AA: You were instrumental in the official recognition of the Mt. Veeder AVA, which was approved back in 1990. If you were putting together the Mt. Veeder petition today, what changes - if any - would you make?

RC:Actually, there has been one change in the Mt. Veeder appellation boundaries. In the 1991, I consulted on the planting of a vineyard just to the north of the approved Mt. Veeder appellation. I subsequently petitioned the BATF to have this property included in the appellation and it was accepted.
      I cannot think of any specific changes that I would suggest. Mt. Veeder is, in my opinion, one of the most distinctive of Napa Valley’s appellations, especially as related to "mountain-grown" Cabernet Sauvignons.


AA: The Mt. Veeder boundaries take in a wide band of elevations, ranging from 400 feet, to 2600 feet at the peak of the Mayacamas Range. This seems like a wide range in elevation which might account for significant differences in grape ripening patterns and wine styles. Have you identified any variation in wines coming from different elevations within the appellation?

RC: I have not observed elevation to be a significant determinant in ripening patterns and wine styles on Mt. Veeder. Rather, I believe that the degree of slope is more of a defining factor than elevation. The 400-foot lower limit in the Mt. Veeder AVA was adopted to be consistent with the boundaries that were accepted by BATF for the Carneros appellation, where 400 feet was adopted as the upper elevation limit. We determined that 400 feet was a good standard because that is the elevation where Mt. Veeder begins to acquire some slope.
      Soil drainage is the viticultural factor that most differentiates hillside vineyards from valley floor vineyards. Drainage through the soil deprives the vines of the ability to take up water during the growing season. This results in highly concentrated juice in the berries, and thus, concentrated wines from hillside grapes, irregardless of the vineyard elevation.
      In addition, there are a number of key factors that affect the ripening pattern at any elevation: the type of rootstock and varietal, the soil type and depth, the orientation of a block of vines in terms of sunlight and wind exposure, and the degree of slope. For example, the ripeness of grapes within a single row of vines can measurably differ due to variations in sunlight exposure, hillside location, and soil type.


AA: In light of the variations you've just discussed, do you see any need to identify and delineate sub-appellations of the Mt Veeder AVA?

RC: I cannot think of any further delineations or sub-appellations that would identify meaningful viticultural differences on Mt. Veeder. The appellation is actually quite small in terms of planted acres.


AA: Do you feel that the existing appellation system in America is as comprehensive as it should be? That is, should it take into account maximum yields, varietal limitations, etc.?

RC: In my opinion, the overall U.S. appellation system is sufficiently descriptive and workable for truly meaningful appellations. However, when larger, more general groupings are created on a regional level, such as "North Coast" or "Coastal", I think there is too much diversity of conditions within those areas to deserve appellation status.
      As far as establishing smaller, more discreet appellations within an existing appellation, some inclusion of requirements for viticultural practices and maximum yields would be worthy of consideration. But I am not convinced that this refinement should extend to limiting the varietals that are to be identified with the appellation. If an appellation can produce excellent Cabernet Sauvignon, Syrah and Zinfandel, why not let them all be identified?


AA: What about attempting the height of terroir specific appellations -- single vineyards? Are there any single vineyards that you've worked with in your experience as both a winemaker and a viticultural consultant that are worthy of "Cru" status, if such designations were ever to be incorporated into the appellation system?

RC: Single vineyards are, of course, a very legitimate labeling concept and deserve a place in wine designations. I work with some vineyards that produce stand-alone wines which are worthy of this kind of recognition.
      However, I am not a believer in the merits of a "Cru" designation. I presume that this would be a very political and, therefore, problematic process. What are the standards for "Cru" status and who gets to determine which single-vineyard wines deserve to be included (and which don't)? This labeling would also introduce an elitist element and accompanying pricing excesses. Is any wine really worth $1600 a bottle, and is that wine 40 times better than a well-made wine that sells for $40 a bottle? I don't think so!


