Winery Tasting Rooms Remain Open During Ongoing Legal Challenges

Chris Polychron of Coast Law Group filed an appeal of the San Diego County Tiered Winery Zoning Ordinance of 2010 on behalf of the SD Citizenry group on June 10, 2011 with the Superior Court of California. It was received on June 22, 2011 by the California Appellate Court.

Polychron filed the required brief on Monday of this week  (Nov 14^th 2011) appealing Judge Timothy Taylor’s April 15, 2011 ruling denying the anti-winery group’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) based challenge.

Judge Taylor’s April ruling also ordered the SD Citizenry group as part of their lawsuit loss, to reimburse the County the $16,433.67 cost the County incurred to prepare the Administrative Record for the lawsuit.

The County is now working on a response brief, having 30 days plus an additional 30 day grace period. SD Citizenry’s attorneys will then file a response and then appellate court will schedule an oral argument.

The appeals process will take many more months but the current ordinance remains in effect and winery tasting rooms remain OPEN FOR BUSINESS for the enjoyment of San Diego wine lovers and tourists.

Legislative background: San Diego County Supervisors unanimously approved on august 4th 2010 a Tiered Winery Zoning Ordinance and General Plan amendment that allows boutique wineries by right of land ownership, to open tasting rooms on land with A70 or A72 agricultural zoned land. This action sought to encourage jobs, commerce, and agricultural activity in the County. The  stimulus provided by this ordinance is particularly needed during the current economic crisis.

From prior posts - Winery opponents appealed their April 2011 Court loss along with a $16.4K award of administrative record preparation costs to the County.

Opponents in their appeal are again asserting CEQA violations and contest the order to pay the County $16.4K in administrative record preparation costs.

The appeals process is long and complicated so the end date of this process is TBD, a current estimate is a several months beyond November 2011. 

As before, and in the mean time, the 2010 Tiered Ordinance stands enabling public Tasting Rooms in San Diego County Wine Country – so local wine lovers and visiting wine tourists are encouraged to visit and support San Diego County’s Award Winning Boutique Wineries.

As you may recall, the Superior Court of California issued a ruling Friday April 15th 2011 that upheld the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance.

Back in September 2010 “San Diego Citizenry Group” challenged the ordinance on CEQA grounds, seeking an injunction against its provisions.

Furthermore Citizenry was ordered to reimburse the County $16,444 for legal defense costs.

This hard-fought ordinance was over four years in the making, and was finally passed unanimously by the Supervisors in August 2010.

The thoughtful ordinance provided for a multi-level or “tiered” winery industry and in part, grants badly needed by-right tasting rooms to Boutique Wineries eliminating an onerous ~$250,000 Major Use Permit process that was effectively preventing this fledgling industry from happening – ironically in one of the (potentially) best wine-grape growing regions in the state .

As in August 2010, local wine lovers and wineries must hold their collective breath for a few more months with the hope and expectation that the Appeals Court upholds the original ruling against the opponents and in support of the County winery ordinance.

Appeal aside, area wineries continue to face costly and prohibitive building permit mandates by the County Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU). This is the next issue that the Supervisors will need to address. Sadly the local building industry would benefit from these projects if excessive standards were not forced upon Boutique Wineries.

In the mean time, locals, please (again) raise a glass and toast the visionary Supervisors and wish the wineries the best as they begin work this next bureaucratic challenge. Let’s also toast to the future wisdom of the Appeals Court to decline the Winery Opposition’s appeal of their April lawsuit loss.

“Salute” (Italian)

“Salud” (Spanish & Latin America)
“Santé” (French)

My post in September 2010 started off saying “We had been holding off hoping to finally post good news for San Diego County wine lovers, tourism, and the community as a whole, but alas, that is not the case.”

The wine grape harvest for 2010 has been delayed in much of California, Oregon, and Washington state, due to cool weather so we have time to post on this topic today as we urge the brix (wine grape sugar content) upward.

You say: “Hey! I saw that the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance passed on August 4th – Hooray!

When are the new winery tasting rooms opening? I can’t wait!!!”

Well wait you must.

Lawsuits as a weapon of mass obstruction: While the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance still stands, anyone opening a tasting room under its current provisions is are risk of premature shut- down if the courts issue an injunction as a result of the lawsuit that has been filed (3 Sept) by a local group of ordinance opponents. A similar lawsuit threat was raised some two years ago by the same opponents.

CEQA a complicated well-meaning law: Those of you who are familiar with California Environmental law – primarily the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), know that this well meaning law has been used not only to protect the environment, but also in an unintended way, as a tool to stop development and projects beneficial to the community.

After the last lawsuit threat, San Diego County regrouped and spent $250,000 completing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) plus the cost of associated staff time, hearings, and public review processes to provide the legal means of moving forward with a county-wide winery ordinance.

Most folks in the county we’ve discussed these issues with, support San Diego’s nascent winery industry, agriculture and business in general. They cannot understand why the opponents continually block this beneficial initiative.

Others residents simply can’t understand the County’s prohibitively expensive permitting process – when wineries state-wide have reasonable and affordable opportunities for on-site tasting rooms and sales. The delays and cost inherent in the prior ordinance are the primary reason there has only been ONE new on-site winery tasting room open in the last few years. When advised of a $250,000 winery Major Use Permit (MUP) most citizens (rightfully) display a jaw- drop of significant proportions and typically say “That’s ridiculous.”

To be fair here, it’s important to point out the County Supervisors recognize the chilling impact the current permitting process has on agriculture and wineries and they took significant action to rectify the situation in the form of a two year effort crafting the Tiered Winery Ordinance and directing the EIR – but their visionary efforts were derailed by yet another lawsuit.

Economics (or not) of small wineries: Vince Vasquez and Eric Larson of the San Diego Farm Bureau explain the economics of water-wise wine grapes and small San Diego family-owned wineries in this May 15th weekly National University Impact San Diego radio public policy show “San Diego and the local wine industry!” The show can be streamed, or downloaded as a Podcast at this link .

The economics of scale that exist (well actually there are none) at a premium Boutique winery require on-site retail sales to maximize profits to sustain operations. Premium wines require tastings to appreciate their uniqueness and quality. For example, 100% of Eagles Nest 2007-2008 wines and Ports have won medals gold-silver-bronze – a total of 30 in the 2009-2010 competition year.

The overhead of an off-site tasting room for a family winery operation is untenable and cooperative tasting rooms in our area have consistently failed. Case study after case study have emphasized the importance of on-site retail and wine club sales for Boutiques – and the many years needed to achieve profitability due to the heavy capitalization of a winery. These are not high volume operations that can efficiently and amazingly produce, bottle, distribute, and sell a quaff-able daily wine for a profit at a few bucks a bottle. Many if not most wine tourists want to see the vineyards where the wines originated and meet the winemaker at the winery – this can’t be done with an urban tasting room.

