Link isn’t showing. Just search “mason jar vacuum sealer” on Amazon.
Thanks Wes, this is helpful. The problems with machine harvesting - especially pollution and soil compaction - make sense to ban for wines that are supposed to be natural. But I don’t see how narrow selection (allowed by optical sorters) is more natural. Seems like any choice other than ‘use it all, dead mice included’ isn’t t natural. Who’s to decide which is more natural than another. What if I made the same narrow selection choice by hand? I don’t see how using a machine for a task (how about bottling? Corking?) is unnatural if it doesn’t changed the ecosystem of the wine.
Some really interesting philosophical question about quality though. How much is too much? What is natural quality? Who decides?
I hear you and don’t disagree.
There is, no doubt, an effect of using machine harvesting. And a different environmental impact. I’m not advocating its use. (Grape growing is inherently inconsistent with biodiversity in my view and not much different than any crop in terms of ecological effect.) But I’ve always thought machine harvesting doesn’t truly fit into what some see as the basic definition of natural wine (not me - I don’t have a personal definition or predisposition, even if I try to be environmentally conscious) as nothing added, nothing taken out. It’s just worse for the environment than hand picking and leads to the problems with the grapes that you identified.
On optical sorting and narrow ripeness range, that’s not different, except maybe as a matter of degree/precision, from picking different vines at the different times depending on ripening or sorting by subplots and vinifying them separately or deciding to use or not use shot grapes or crop thinning / green harvesting initially. I just have a hard time with that level of nitpicking as to what meets a certain philosophy of being “natural”. This new designation doesn’t seem to prevent the use of the majority of modern technology as far as I understand. I haven’t seen that it would preclude optics-based sorting.
Thanks for the additional links, Greg.
Here’s my (no doubt poor) translation of the vineyard and winery regulations from the original French document:
Fruit from certified organically-farmed vineyards only.
Fruit must be manually harvested.
The wines must be vinified only with indigenous yeasts.
No winemaking additions are permitted.
No use of “brutal and traumatic physical techniques” (reverse osmosis, filtration, tangential [crossflow] filtration, flash pasteurization, thermovinification …)
No added sulfites before or during fermentation, with a maximum 30mg/L added sulfites.
That’s essentially it. And how odd that it does show “H2SO4” in the original French document when it means SO2 - amazing that they didn’t catch that error.
It’s a very loose set of regulations and the list of non-compliant winemaking techniques is extremely short and vague. By “filtration” I’d assume they mean sterile filtration only, but it doesn’t seem explicit about that - and then why specifically mention crossflow (but not plate-and-frame, etc.)? Perhaps the term “filtration” in France refers only to sterile filtration? I don’t know, perhaps someone else here on the board can clarify that. There are lots of unlisted techniques that could be included in the “…” of that particular regulation - are we supposed to guess what’s permitted and what’s not?
I realize that natural wine has had a fairly vague definition all along, and it seems like most vintners making wines that most would consider to be in that category are fine with that. But then the whole idea of having the official “vin méthode nature” designation based on such a vague set of regulations seems like it loses much of its potential value, and leaves it open to abuse.
Some of the voices we heard early, when the natural wine movement really got booming, such as Alice Feiring, were really focused on the expression of the wines. That’s what brought her to these wines, as well as other wines that express like a natural product. It’s an aesthetic. The wines taste natural, not like some product. So, not just new oak was verboten, but overt ripeness. Aesthetically, use of an isolated yeast will usually make a less complex wine. The appeal of uniform ripeness is textural elegance at the cost of complexity. The consumer base of these wines want wines that express as natural, not as “wine-like product”.
Note that Feiring has been writing about (badly) flawed wines not being acceptable.
We saw a decade or so ago that a lot of French producers at that time counted their wines natural solely based on what happened once the grapes got to the winery. They weren’t using organic grapes, or grapes that should be allowed to be called organic, anyway. We saw a light bulb moment. Language since then from the movement seems to always be stressing organic grapes.
