Recently I started writing about “natural wine” in an Australian industry publication because I wondering what it really was.

And the Australian and New Zealand health codes which control how wine is defined, labelled and sold has no category for natural wine. Which begs the question; is it an illegal product and is there some misinformation afoot.

Well regardless such wines are on sale around the world whether the regulatory authorities like it or not, and it is probably saying that innovation will always out-strip the establishment in any industry. And their first move is to stamp it out rather than entertain change.

Conservatism reigns.

The best example of this is glaringly obvious where the Portuguese cork lobby (52% of the world cork market and not as much as they would have you believe) has a firm hold on closure decisions in the major DOCG’s of Italy.

This slows the spread of screw caps due to regional prohibition on wines like Soave, Chianti or Barolo despite untreated corks’ deteriorating position when taking wine to the market.

Wikipedia already has the controversial aspects of natural wine explained though:

“The concept of ‘natural wine’ is extremely controversial, particularly in the English-speaking world. Many critics reject it as misleading. There is no established certification body and the term has no legal status. Winemakers who describe themselves (or are described by others) as ‘natural’ often differ in what they consider to be an acceptable level of intervention”, says the noted web-based authority.

Sounds like the position for organic and bio-dynamic producers who have to bludgeon their way in the commercial world against untold odds for the past 20 years; mainly due to different standards of recognition by authorities who regulate the production laws, and to a lesser extent in regimens where free markets apply.

A real innovator in natural wine sales is Natural Wine Selection Theory www.naturalwineselectiontheory.com , a collaborative experiment between four Australians – Sam Hughes, Anton Von Klopper, James Erskine and Tom Shobbrook.

The entire sales pitch hits entirely at the Milliennial drinking demographic (born after 1982) who just love wine to be easy to digest and demystified, simple to find and so uncomplicated when choice is involved (forget wine regions, sometimes varieties, brand means zilch).

And by the way their wine happened to be a natural wine but this was subtlely applied, and most probably went over the heads of the demographic for which it was intended. But the thin edge of the wedge was there, and a marketing ploy sits there for the future I reckon.

So with the Voice of the People Winter 2010 wine (it was red but hardly marketed as wine of any colour) the choice was one wine (because there was no other competition in the 23 litre, olive oil topped, single serve by tap, wine market).

In an ideal world this younger generation should just lo……oove the way this wine is sold to them, and gone viral on Twitter to friends so that it sold out instantly. Good luck to these guys who hopefully have a 2011 edition even though they foreshadowed it was a one-off sales campaign.

It sounds like London’s first natural wine bar was Artisan and Vine which opened in 2009, and subsequently the New York Times ran a story on the chic natural wine bars around the globe last year; http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/04/tippling-point-natural-wine-bars/.

By now these have expanded considerably as more natural wines are “conceived”.

Closer to home for the writer, the historically listed Moreton Rubber building in Brisbane, Queensland which houses 1889 Enoteca www.1889enoteca.com.au , Australian Gourmet Traveller Wine List of the Year, 2010 winner, served Voice of the People red, under its olive oil layer and by-the-glass, with aplomb.

For more European natural wines http://www.jancisrobinson.com/articles/a20101002.html

This week I had the role of setting up eight wines for a group training to be Masters of Wine.

They were gathered in Brisbane, Queensland, a long way, thank goodness, on the same evening from where cyclone Yasi hit our northern neighbours.

The wines in question four sauvignon blancs, two semillons and two blends of the respective varieties.

This might sound a simple exercise, to sort out the sauvignons from the semillons and on the way through detect the two wines blended from the two varieties, and not necessarily in what proportion, more semillon or more sauvignon in the blend.

And remember the wines are served up with label: just eight unlabelled, similar bottles (of course we didn’t wish to give any hints as a couple of wines had corks, the rest the preferred screw caps, and students can easily be biased by seeing the bottle shape).

This becomes an exercise in sorting out the wines by their varietal character, and that can be a confusing task.

I watched same story play out on twitter between two bloggers lamenting the way that Margaret River semillon often smells more obvious in the cut grass and paspalum, herbal characters which we attribute to sauvignon, also grown in the same region, but now often concealing its overt vegetative character.

The same bloggers also debated how one Margaret River semillon, that of Moss Wood, did not have either characters, due mainly to its later harvest date and greater sun exposure in the same region, leading to bees wax and lanolin character.

Climate dictates semillon and sauvignon characters

The semillons in the MW test came from two regions: Hunter Valley and Margaret River, therefore one hot region (former) and one cool region (latter).

Their expression of semillon should be poles apart: Scarborough White Label Semillon 2009 (90); AUD 25, 10.5% was very pale green, dead neutral nose (typical), some lanolin, lean, dry, high acid, bland, austere, a razor sharp palate destined for 20 years in bottle.