For an insight into the amazing Two-Buck-Chuck story, see a post from earlier this year on this site detailing Fred Franzia’s Bronco Winery operation at this link. If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link.

We’ve stated in testimony at Supervisor and Planning Commission hearings (this link ) that tasting room permissions and on-site retail sales of wine are “mission critical” (in military parlance that veterans will understand) – a capability critical to achieving goals – mission success. Small wineries do not have the (immense) economies of scale that large operations have, and by-the-way 90% of wineries in California are small family operations. Boutiques cannot operate on a wholesale, retail, or restaurant basis alone particularly in the current economic malaise that exists locally and globally.

There will never be a large winery in San Diego County: Practically speaking, there will never be a “danger” of large wineries in San Diego County – the agricultural parcels are too small, the terrain too sloping, and the number of vineyards too low to sustain many wineries. The Boutiques reflected in the Tiered Winery Ordinance are by wine volume 1/100th of what would be considered a “small winery” in the industry – thus a Boutique is more a microscopic or nano-winery.

If and until until San Diego County leadership can overcome CEQA challenges, and deliver tasting rooms with retail sales permissions to small family wineries, the citizens of San Diego County will have to drive to Riverside (Temecula), Santa Barbara, Paso Robles, Napa, or Sonoma counties – sadly, there will be NO wine industry here.

What you can do: San Diego County residents supporting wineries are urged to remain aware and involved politically and voice their support for legislation supporting the local wine industry. Communicate your support for the ordinance to your Supervisor contact them via this link. No problem ever got better without the participation of an educated committed constituency. Thank your Supervisors for their effort on this ordinance and offer your support for tasting rooms at local wineries!

If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see an article on us in San Diego Reader magazine at this link. Or simply visit the many blog posts on this (public) blog.

Our Web 1.0 website is http://eaglesnestwinery.com and our private blog for customers is http://eaglesnestwinery.ning.com . We’re a leading winery on Twitter at http://twitter.com/eaglesnestwine and on Facebook at this link.

Opponents in their appeal are again asserting CEQA violations and contest the order to pay the County $16.4K in administrative record preparation costs.

The appeals process is long and complicated so the end date of this latest delay is TBD, current estimate is October 2011.

As before, and in the mean time, the 2010 Tiered Ordinance stands enabling public Tasting Rooms in San Diego County Wine Country – so local wine lovers and visiting wine tourists are encouraged to visit and support San Diego County’s Award Winning  Boutique Wineries.

As you may recall, the Superior Court of California issued a ruling Friday April 15th 2011 that upheld the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance.

Back in September 2010 “San Diego Citizenry Group” challenged the ordinance on CEQA grounds, seeking an injunction against its provisions.

Furthermore Citizenry was ordered to reimburse the County $16,444 for legal defense costs.

This hard-fought ordinance was over four years in the making, and was finally passed unanimously by the Supervisors in August 2010.

The thoughtful ordinance provided for a multi-level or “tiered” winery industry and in part, grants badly needed by-right tasting rooms to Boutique Wineries eliminating an onerous ~$250,000 Major Use Permit process that was effectively preventing this fledgling industry from happening – ironically in one of the (potentially) best wine-grape growing regions in the state .

As in August 2010, local wine lovers and wineries must hold their collective breath for a few more months with the hope and expectation that the Appeals Court upholds the original ruling against the opponents and in support of the County winery ordinance.

Appeal aside, area wineries continue to face costly and prohibitive building permit mandates by the County Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU). This is the next issue that the Supervisors will need to address. Sadly the local building industry would benefit from these projects if excessive standards were not forced upon Boutique Wineries.

In the mean time, locals, please (again) raise a glass and toast the visionary Supervisors and wish the wineries the best as they begin work this next bureaucratic challenge. Let’s also toast to the future wisdom of the Appeals Court to decline the Winery Opposition’s appeal of their April lawsuit loss.

“Salute” (Italian)

“Salud” (Spanish & Latin America)
“Santé” (French)

My post in September 2010 started off saying “We had been holding off hoping to finally post good news for San Diego County wine lovers, tourism, and the community as a whole, but alas, that is not the case.”

The wine grape harvest for 2010 has been delayed in much of California, Oregon, and Washington state, due to cool weather so we have time to post on this topic today as we urge the brix (wine grape sugar content) upward.

You say: “Hey! I saw that the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance passed on August 4th – Hooray!

When are the new winery tasting rooms opening? I can’t wait!!!”

Well wait you must.

Lawsuits as a weapon of mass obstruction: While the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance still stands, anyone opening a tasting room under its current provisions is are risk of premature shut- down if the courts issue an injunction as a result of the lawsuit that has been filed (3 Sept) by a local group of ordinance opponents. A similar lawsuit threat was raised some two years ago by the same opponents.

CEQA a complicated well-meaning law: Those of you who are familiar with California Environmental law – primarily the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), know that this well meaning law has been used not only to protect the environment, but also in an unintended way, as a tool to stop development and projects beneficial to the community.

After the last lawsuit threat, San Diego County regrouped and spent $250,000 completing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) plus the cost of associated staff time, hearings, and public review processes to provide the legal means of moving forward with a county-wide winery ordinance.

Most folks in the county we’ve discussed these issues with, support San Diego’s nascent winery industry, agriculture and business in general. They cannot understand why the opponents continually block this beneficial initiative.

Others residents simply can’t understand the County’s prohibitively expensive permitting process – when wineries state-wide have reasonable and affordable opportunities for on-site tasting rooms and sales. The delays and cost inherent in the prior ordinance are the primary reason there has only been ONE new on-site winery tasting room open in the last few years. When advised of a $250,000 winery Major Use Permit (MUP) most citizens (rightfully) display a jaw- drop of significant proportions and typically say “That’s ridiculous.”

To be fair here, it’s important to point out the County Supervisors recognize the chilling impact the current permitting process has on agriculture and wineries and they took significant action to rectify the situation in the form of a two year effort crafting the Tiered Winery Ordinance and directing the EIR – but their visionary efforts were derailed by yet another lawsuit.

Economics (or not) of small wineries: Vince Vasquez and Eric Larson of the San Diego Farm Bureau explain the economics of water-wise wine grapes and small San Diego family-owned wineries in this May 15th weekly National University Impact San Diego radio public policy show “San Diego and the local wine industry!” The show can be streamed, or downloaded as a Podcast at this link .

The economics of scale that exist (well actually there are none) at a premium Boutique winery require on-site retail sales to maximize profits to sustain operations. Premium wines require tastings to appreciate their uniqueness and quality. For example, 100% of Eagles Nest 2007-2008 wines and Ports have won medals gold-silver-bronze – a total of 30 in the 2009-2010 competition year.

