The Paso Robles wine industry has formed a committee to consider splitting Paso Robles into well known geographical regions, but a vocal group of winery and vineyard owners are protesting this move, claiming that Paso Robles is still not well known outside the central coast. They argue that our primary goal should be marketing Paso Roble Wine Country, and that recognition of smaller geographical regions within our appellation will dilute recognition for our wines.
Take the poll at left and tell us what you think! As consumers and fans, your opinion counts!
At the moment, the vote is 55% no, and 45% yes.
How will the formation of subappellations affect your buying decisions? Click the "Comment" link below to join the conversation.
Mary, it seems to me that the only people who would be interested in subappellations would be those who think their appellation or subappellation was superior to someone else's. Paso Robles is obviously not as famous as Napa or Sonoma so it might be premature to establish subappellations, I don't know. I would like to hear the arguments for and against, and identify the players in each camp. --Ed
Posted by: Ed Smith | September 09, 2006 at 07:11 PM
Interesting Web Site, with a lot of pertinant and interesting info.
BTW your comments on 7 Rosenblum Zins referred to a picture of 7 Ravenswood bottles.
As to the AVA designations: I feel that there are three distinct areas in Paso Robles. The East, the North-West and the South-West. The flavors of these THREE regions are distinct and shoud be kept as completely separate AVAs. Since I have about 0% influence, I expect about the same respect.
I visited your winery in June of this year, and was impressed with the quality of the wines. I will be going active with the web site in January of 2007, if everything goes well. Your winery will be featured. Please let me know of any plusses or minusses of my comments come next January. I will be continuing to visit your site.
Posted by: Jim Burk | September 09, 2006 at 07:52 PM
Hi, Ed! You pose some really good questions. Your questions also directly address a current perception of what subappellations are all about.
A subappellation should not be construed as a definition based on competition and superiority.
What a subappellation should say to consumers is that a particular region might produce more minerality, or softer tannins, or more intense cherry-skin fruit flavors. A subappellation should be a guide, not a civil war.
Unfortunately, due to spitwads flying between marketing merchants of more recognized wine areas, the concept of a subappellation has indeed become cliquish. In fact, there may be some who say that unless the next volcanic upthrust occurs under the Rutherford Bench, and subsequently frosts us with the blessed dust, that we are unworthy of even considering a sense of place.
Another argument, as you have pointed out, is that the idea of subappellations is premature, given the fact that Paso Robles is a renegade area compared to Napa and Sonoma. (Few people know that historically, 80% of the grapes grown in Paso Robles were sold to Napa and Sonoma wineries, and even with a recent increase in local wine production, I believe the Napa export factor is still around 60%.)
The process of formally declaring a subappellation requires deep soil testing, extensive meteorological recordkeeping, and a history of professional wine evaluation that differentiates regions. Sometimes it takes years to get an application approved.
As for the players in each camp, keep in mind that we all SuperBowl together. So in the end . . . you have already met some them, and will again!
Posted by: Mary Baker | September 09, 2006 at 09:52 PM
Hello, Jim! I saw your business card after your last visit and immediately bookmarked your site. Any friend of zin is a friend of mine!
As for influence, there is no stronger influence than consumer opinion!
I hope you'll share with us how you would describe the different flavor profiles of each region. Why do you feel the regions are distinctive?
Posted by: Mary Baker | September 10, 2006 at 08:56 AM
Good idea on the appellations.
We've found significant differences between the varietals and wines produced by winemakers in the region. Especially on the other side of 101 and north/south of Paso Robles.
Posted by: Dude | September 11, 2006 at 03:58 PM
I think people have too much time on their hands. Just enjoy the wines! Subappellations??? What a crock.....
Posted by: Dr Joe Burian | September 11, 2006 at 05:13 PM
Dude (Dave?), thanks for your comment. If someone asked you over dinner what the differences are, what would be your quick answer?
Dr. Joe, a good philosophy indeed! I hope to see you next time you stop by.
Posted by: Mary Baker | September 12, 2006 at 08:08 AM
Just to update everyone, when you vote in the poll at left, you will see the current results.
If you haven't voted, the results are currently:
No, the region should focus: 63%
Yes, the regions are different: 34%
Not sure: 3%
That's interesting, as there has been so much talk within the local wine industry, and among regular visitors to the central coast, about the varying regional profiles within our appellation.
But maybe we're too self-absorbed in the details! Does this mean we need to concentrate more on getting the word out that 'Paso Robles' is not a suburb of Napa?
Posted by: Mary Baker | September 12, 2006 at 08:17 AM
Current results, as of October 3rd:
No, the region should focus: 50%
Yes, the regions are different: 40%
Not sure: 10%
Posted by: Mary Baker | October 03, 2006 at 08:50 PM