Frank Tate’s Miles from Nowhere Semillon 2010 (89); AUD 22, 11.7% was absolutely screaming out its cooler region characters-pale, intense fluorescein-green, fruity, waxy, honied from oak in ferment, riper, dry palate, modest but good richness, drink now or 2-4 years.

The four sauvignons were from the Casablanca Valley Chile; Pouilly-Fume, Loire, France; Marlborough, NZ; and Derwent, Tasmania.

Reported in the same order: the Chilean Castillo Molina 2008, stupidly under natural cork, (88); AUD 20, 13.5%, quite pale but smelt the ripest of them all, alcoholic, peachy from over-ripeness where the vegetal aromas fall off, honied, fat, yet intense vegetal sauvignon on the palate to redeem it, lots of acid, contemplative wine. Owned by Vina San Pedro.

Next was Pierre Brevin “Le Marquisay” Pouilly-Fume 2008, under synthetic cork, (90); AUD 30, 12.5%, intense straw colour, glowing, heavenly ripe, a mix of expressive peachiness and nettles, clearly a vegetal sauvignon, ripe in the mouth, very round, long flinty acidity which holds up the fruit flavour.

Next came Cloudy Bay 2010 (89), AUD 33, 13.5%, very, very pale, lots of green, smells of cut grass, cat’s urine, nettles and herbs, minimal intensity and searingly-high acid. Have to be a Kiwi at this acid level.

Last was Stefano Lubiana 2009 (88); AUD 28, 12.5%, very pale, lean nose, herbal but also reduced, smelly from solids fermentation, also some shaded bunches effect which leads to tomato bush aromas, fruity but herbal palate, very chewy, probably finished in some old oak to de-emphasise the catty character that this variety can offer. A challenging wine to identify blind.

One of the most distinctive wines of the line-up due to sloppy, old-fashioned winemaking was the Bordeaux white wine.

Pierre Lurton’s Chateau Marjosse Entre-Deux-Mers 2005 (semillon-sauvignon blanc), smartly-corked with an aggregate (88), AUD 30, 12.5%, was straw, slight gold from accelerated aging, waxy, oily nose, little freshness, palate oily and bitter, wood dry, ruined by skin phenolics and little exercising of only free run juice, so basically already dried out, not for any more aging either.

A better wine, Fraser Gallop Semillon Sauvignon Blanc (66/34) 2010 (90); AUD 20, 13%, has lots of pale greens, sweet, tropical, herbal nose, fresh, some paspalum aroma to underline the semillon component, austere but drying (a little oak used) and lots of flavour.

The latter wine could easily confuse blind tasters; the semillon is so grassy that it could easily be nominated to be 100% semillon, unless you are an experienced tasters.

It is tasting experience of course that underlines the skill of passing the Master of Wine tasting exam. And being crafty about the different expressions of semillon and sauvignon blanc.

NZ Winegrowers are an active bunch – their members (wine brands) troop around Australia’s East Coast annually presenting a tasting fair.

NZ in a Glass came to Brisbane last Monday with a swag of exhibitors: 71 stands that I counted, 350 industry persons in the afternoon and almost 400 drinking customers for the evening tasting (a good percentage expat Kiwis).

Strangely there was no presence of KEA, the NZ Business organisation although it could have been low key.

But then the latter had their main eye on fundraising for the Christchurch disaster.

Sauvignon blanc was everywhere and well patronised, though exhibitors were very keen to point out their retro-sauvignons (those manipulated during winemaking to conceal mainstream savvy character and replace it with modified taste streams).

However, the fact remains you can never hide a NZ savvy – that’s what made it famous in the first place, that irrepressible nose.

With the sales stats really showing the rise of pinot noir uptake it was a no-brainer that NZ in a Glass would promote this varietal this year and they did so with a seminar.

It was “The Ageability of Marlborough and Central Otago Pinot Noirs” with two typical South Island makers chosen; a big maker in Villa Maria who have a substantial investment in Marlborough and a small maker in Central Otago, Mt Difficulty of Bannockburn.

The wines were worth engaging with; expressive, but the ageability aspect took a back seat, maybe because few of these wines are found on the secondary market (auction). But several vintages were tasted.

Villa Maria’s pinot man Jeremy McKenzie

Jeremy McKenzie, Senior Winemaker for Villa Maria in Marlborough spoke mainly about the sites for pinot in the general region, saying that the luscious gravel riverbed vineyard sites are too vigorous for pinot (that’s where the savvy excels). Even the pinot in this environment is too herbal! www.villamaria.co.nz.

So now the newer pinot vineyards are sited on north-facing clay terraces, slowing the ripening and producing the flavours that Villa wants.

This was demonstrated with three very respectable serial vintages of a Marlborough vineyard blend in the Cellar Selection category.