The overhead of an off-site tasting room for a family winery operation is untenable and cooperative tasting rooms in our area have consistently failed. Case study after case study have emphasized the importance of on-site retail and wine club sales for Boutiques – and the many years needed to achieve profitability due to the heavy capitalization of a winery. These are not high volume operations that can efficiently and amazingly produce, bottle, distribute, and sell a quaff-able daily wine for a profit at a few bucks a bottle. Many if not most wine tourists want to see the vineyards where the wines originated and meet the winemaker at the winery – this can’t be done with an urban tasting room.

For an insight into the amazing Two-Buck-Chuck story, see a post from earlier this year on this site detailing Fred Franzia’s Bronco Winery operation at this link. If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link.

We’ve stated in testimony at Supervisor and Planning Commission hearings (this link ) that tasting room permissions and on-site retail sales of wine are “mission critical” (in military parlance that veterans will understand) – a capability critical to achieving goals – mission success. Small wineries do not have the (immense) economies of scale that large operations have, and by-the-way 90% of wineries in California are small family operations. Boutiques cannot operate on a wholesale, retail, or restaurant basis alone particularly in the current economic malaise that exists locally and globally.

There will never be a large winery in San Diego County: Practically speaking, there will never be a “danger” of large wineries in San Diego County – the agricultural parcels are too small, the terrain too sloping, and the number of vineyards too low to sustain many wineries. The Boutiques reflected in the Tiered Winery Ordinance are by wine volume 1/100th of what would be considered a “small winery” in the industry – thus a Boutique is more a microscopic or nano-winery.

If and until until San Diego County leadership can overcome CEQA challenges, and deliver tasting rooms with retail sales permissions to small family wineries, the citizens of San Diego County will have to drive to Riverside (Temecula), Santa Barbara, Paso Robles, Napa, or Sonoma counties – sadly, there will be NO wine industry here.

What you can do: San Diego County residents supporting wineries are urged to remain aware and involved politically and voice their support for legislation supporting the local wine industry. Communicate your support for the ordinance to your Supervisor contact them via this link. No problem ever got better without the participation of an educated committed constituency. Thank your Supervisors for their effort on this ordinance and offer your support for tasting rooms at local wineries!

If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see an article on us in San Diego Reader magazine at this link. Or simply visit the many blog posts on this (public) blog.

Our Web 1.0 website is http://eaglesnestwinery.com and our private blog for customers is http://eaglesnestwinery.ning.com . We’re a leading winery on Twitter at http://twitter.com/eaglesnestwine and on Facebook at this link.

The appeals process is long and complicated so end date of this latest delay is TBD. If you want to review the appeals process it’s available at this Superior Court link (here).

In the mean time , and as before, the 2010 Tiered Ordinance enabling public Tasting Rooms stands – so local wine lovers and visiting wine tourists may continue visiting their favorite San Diego County winery tasting rooms.

As you may recall, the Superior Court of California issued a ruling Friday April 15th 2011 that upheld the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance.

Back in September 2010 “San Diego Citizenry Group” challenged the ordinance on CEQA grounds, seeking an injunction against its provisions.

Furthermore Citizenry was ordered to reimburse the County $16,444 for legal defense costs.

This hard-fought ordinance was over four years in the making, and was finally passed unanimously by the Supervisors in August 2010.

The thoughtful ordinance provided for a multi-level or “tiered” winery industry and in part, grants badly needed by-right tasting rooms to Boutique Wineries eliminating an onerous ~$250,000 Major Use Permit process that was effectively preventing this fledgling industry from happening – ironically in one of the (potentially) best wine-grape growing regions in the state .

As in August 2010, local wine lovers and wineries must hold their collective breath for a few weeks to see if an appeal is filed by the opponents.

Appeal aside, area wineries continue to face costly and prohibitive building permit mandates by the County Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU). This is the next issue that the Supervisors will need to address.  Sadly the local building industry would benefit from these projects if excessive standards were not forced upon Boutique Wineries.

In the mean time, locals, please raise a glass and toast the visionary Supervisors and wish the wineries the best as they begin work this next bureaucratic challenge. Let’s also toast to the future wisdom of the Appeals Court to decline the Winery Opposition’s appeal of their April lawsuit loss.

“Salute”  (Italian)

“Salud”  (Spanish & Latin America)
“Santé”  (French)

My post in September 2010 started off saying “We had been holding off hoping to finally post good news for San Diego County wine lovers, tourism, and the community as a whole, but alas, that is not the case.”

The wine grape harvest for 2010 has been delayed in much of  California, Oregon, and Washington state,  due to cool weather so we have time to post on this topic today as we urge the brix (wine grape sugar content) upward.

You say: “Hey! I saw that the  San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance passed on August 4th – Hooray!

When are the new winery tasting rooms opening? I can’t wait!!!”

Well wait you must.

Lawsuits as a weapon of mass obstruction: While the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance still stands, anyone opening a tasting room under its current provisions is are risk of premature shut- down if the courts issue an injunction as a result of the lawsuit that has been filed (3 Sept) by a local group of ordinance opponents. A similar lawsuit threat was raised some two years ago by the same opponents.

CEQA a complicated well-meaning law: Those of you who are familiar with California Environmental law – primarily the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), know that this well meaning law has been used not only to protect the environment, but also in an unintended  way, as a tool to stop development and projects beneficial  to the community.

After the last lawsuit threat,  San Diego County regrouped and spent $250,000 completing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) plus the cost of associated staff time, hearings, and public review processes to provide the legal means of moving forward with a county-wide winery ordinance.

Most folks in the county we’ve discussed these issues with,  support San Diego’s nascent winery industry, agriculture and business in general. They cannot understand why the opponents continually block this beneficial initiative.

Others residents simply can’t understand the County’s prohibitively expensive permitting process – when wineries state-wide have reasonable and affordable opportunities for on-site tasting rooms and sales. The delays and cost inherent in the prior ordinance are the primary reason there has only been ONE new on-site winery tasting room open in the last few years. When advised of a $250,000 winery Major Use Permit (MUP) most citizens (rightfully) display a jaw- drop of significant proportions and typically say “That’s ridiculous.”

To be fair here, it’s important to  point out the County Supervisors recognize the chilling impact the current permitting process has on agriculture and wineries and they took significant action to rectify the situation in the form of a two year effort crafting the Tiered Winery Ordinance and directing the EIR – but their visionary efforts were derailed by yet another lawsuit.

