’, and wineries that mostly adhere to organic practices are not being recognised for their efforts. The organic certification isn't working. Something new is needed.

New Zealand could use a new certification for wine to attract the best winemakers into trying to acquire it whilst enhancing the boutique, pure image kiwi wines currently enjoy on the international market. A badge of honour (with substance) is needed, giving award-lovers something honest to guide them on the bottle rather than the ubiquitous, corporate-biased Cuisine sticker or even a (God-bless-us-and-save-us-may-we-melt-it-down-into-a-cow-and-worship-it) New World gold medal.

How about creating a ‘100%’ wine certification for wineries who list all of the constituent ingredients on the back label of their wine and the origin of all of the grapes.

Think about the potential outcome. For instance, winemakers are not going to use sugar in their '100%' wines because it'll stick out on the label like a missing ear. Ideally, they will want to restrict things to, for example, 100% Marlborough grapes with sulphur. By listing the ingredients, they leave the wine totally open to chemical analysis leading to wholly honest winemaking which can be governed easily by spot checks. They will strive to develop cost effective, natural viticultural techniques to keep the label free of chemical-sounding words (and ultimately chemicals!).

The ‘100%’ wines could have their own awards ceremonies which would be a damned sight more trustworthy than the current ones. Consumers here and abroad would learn to look for the certification as the chemical-laden wines start to look dishonest without it. Winemakers could choose to have one of their wines, all of their wines or none at all with the certification preventing the need for massive upheavel in the trade. Finally, New Zealand would steal a march on the world stage with wine journos and greenies preaching the certification’s brilliance from the treetops thus doing its promotion for free.

This leads to New Zealand enhancing its image as a pure wine producer; other countries might take the lead and emulate the certification, and then who knows…we might have honest winemaking for the world. Add the words 'organic viticultural techniques used where possible' to the label, and hey presto...the image conscious big guys are forced to change their production techniques to keep up with the shift in consumer demand for wines that are HONEST. I wonder will Jim Delegats one day list the ingredients in his wines on the back label? Well here’s to wishful thinking…

Tried recently

Caleo Primitivo 2006 (Salento, Italy)

A beautiful table wine Bob Campbell and his flying monkey judges failed to even award a medal at the recent New Zealand International wine show (Wolf Blass Adelaide Hills Chardonnay 2008 GOLD!!!...ay right Bob...it's maybe time to retire to that little bit of land you've been promised on the Gold Coast…). A savoury wine of some depth; the primitivo boot-polishyness is enhanced with some beautiful ripe fruit and a back palate of fig and coconut)

$25

Penfolds Bin 90A 1990 Shiraz Cabernet

A superb wine from the Penfold's stable. Incredible finesse for such piercing intensity, the layers of flavour kept coming in waves. Oily and herbaceous with classic Penfold's earthiness, the stunning spine of acidity carries front, middle and back palate forward together, leaving a complex trail of flavours that I was too lazy to try and even analyse. I just enjoyed it for the rare pleasure it was.

$$$

Moet et Chandon Brut NV

Although it is a corporate Champagne whose sales are brand-based, I was shocked at just how bad the quality of Moet has plummeted , especially given the price they're asking for it. Made by a process that has been described as the biggest fraud in winemaking today, Sur Latte is the purchasing of ready-made Champagnes from producers that are taken to one Champagne house and blended under its name. Moet buy from all over the region, and judging by the taste of this muck, they mustn't be very careful with their sources. A bruised fruit underbelly, coarse acidity and a length that falls away faster than a lonely teenager on Beachy Head. Poor doesn't cover it. Perhaps rip-off does...

$100

Paul Brannigan, http://www.rumbles.co.nz/

© Scoop Media