Villa Maria Cellar Selection Pinot Noir 2006 (USD 45), 14%, +++, from a hot year, has robust colours, cherry, jam, stewed fruit and oak, lots of sweet and sour fruit on the palate, lots of drying tannins.

Villa Maria Cellar Selection Pinot Noir 2007 (USD 45), 14%, ++++, from the vintage of the decade, pure colour, dark and black cherry fruit dominance, oak char, plums and sap, mouth sweet and a little warming with alcohol.

Villa Maria Cellar Selection Pinot Noir 2008 (USD 45), 14%, +++1/2, from a warmer than average year, has perfume, sap, tar, char, lots of whole berry fruit punch, great fruit intensity, fine grained tannin layering, alcohol warming and flavour push.

Michael Herrick, an articulate and well informed fellow, Sales and Marketing Manager of Mt Difficulty presented his company’s wines.

Mt Difficulty’s Michael Herrick on pinot

Mt Difficulty Pinot Noir 2006 (USD 50), 14.5%, +++1/2, from a warm, cool-affected year, has cherry colour, sap complexity, spice, black fruits, then blocky, powerful finish and tannin, big pinot.

Mt Difficulty Pinot Noir 2007 (USD 50), 14%, ++++, snow at flowering, light crop, deep cherry, stylish nose, chunky, taste with talc from minerality, black fruits, lovely balance, honey and perfume, delicious.

Mt Difficulty Pinot Noir 2008 (USD 50) 14%, +++, a lot of fruit dropped, crop reduction, very oak-structured, cedar, sap, tight now, yet mouth sweet, aging slowly, will impress for those who keep it, rich.

Mike Herrick’s take home message was that aging examples develop forest floor aromas at 7-10 years; and now that the early plantings had 20 years of vine age, the best grapes have marvellous flavour intensity. www.mtdifficulty.co.nz

I walked around the tasting displays, discovering some new arrays of wines.

Try three new red wines: Northburn Station Pinot Noir 2008 (USD 42)-from a 30,000 acre sheep station, Man O’War Ironclad Bordeaux Blend 2008 (USD 45),-Waiheke Island near Auckland, merlot dominant and Alpha Domus The Barnstormer Syrah 2010 (USD 27)- from Hawke’s Bay, sexy texture here.

For wines www.nzwineonline.com.au and www.nzwine.com

Over-production in the Australian vineyard has been hovering around for several vintages now, with little movement towards a re-balanced grape economy.

The large-listed wine companies did it quite simply at a board level and signed off for large vineyards to be grubbed out (were the worst performing in the assets portfolio) or offered a series of vineyards for sale (Fosters listed over 30).

Today most of those have been sold to interested parties though some remain on the books and have not been moved along. They would be posing as disease bombs because they would be left without any management, and some vines will die.

Several industry commentators have remarked how slowly the Australian wine map is changing: that re-adjustment of the national vineyard is rather slow, and that production has not really declined despite the ever-present glut.

One has to look at the nature of the over-planting from the start.

Better sites-better wines

All sectors are responsible: managed investment schemes, listed companies, private family wineries, private investment growers, traditional growers right through to the 1800 small brand owners who have contributed by “adding a few more hectares of new vines”.

Some regions have simply not re-adjusted. In the 2010 harvest, 13,000 odd hectares of vines out of the total of 160,000 were not harvested due to no demand for the grapes.

These were mainly growers’ grapes. They sat on the vine and were converted into carbon. However those vines are still in the ground and capable of re-igniting the spectre of over-production in 2011.

The first evidence of vineyard adjustment in New South Wales in 2011 emerged late last week with a survey by the Newcastle Herald revealing 46 percent of Hunter Valley vineyards were no longer there. That was 3250 has reduced to 1750 during the past year or so.

The majority of vines have been lost in the Upper Hunter where the larger grower population is found. That’s also where the once famous large Rosemount winery was situated, and that has been gutted for want of a buyer for five years.

Also the Hunter Valley is home to Australia’s major wine tourism market, so despite being buffered by tourists who pay the highest retail prices, this sector of the industry is leading the adjustment phase very well.

Most Hunter Valley proprietors now chase the over USD15 market and varieties that are in demand.

Industry veteran and managing director of Tyrrell’s Wines in the Hunter Valley, Bruce Tyrrell described the market as the toughest he had seen.

Mr Tyrrell said producers who survived the next few years would have no choice but to come out stronger, more focused and making better quality wines.

He predicted a return to practices of 50 years ago with operators selling the majority of wine direct to consumers.

‘‘There were many vines planted in the wrong place, for the wrong reasons and they will all have to come out.’’

By March 2010, 6600 hectares, or 4.3 per cent of Australia’s plantings, had been removed with an additional 13,000 hectares not harvested.

If the industry removal estimate is 20 percent of production, the final amount to uproot is 32,000 hectares. Ouch!