Economics (or not) of small wineries: Vince Vasquez and Eric Larson of the San Diego Farm Bureau explain the economics of water-wise wine grapes and small San Diego family-owned wineries in this May 15th weekly National University Impact San Diego radio public policy show  “San Diego and the local wine industry!” The show can be streamed, or downloaded as a Podcast at this link .

The economics of scale that exist (well actually there are none) at a premium Boutique winery require on-site retail sales to maximize profits to  sustain operations. Premium wines require tastings to appreciate their uniqueness and quality.  For example, 100% of Eagles Nest 2007-2008 wines and Ports have won medals gold-silver-bronze – a total of 30  in the 2009-2010 competition year.

The overhead of an off-site tasting room for a family winery operation is untenable and cooperative tasting rooms in our area have consistently failed.  Case study after case study have emphasized the importance of on-site retail and wine club sales for Boutiques – and the many years needed to achieve profitability due to the heavy capitalization of a winery.  These are not high volume operations that can efficiently and amazingly produce, bottle, distribute, and sell a quaff-able daily wine for a profit at a few bucks a bottle.  Many if not most wine tourists want to see the vineyards where the wines originated and meet the winemaker at the winery – this can’t be done with an urban tasting room.

For an insight into the amazing Two-Buck-Chuck story, see a post from earlier this year on this site detailing Fred Franzia’s Bronco Winery operation at this link. If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link.

We’ve stated in testimony at Supervisor and Planning Commission hearings  (this link )  that tasting room permissions and on-site retail sales of wine are “mission critical” (in military parlance that veterans will understand) – a capability critical to achieving goals – mission success.  Small wineries do not have the (immense) economies of scale that large operations have, and by-the-way 90% of wineries in California are small family operations.  Boutiques cannot operate on a wholesale, retail, or restaurant basis alone particularly in the current economic malaise that exists locally and globally.

There will never be a large winery in San Diego County: Practically speaking, there will never be a “danger” of large wineries in San Diego County – the agricultural parcels are too small, the terrain too sloping, and the number of vineyards too low to sustain many wineries.  The Boutiques reflected in the Tiered Winery Ordinance are by wine volume 1/100th of what would be considered a “small winery” in the industry – thus a Boutique is more a microscopic or nano-winery.

If and until until San Diego County leadership can overcome CEQA challenges, and deliver tasting rooms with retail sales permissions to small family wineries, the citizens of San Diego County will have to drive to Riverside (Temecula), Santa Barbara, Paso Robles, Napa, or Sonoma counties – sadly, there will be NO wine industry here.

What you can do: San Diego County residents supporting wineries are urged to remain aware and involved politically and voice their support for legislation supporting the local wine industry. Communicate your support for the ordinance to your Supervisor contact them via this link. No problem ever got better without the participation of an educated committed constituency. Thank your Supervisors for their effort on this ordinance and offer your support for tasting rooms at local wineries!

If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see an article on us in San Diego Reader magazine at this link. Or simply visit the many blog posts on this (public) blog.

Our Web 1.0 website is http://eaglesnestwinery.com and our private blog for customers is http://eaglesnestwinery.ning.com . We’re a leading winery on Twittter at http://twitter.com/eaglesnestwine and on Facebook at this link.

Good news at long last!

The Superior Court of California issued a ruling Friday April 15th 2011 that upheld the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance.

Back in September 2010 “San Diego Citizenry Group” challenged the ordinance on CEQA grounds, seeking an injunction against its provisions.

Furthermore Citizenry was ordered to reimburse the County $16,444 for legal defense costs.

This hard-fought ordinance was over four years in the making, and was finally passed unanimously by the Supervisors in August 2010.

The thoughtful ordinance provided for a multi-level or “tiered” winery industry and in part, grants badly needed by-right tasting rooms to Boutique Wineries eliminating an onerous ~$250,000 Major Use Permit process that was effectively preventing this fledgling industry from happening – ironically in one of the (potentially) best wine-grape growing regions in the state .

As in August 2010, local wine lovers and wineries must hold their collective breath for a few weeks and see if an appeal is filed by the winery opponents.

Barring an appeal, area wineries continue to face costly and prohibitive building permit mandates by the County Department of Planning and Land Use (DPLU). This is the next issue that the Supervisors will need to address.  Sadly the local building industry would benefit from these projects if excessive standards were not forced upon Boutique Wineries.

In the mean time, locals, please raise a glass and toast the visionary Supervisors and wish the wineries the best as they begin work this next bureaucratic challenge.

“Salute”  (Italian)
“Salud”  (Spanish & Latin America)
“Santé”  (French)

My post in September 2010 started off saying “We had been holding off hoping to finally post good news for San Diego County wine lovers, tourism, and the community as a whole, but alas, that is not the case.”

The wine grape harvest for 2010 has been delayed in much of  California, Oregon, and Washington state,  due to cool weather so we have time to post on this topic today as we urge the brix (wine grape sugar content) upward.

You say: “Hey! I saw that the  San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance passed on August 4th – Hooray!

When are the new winery tasting rooms opening? I can’t wait!!!”

Well wait you must.

Lawsuits as a weapon of mass obstruction: While the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance still stands, anyone opening a tasting room under its current provisions is are risk of premature shut- down if the courts issue an injunction as a result of the lawsuit that has been filed (3 Sept) by a local group of ordinance opponents. A similar lawsuit threat was raised some two years ago by the same opponents.

CEQA a complicated well-meaning law: Those of you who are familiar with California Environmental law – primarily the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), know that this well meaning law has been used not only to protect the environment, but also in an unintended  way, as a tool to stop development and projects beneficial  to the community.

After the last lawsuit threat,  San Diego County regrouped and spent $250,000 completing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) plus the cost of associated staff time, hearings, and public review processes to provide the legal means of moving forward with a county-wide winery ordinance.

Most folks in the county we’ve discussed these issues with,  support San Diego’s nascent winery industry, agriculture and business in general. They cannot understand why the opponents continually block this beneficial initiative.

Others residents simply can’t understand the County’s prohibitively expensive permitting process – when wineries state-wide have reasonable and affordable opportunities for on-site tasting rooms and sales. The delays and cost inherent in the prior ordinance are the primary reason there has only been ONE new on-site winery tasting room open in the last few years. When advised of a $250,000 winery Major Use Permit (MUP) most citizens (rightfully) display a jaw- drop of significant proportions and typically say “That’s ridiculous.”

To be fair here, it’s important to  point out the County Supervisors recognize the chilling impact the current permitting process has on agriculture and wineries and they took significant action to rectify the situation in the form of a two year effort crafting the Tiered Winery Ordinance and directing the EIR – but their visionary efforts were derailed by yet another lawsuit.

Economics (or not) of small wineries: Vince Vasquez and Eric Larson of the San Diego Farm Bureau explain the economics of water-wise wine grapes and small San Diego family-owned wineries in this May 15th weekly National University Impact San Diego radio public policy show  “San Diego and the local wine industry!” The show can be streamed, or downloaded as a Podcast at this link .