The other important aspects are the healthfulness of the wines and minimizing environmental impacts.
It’s worth noting that I attended a tasting of natural wines early this month (WINeFare - I posted notes on the board) and the overall quality of the wines was quite high. Very few with the type of wine faults that many complain about with natural wines and even those were more borderline than egregious. Certainly the best tasting of natural wines that I’ve been to, with some real standout bottlings.
Thanks for the translation.
So it looks the following is ok:
- any vineyard technique pre-harvest that qualifies as organic
- sorting methods that are not brutal and traumatic
- cellar- or vessel-based temperature control during vinification (?)
Some (obvious?) questions to which there may already be answers:
Are oaks chips a winemaking addition? What about use of highly toasted barrels?
What about added enzymes? I understand from this they should be excluded but I also understand from hearing first hand stories that sometimes an AOC inspector will require them. Will winemakers potentially have to choose between AOC or the vin naturel designation?
What is the view on bottling lines or trucks that use various pumping methods? Can they be or are they brutal and traumatic?
Some good questions. Correct that temperature-controlled fermentations are not specifically addressed, nor is the use of pumps in general or type of pumps in particular. I’d guess that oak chips might not be permitted, but the types of vessels used for fermentation and aging aren’t mentioned at all so I suppose anything goes. Natural wine in 200% new American oak barrels! Not that I think fermentation and aging vessels really need to be part of the regulations for this though.
Enzyme additions would certainly be excluded. Some French vintners already choose between conforming with AOC regulations and making wines the way they want to, forgoing the AOC designation in favor of VDP or even VDF.
Oy… would these be a good time to raise the issue of SO2 additions must be made from “natural” Sulfer harvested from natural volcanoes vs. SO2 that comes as a byproduct of the PetroChemical industry?? Nawh… it’d only muddy the waters!!
Tom
So, I think the whole “natural” wine thing is silly, but optical sorting is different than hand sorting and the other methods you mentioned. It’s more selective than humans could be. Have you seen these machines in action? They exclude grapes that look just like some of the included grapes to the naked eye. One winemaker who showed me his at work said his crew sometimes sorts through the reject bins and puts some of the grapes back in because they seem fine. Producers can and do use these things to select such a narrow range of ripeness and “perfection” that the wines are not the same as what could be done by humans, even with as much care and time as possible.
Haven’t read the whole thread, but on the whole I approve. The term had no legal definition… I’m quite surprised that Gallo Hearty Burgundy, Franzia Chablis, Apothic Cabernet Sauvignon and Middle Sister Pinot Grigio are not currently labeled ‘natural’, which, unless I’m mistaken, they could be today under American law.
An anecdote: This goes back about three decades, and please don’t quote me as my memory is unclear on the exact verbiage, but about that time I represented a Burgundy grower with some great holdings. Robert Parker gave very high (for the epoch), identical scores to two of his wines. He (more or less) referred to one as “savage, brutal”, the other as “polite, refined”. The orders for “savage, brutal” were five times greater than for “polite, refined”.
As to the specifics, IMO organic viticulture, hand harvesting and indigenous yeasts are a very good start on a definition. I also agree that the proscribed winemaking techniques are appropriately banned. Not sure what else I might add, but I’ll read the whole thread tomorrow. I’m glad to see this, and to see this thread.
Dan Kravitz
Right. But the question then in my mind is why does that matter? I could measure the sugar and acid levels with precision before picking, much more precisely than by taste. Control fermentation temps with high precision using technology. Etc. for uses of technology. Which apparently are all allowed as long as the prescribed rules are followed.
Curiously it looks like fining is allowed.
I think it does matter in that it will affect the flavor of the finished wine. I don’t know how temperature control is relevant to what I’m saying.
I visited several natural wine wineries in Jura last November. There I was told that you could call it natural if it had up to 20mg of sulfites per litter. Some producers were radically against it and insist in having zero… others would be ok.