The economics of scale that exist (well actually there are none) at a premium Boutique winery require on-site retail sales to maximize profits to  sustain operations. Premium wines require tastings to appreciate their uniqueness and quality.  For example, 100% of Eagles Nest 2007-2008 wines and Ports have won medals gold-silver-bronze – a total of 30  in the 2009-2010 competition year.

The overhead of an off-site tasting room for a family winery operation is untenable and cooperative tasting rooms in our area have consistently failed.  Case study after case study emphasize the importance of on-site retail and wine club sales for Boutiques – and the many years needed to achieve profitability due to the heavy capitalization of a winery.  These are not Two-Buck-Chuck operations that can efficiently amazingly produce, bottle, distribute, and sell a quaff-able daily wine for a profit at a few bucks a bottle.

For an insight into the amazing Two-Buck-Chuck story, see a post from earlier this year on this site detailing Fred Franzia’s Bronco Winery operation at this link. If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link.

We’ve stated in testimony at Supervisor and Planning Commission hearings  (this link )  that tasting room permissions and on-site retail sales of wine are “mission critical” (in military parlance that veterans will understand) – a capability critical to achieving goals – mission success.  Small wineries do not have the (immense) economies of scale that large operations have, and by-the-way 90% of wineries in California are small family operations.  Boutiques cannot operate on a wholesale, retail, or restaurant basis alone particularly in the current economic malaise that exists locally and globally.

There will never be a large winery in San Diego County: Practically speaking, there will never be a “danger” of large wineries in San Diego County – the agricultural parcels are too small, the terrain too sloping, and the number of vineyards too low to sustain many wineries.  The Boutiques reflected in the Tiered Winery Ordinance are by wine volume 1/100th of what would be considered a “small winery” in the industry – thus a Boutique is more a microscopic or nano-winery.

If and until until San Diego County leadership can overcome CEQA challenges, and deliver tasting rooms with retail sales permissions to small family wineries, the citizens of San Diego County will have to drive to Riverside (Temecula), Santa Barbara, Paso Robles, Napa, or Sonoma counties – sadly, there will be NO wine industry here.

What you can do: San Diego County residents supporting wineries are urged to remain aware and involved politically and voice their support for legislation supporting the local wine industry. Communicate your support for the ordinance to your Supervisor contact them via this link. No problem ever got better without the participation of an educated committed constituency. Thank your Supervisors for their effort on this ordinance and offer your support for tasting rooms at local wineries!

If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see an article on us in San Diego Reader magazine at this link. Or simply visit the many blog posts on this (public) blog.

Our Web 1.0 website is http://eaglesnestwinery.com and our private blog for customers is http://eaglesnestwinery.ning.com . We’re a leading winery on Twittter at http://twitter.com/eaglesnestwine and on Facebook at this link.

Typical winery sign post - Amador County near Sacramento

My post in September 2010 started off saying “We had been holding off hoping to finally post good news for San Diego County wine lovers, tourism, and the community as a whole, but alas, that is not the case.”

The wine grape harvest for 2010 has been delayed in much of  California, Oregon, and Washington state,  due to cool weather so we have time to post on this topic today as we urge the brix (wine grape sugar content) upward.

You say: “Hey! I saw that the  San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance passed on August 4th – Hooray!

When are the new winery tasting rooms opening? I can’t wait!!!”

Well wait you must.

Lawsuits as a weapon of mass obstruction: While the San Diego County Tiered Winery Ordinance still stands, anyone opening a tasting room under its current provisions is are risk of premature shut- down if the courts issue an injunction as a result of the lawsuit that has been filed (3 Sept) by a local group of ordinance opponents. A similar lawsuit threat was raised some two years ago by the same opponents.

CEQA a complicated well-meaning law: Those of you who are familiar with California Environmental law – primarily the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), know that this well meaning law has been used not only to protect the environment, but also in an unintended  way, as a tool to stop development and projects beneficial  to the community.

After the last lawsuit threat,  San Diego County regrouped and spent $250,000 completing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) plus the cost of associated staff time, hearings, and public review processes to provide the legal means of moving forward with a county-wide winery ordinance.

Most folks in the county we’ve discussed these issues with,  support San Diego’s nascent winery industry, agriculture and business in general. They cannot understand why the opponents continually block this beneficial initiative.

Others residents simply can’t understand the County’s prohibitively expensive permitting process – when wineries state-wide have reasonable and affordable opportunities for on-site tasting rooms and sales. The delays and cost inherent in the prior ordinance are the primary reason there has only been ONE new on-site winery tasting room open in the last few years. When advised of a $250,000 winery Major Use Permit (MUP) most citizens (rightfully) display a jaw- drop of significant proportions and typically say “That’s ridiculous.”

To be fair here, it’s important to  point out the County Supervisors recognize the chilling impact the current permitting process has on agriculture and wineries and they took significant action to rectify the situation in the form of a two year effort crafting the Tiered Winery Ordinance and directing the EIR – but their visionary efforts were derailed by yet another lawsuit.

Economics (or not) of small wineries: Vince Vasquez and Eric Larson of the San Diego Farm Bureau explain the economics of water-wise wine grapes and small San Diego family-owned wineries in this May 15th weekly National University Impact San Diego radio public policy show  “San Diego and the local wine industry!” The show can be streamed, or downloaded as a Podcast at this link .

The economics of scale that exist (well actually there are none) at a premium Boutique winery require on-site retail sales to maximize profits to  sustain operations. Premium wines require tastings to appreciate their uniqueness and quality.  For example, 100% of Eagles Nest 2007-2008 wines and Ports have won medals gold-silver-bronze – a total of 30  in the 2009-2010 competition year.

The overhead of an off-site tasting room for a family winery operation is untenable and cooperative tasting rooms in our area have consistently failed.  Case study after case study emphasize the importance of on-site retail and wine club sales for Boutiques – and the many years needed to achieve profitability due to the heavy capitalization of a winery.  These are not Two-Buck-Chuck operations that can efficiently amazingly produce, bottle, distribute, and sell a quaff-able daily wine for a profit at a few bucks a bottle.

For an insight into the amazing Two-Buck-Chuck story, see a post from earlier this year on this site detailing Fred Franzia’s Bronco Winery operation at this link. If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link.

We’ve stated in testimony at Supervisor and Planning Commission hearings  (this link )  that tasting room permissions and on-site retail sales of wine are “mission critical” (in military parlance that veterans will understand) – a capability critical to achieving goals – mission success.  Small wineries do not have the (immense) economies of scale that large operations have, and by-the-way 90% of wineries in California are small family operations.  Boutiques cannot operate on a wholesale, retail, or restaurant basis alone particularly in the current economic malaise that exists locally and globally.

There will never be a large winery in San Diego County: Practically speaking, there will never be a “danger” of large wineries in San Diego County – the agricultural parcels are too small, the terrain too sloping, and the number of vineyards too low to sustain many wineries.  The Boutiques reflected in the Tiered Winery Ordinance are by wine volume 1/100th of what would be considered a “small winery” in the industry – thus a Boutique is more a microscopic or nano-winery.

If and until until San Diego County leadership can overcome CEQA challenges, and deliver tasting rooms with retail sales permissions to small family wineries, the citizens of San Diego County will have to drive to Riverside (Temecula), Santa Barbara, Paso Robles, Napa, or Sonoma counties – sadly, there will be NO wine industry here.

What you can do: San Diego County residents supporting wineries are urged to remain aware and involved politically and voice their support for legislation supporting the local wine industry. Communicate your support for the ordinance to your Supervisor contact them via this link. No problem ever got better without the participation of an educated committed constituency. Thank your Supervisors for their effort on this ordinance and offer your support for tasting rooms at local wineries!

If you are interested in more information about Eagles Nest you can see a this week’s San Diego Reader magazine at this link. Or simply visit the many blog posts on this public blog.

Our Web 1.0 website is http://eaglesnestwinery.com and our private blog for customers is http://eaglesnestwinery.ning.com . We’re a leading winery on Twittter at http://twitter.com/eaglesnestwine and on Facebook at this link.

Tasting rooms almost…

The nascent rebirth of San Diego County winery industry was given another assist  yesterday (August 4th 2010)  as the County Board of Supervisors unanimously passed the “Tiered Winery Ordinance” which enables tasting rooms by right of land ownership in A70-A72 agriculturally zoned parcels in the County. The proceedings and testimony are available at this video link http://bit.ly/9SyFQW .

This has been a long 4-year effort. Winery opponents derailed a similar ordinance two years ago requiring the County to spend some $300,000 on a Environmental Impact Report (EIR) along with associated staff hours and hearings on the report. Placer County near Sacramento passed a similar ordinance two years ago without incident and has had no problem with winery customers in that county.

What’s next?

There is a 30 day Ordinance enactment (waiting) period to allow among other things, the filing of opposing lawsuits. Following enactment of the ordinance, Boutique wineries plannning to open tasting rooms modify their existing California Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission (ABC) licences and meet several  San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use  (DPLU) requirements.

Here’s a link to one of many news stories on the ordinance http://bit.ly/9fGe5q

Many newer wine consumers are unaware of the importance in maintaining stable, consistent temperatures in storing their prized wines.

Wine blogs on the Internet are full of posts about the importance of temperature control from the wine cellar perspective. But what happens between the winery and the retail consumer? This discussion is uniquely from an insider/winery owner’s  (and also a wine consumer) perspective.

We have occasionally been disappointed with wines purchased through distributors/retailers who did not exercise proper temperature control in the transport,  warehousing, and storefront storage of their wine products. These were generally wines with several years on the clock  (4-5 years) and from reputable wineries -wines that could likely have been exposed to prolonged storage at higher than proper temperatures.

Our assessment was that these wines were likely “cooked” – exposed to storage at prolonged high temperatures of 70+F – 80+F that can prematurely age a wine.

So how important are shipping storage temperatures to wineries? Consider this from a Wine Business Monthly article from November 2000 authored by Jeremy Hay – Many wineries will not allow their wines to ship wine in “dry” (uninsulated) semi-trailers and require either insulated trailers or trailers with refrigeration capability. In addition to absolute high temperatures, temperature excursions (raising and lowering of storage temperatures)  is detrimental to wine. “According to the American Trucking Association, in 1998, six percent of the 501,000 American trucking companies were refrigerated carriers.” Yes – 94% of the trucks are not refrigerated – think about that some smoking-hot mid-west summer day.

Jeremy Hay continues: :  “Florida is the country’s third largest wine market, average summer temperatures hover in the 90s–while distributors have cold rooms for their most expensive brands, the great majority of wines are stored at ambient warehouse temperatures…”  “The bottom line of such conditions is that by the time most wines are chosen from a wine list or retail shelf, they do not taste the same as when they left the winery.”

Vinfolio graph depicting accelerated wine aging above 55F

Proponents of cooler storage temperatures generally recommend a range of 55F to 60F. Chemical reactions double in speed for every 18-degree Fahrenheit increase in temperature–wine stored at 73-degrees will age twice as fast as it should, at 91-degrees, it will age four times as fast. The chart to the right from Vinfolio to depicts the impact of temperature on wine

30 Medals in 2009-2010 International and National Wine Competitions

At Eagles Nest Winery, we stress strict temperature control, and to further ensure medal- winning quality – we emphasize quality sustainable winegrape production, sanitary operations,  and a careful  winemaking and barrel aging/case goods regimen.

We believe second to quality winemaking and sanitary operations,  temperature control is a key reason 100% of our Estate produced, and nearly 100% of our other wines have been medalists in International and National Wine Competitions (see Wine Awards).  Our wines are barrel aged and store case goods stored below 59F at all times.

For the above reasons, you should carefully choose Winery Wine Clubs that ship only during cool weather seasons, and also consider accelerated shipping options to minimize the time your wine is exposed to non-temperature controlled conditions.

You should ensure that your local wine distributors and wine shops store their case goods at proper temperatures especially if you live in a warm weather regions. In these tight economic times, retailers may adjust their thermostats upward to save on power bills, compromising their wine inventory.

A temperature controlled storage unit in your home ro restaurant to protect your liquid investments for that future day of enjoyment.  Don’t store your wine in that living room closet or automobile garage at 70F-80F degrees.  See out a cool, dark, quiet, vibration free location. If your collection is large, commercial off-site temperature controlled wine storage is another option.

Shared below is a June 2010 article by wine expert and columnist, Dan Berger, from the Herald Tribune on the importance of wine transport, distribution and storage temperatures.  Also discussed above were facts presented in an excellent article on wine shipping and storage in the Wine Business Monthly Archives  click here.

_____________________

Did the retailer take good care of your wine?

Beaulieu Vineyard, Rutherford, CA Circa 1920's

Surely you’ve heard heard of the term “brix” in the context of wine referring to the sugar levels in wine grapes. Have you heard of the term “Bricks” of wine?  We’re not talking masonry building elements, but a colorful and effective Prohibition era product offering to wine consumers…

In American history, nothing has had the overall impact on the Wine Industry as the 1920′s Prohibition movement. The politics and alliances that were formed to implement the 18th Amendment to the U.S.  Constitution on January 16th, 1919 , and later its repeal in 1933 by the 21st Amendment,  is quite the read for students of U.S. wine history.

The fallout from backroom deals that were cut to implement the repeal of Prohibition are still with us today. If you live outside California – have you ever attempted to order your favorite wine from a special winery you visited on a wine tasting vacation – only to to find you could be prosecuted for a felony (in some states) by having wine shipped to your home ???

U.S. wine history details the origin of the maddeningly complicated alcohol and wine distribution and sales laws we live with daily -  just visit the Family Winemakers of California or Free The Grapes organization’s websites for legal interstate wine shipping maps and you can see the problem.

Recently, a leading wine industry PR professional Tom Wark posted a series of excellent articles on threats to your consumer rights in the form of  legislation targeting your already limited direct-to-consumer shipping rights - your only true freedom of choice in the wines you buy today.

I encourage to read all of Tom’s well written and informative posts on his Fermentation Blog – but here is a link to a recent and excellent article articulating the consumer hostile legislation on Capitol Hill being pushed by the alcohol distribution industry.  If you are into consumer rights, and specifically your choices in wine consumption please read his posts.

BTW this blog site has a nice tribute to the late Juanita Swedenburg - wine lovers benefiting from direct shipping, must thank her for her successful U.S. Supreme Court case defending wine shipping regulations.

As an award winning Boutique winery, quality wine is understandably one of our top passions. As with any career field, the wine industry has many areas of specific and unique knowledge, and specialized terms and processes – just as in medicine, art, and the sciences – actually we’ve been known to say winemaking is a carefully orchestrated blend of science and art.

Below article is shared from the Napa Valley Register’s Traces of History series – an excellent source of wine industry information specific to California’s  world-renowned wine regions.

Please enjoy the Napa Valley Register’s

Traces of History

Prohibition in Wine Country

By Kelsey Burnham, Special to the Register | Posted: Sunday, April 18, 2010

In the 13 years it was in effect, the 18th Amendment to the Constitution could have killed the wine industry in the Napa Valley. Instead of collapsing under the pressure of the new law, a few industrious business people decided to make the best of the hand they were dealt and found loopholes in the law.

On Jan. 16, 1920, the amendment went into effect. America banned the production, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors.

Prohibition grew out of the temperance movement, which had been around since the inception of the country and was born of the puritan values of some of the first settlers.

As the movement gathered steam proponents used both religious and scientific reasons to back the ban, and prohibition became a signature cause of politically active women of the era.

In October 1919 the amendment, along with a companion piece of legislation known as the Volstead Act — named for the conservative senator from Minnesota who championed the cause — was approved in Congress. Prohibition was set to take effect at the beginning of the new year.

In the months between the passing of the act and its instatement, some vineyard owners tore out their vines and replaced them with orchards. Others, however, recognized the continuing marketability of grapes, since the sale and transport of fresh or dried grapes was not banned under the new amendment — although the law explicitly stated that if the shipper knew that the final buyer was going to use the grapes for making wine then both buyer and seller could be charged with conspiracy.

Nonetheless, growers were confident that grapes to be used in wine would pass through the hands of a sufficient number of wholesalers and buyers that charges would be difficult to raise or prove. The sale of Napa County grapes proved to be an incredibly lucrative endeavor during Prohibition, reaching buyers as far away as New York.

Dried grapes were marketed in a different manner. Beringer Vineyards, for example, sold what were called raisin cakes for use in the making of grape juice.

Distributors and retailers warned consumers not to let the juice ferment, but in reality they were drawing attention to the wine-making potential of the cakes. For example, these representatives told consumers not to let the juice sit aside in a jug for 21 days, because that would cause fermentation to occur, and that using a cork was unnecessary for non-alcoholic beverages. Each brick was also sold with a warning label that stated that the juice could ferment into wine.

Another loophole allowed production of sacramental wines if the winery could get a permit through the government. One of the wineries that took advantage of this was Beaulieu Vineyard. Founder Georges de Latour was a practicing Catholic and a friend of the archbishop of San Francisco. He used this connection to his advantage and secured an exclusive deal to sell wine to all the priests in the diocese. Other wineries established similar deals with rabbis.

With the amount and types of wine that the priests and rabbis were buying it is probable that they were acting as bootleggers for their congregations, and their titles effectively shielded them from prosecution.

Bootlegging was the common but less-than-legal way to keep wineries open and making money. The Volstead Act allowed  individuals to buy a household permit to have 200 gallons of wine a year for personal use. Some permit holders would make wine, drive it to Sausalito and ferry it over into the bars of San Francisco. They would also bottle new wine and switch it out with bottles in their cellars, which were locked and routinely inspected by the government to make sure bottles did not go missing.

These pathways around Prohibition allowed a select few businesses to boom in the days that looked dire for both vineyards and wineries. In fact, between 1920 and 1933, grape production actually increased and the savvy business people who figured out how to work the system became exceedingly wealthy. In an era when the economy of the Napa Valley could have been severely crippled, it survived and many thrived.

Burnham is a Napa County Historical Society intern. Research for this article was conducted at the Napa County Historical Society, in the historic Goodman Library Building. The society is open Tuesday-Saturday from 12-4 p.m. and the Society’s Research Library is open Tuesday-Thursday, 12-4 p.m. The society houses an extensive research library, changing exhibition space and presents a variety of programs and events. The Society is a non-profit 501 (c) 3 organization. For more information or become a member visit www.napahistory.org or call 224-1739.

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains both original and copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, health, wine and wine industry issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. If you are the copyright holder and feel that this use does not fit under the clause mentioned above, then please let us know and we will remove this from our site. Please consider that your material is cited or hyperlinked to you URL improving your site’s search engine rankings and your Internet presence. We appreciate link backs for this same reason. Thank you.

The prestigious 10th annual Finger Lakes International Wine Competition (FLIWC), was held at the Rochester Plaza Hotel & Conference Center 27-28 March 2010. FLIWC is the world’s third-largest commercial competition, and largest on the east coast.

The 2010 competition featured a record number of entries 3,010 wines from over 666 International and National wineries from all 50 states including 105 from New York state.

This year Eagles Nest Winery’s entries went beyond our Port-styled dessert wines (which were all medalists in last year’s FLIWC competition) and entered our 2007 still wines. This year we won five Gold, Silver & Bronze medals. See FLIWC 2010 competition results - Click here!

Presently 100% of our 2007 & 2008 releases of estate wines are medalists, and  nearly 90% of our total 2007 & 2008 releases are medalists in highly credible National/ International and Regional wine competitions since last year.

The distinguished the panel of fifty-six judges hailing from from 10 countries and 5 continents, and 10 states included educators and winemakers, distributors and restaurateurs.

The charity fund raising event has earned International acclaim as one of the most prestigious wine competitions on the east coast. It was created by wine aficionado Peter Parts to raise funds for Camp Good Days and Special Times which benefit children  with cancer and their families.

View the FLIWC and Camp Good Days video clip – Click here!

Sharing our custom art labels from our winning wines and ports below:

2010 National Women’s Wine International Competition

While the competition results won’t be released to the general public until April 2, 2010, we found out today (March 23, 2010) that we received four medals for our wines and ports.

Our 2007 Estate Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon wine, 2007 Estate Reserve Syrah wine, 2007 Estate Reserve Starboard Cabernet Sauvignon port-style dessert wine, and 2008 Estate Reserve Picpoul Blanc port-style dessert wine all Ramona Valley AVA estate grown and produced  wines medalists in the 2010 National Woman’s Wine International Competition.We won three Silver Medals and one Bronze Medal.

Presently 100% of our 2007 & 2008 releases of estate wines are medalists, and  88% of our total 2007 & 2008 releases are medalists in highly credible National/International and Regional wine competitions since last year.

2007 Estate Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon, Ramona Valley AVA estate grown and produced (Silver)

2007 Estate Reserve Syrah, Ramona Valley AVA estate grown and produced (Bronze)

2007 Estate Reserve Cabernet Sauvignon Ruby-Port-styled dessert wine, Ramona Valley AVA estate grown and produced (Silver)

2008 Estate Reserve Picpoul Blanc White-Port-styled dessert wine, Ramona Valley AVA estate grown and produced (Silver)

Enjoy our custom artwork labels featuring our winery, its animals, and local public service organizations.

We practice sustainable farming and use Olde English Southdown Baby Doll Sheep in our vineyards and on our estate to eliminate the need for herbicides and other chemicals. We even have a worm farm to produce natural soil nutrients and nutrient and foliage sprays.

Learn first hand how we made this wine by  staying at Eagles Nest Vacation Villa/Cottage.  Read actual guest comments – Click here!

Please visit us at http://eaglesnestwinery.com Click here!

We received four medals this year and one last year from NWWC – a medal in this competition is more significant than you might think – in past NWWC competitions, only 1 in 5 entries win a medal so winning ANY medal is quite an achievement. Judging rules stipulate that only “wines of merit” are awarded medals, and ALL judges must agree on the award for that wine.

For example, if you’re #3 of 3 entries in a category, that doesn’t mean you get a medal by default. If the judges don’t believe your wine is worthy – it doesn’t get any medal – as 4 of 5 wines submitted do not get medals. Also if there are too few entrants in a given category, NWWC policy is to judge your wine against a larger, combined group, making the competition that much more difficult.

Competition Background:

Eileen Crane 2010 Honorary Chair

We are honored that Eileen Crane, Founding Winemaker & President of Napa’s legendary Domaine Carneros, is the 2010 Honorary Chairwoman for the National Women’s Wine Competition. Often referred to as America’s Doyenne of Sparkling Wine, Eileen Crane has spent more than 30 years in the industry. She is the most experienced Sparkling Winemaker in the United States.

The 2010 National Women’s Wine Competition… judged by twenty-three of the leading women wine judges in America. Entries were limited to ~2,500 overall entries 2,000 entries for the Open Competition; 500 entries for the Women Winemaker’s Challenge.

Judging Methodology

NWWC is a true blind tasting, which means that the judges do not know the maker of the wine, they never see the labels, nor do they know the price of the wine.

This makes it possible for our judges to identify outstanding wines across the range of price points and varietals. We also begin each judging session with an initial tasting of brut champagne to clear the judge’s palates to create the best tasting conditions.

Further, our judges receive the results of their panel’s work, ensuring the integrity of the judging.

Competition Philosophy

Since women make 60%-70% (or more) of the wine purchases in the United States, it only makes sense to craft a competition judged entirely by women. As a marketing tool, NWWC provides a “woman to woman roadmap” of the wine industry. Medal winners can be assured that the leading women in wine have judged their wines exemplary. (Please note: to win a Bronze or Double Gold medal, all judges must be in agreement.

As in 2008 and 2009, NWWC limited the number of entries this year to ensure that they could maintain an atmosphere that gives their judges sufficient time to consider the wines and not overwhelm their palates. NWWC’s promise to entrants was that their wine will be appropriately categorized and well judged by superstar palates – the leading women in the wine industry.

Awards were awarded on a merit basis only and all judges must agree on the award level. The judges were instructed to grant no awards when, in their opinion, a wine was unworthy, and they were empowered to grant duplicate awards if the quality of wines so merits.

Judging was held March 22, 2010 in Sonoma, California.

The 2010 Judges

Eileen Crane, Founding Winemaker & President of Napa’s legendary Domaine Carneros, was the 2010 Honorary Chairwoman for the National Women’s Wine Competition.

Diane Teitelbaum, International Judge & Author, Dallas, TX

Amy Atwood, blogger, MyDailyWine.com

Rosanne LaVoy, Owner/Chef, Coast Café, Bolinas, CA

Cassandra Brown, CS, CSW, Consultant, The Chocolate Grape – Sommelier At YOUR Service

Eileen Hoffmeister-Mooney, Stone Hill Winery, Branson, MO

Traci Dutton, Beverage Manager, Sommelier, CIA

Laura Ness, Reporter/Consultant/Buyer Wines & Vines Magazine

Ramona Nicholson, Owner, Nicholson Ranch Winery, past winner, Judges’ Choice Award, 2009 NWWC

Julie Lumgair, Partner and Winemaker, Windsor Oaks Vineyard, past winner, Judges’ Choice Award, NWWC 2009

Staci Hunt, Member, Board of Directors, Specialty Wine Retailers Association & Wine Reporter, NPR’s GOOD FOOD Wine Report

Debra Del Fiorentino, Sommelier, CWP, Wine Educator and Consumer Marketing Director at Russian River Vineyards

Virginie Boone, Wine Writer, The Press Democrat

Maureen Downey, DWS, CWE, Owner, Chai Consulting

Jil Child, Sommelier, Wine Educator

Liz Thach, Ph.D., MW Candidate, Professor of Wine Business at Sonoma State University

Valery Uhl, Director of North of the Gate Wine Competition

Ann Noble, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor of Enology at UC Davis, inventor: The Wine Wheel(tm)

Deborah Parker Wong, Journalist, The Tasting Panel Magazine

Jan Manni, Wine Blogger, The Wine Attic

Prudy Foxx, Viticulture Consultant, Foxx Viticulture

Evelyn White, Winemaker, Taft Street Winery

Mariana Gil Juncal, Sommelier and Director Editorial, Baco Club, Argentina’s leading private wine club

Gillian Ballance, Wine Consultant