AA: On average, Mt. Veeder receives much more rainfall than the Napa Valley floor, (50" annually compared to Napa's 30"). What measures do you take to ensure maximum benefit and minimal destruction from this additional precipitation?

RC: Erosion control is vital in all hillside vineyards and is an especially critical concern on Mt. Veeder, where the combination of top soils and sub soils make it an area that is uniquely susceptible to erosion. Over the years specific engineering requirements have been adopted by Napa County. Every legally planted hillside vineyards must have an engineered erosion control plan that has been approved by the county before work can begin. Permanent, no-till cover crops are also important for controlling surface erosion.


AA: Your main focus is on Cabernet Sauvignon, not just from Mt. Veeder but from other Napa sub-appellations like Howell Mountain. Producing single appellation wines is a strong indication of your dedication to making terroir specific wines. In your opinion, what are the distinguishing characteristics of Cabernets from these two places, and how do these "mountain" wines differ from their valley floor counterparts?

RC: In my earlier response to the question regarding Mt. Veeder's elevation, I indicated that the drainage of hillside soils is the most important factor in distinguishing mountain wines from valley floor wines. Common attributes of hillside wines are great concentration of flavor and firm texture. Beyond that, the differences among individual mountain appellations are a function of variations in terroir, primarily related to soils and microclimates. Mt. Veeder soils are predominantly light clay loams, with varying top soil depths. In contrast, Howell Mountain soils are mostly volcanic, with substantial rock content.
      In comparing micro-climates, Mt. Veeder vineyards are primarily east-facing, which provides early morning sun exposure, while Howell Mountain vineyards are mostly west-facing, resulting in more afternoon sun. Mt. Veeder's proximity to San Francisco Bay is another micro-climate factor that translates into cooler nights and mornings. Howell Mountain's location on the northeastern side of Napa Valley is less impacted by fog and produces warmer evenings.
      All of these elements of terroir influence ends up in the bottle. Cabernets from Mt. Veeder are so incredible in their dense, concentrated black fruit and complex flavor profile, which can include black cherry, cassis, currant, dusty cedar, chocolate and mint. Howell Mountain Cabernets are equally distinctive, offering up bright, intense wild berry fruit, mountain pepper and spice, and subtle herbs. When the Mt. Veeder and Howell Mountain Cabernets are tasted side-by-side, these terroir characteristics are very compelling.
      In fact, the concept of terroir has guided the development of our wine program. When starting the winery in 1992, I knew that I wanted to offer a Mt. Veeder Cabernet, but wasn't certain about other wines. Then I blended some Howell Mountain fruit from a friend's vineyard with a Napa Valley Cabernet for my first wine release. The result was a Cabernet with such distinctively Howell Mountain characteristics that I became convinced that we should make wines from both Mt. Veeder and Howell Mountain appellations.
      For the past ten years our wine program has been called Two Mountains and a Valley. In addition to the two mountain Cabernets, we make Affinity, which is a Bordeaux-style Cabernet blend of Cabernet, Merlot and Cabernet Franc from Napa Valley floor vineyards. Again, the terroir of the Valley floor lends special characteristics to the Affinity blend that are quite different from the mountain Cabs.


AA: Some other wineries produce Zinfandel, Merlot and Chardonnay from the Mt. Veeder appellation. You also produce a Syrah, Zinfandel and Chardonnay, but source your fruit from other North and Central coast appellations. Do you see a place for these varieties (or others) on Mt. Veeder, or is it an appellation most suitable, ecologically speaking, to the cultivation of Cabernet Sauvignon?

RC: My experience on Mt. Veeder involves the Bordeaux varietals and Chardonnay. I have had some very good Syrahs and Zinfandels from other Mt. Veeder producers. In my view, both Mt. Veeder and Howell Mountain are exceptional locations for red grape varietals. Chardonnay from Mt. Veeder is typically more lean and focused than other Chardonnays from Napa Valley floor vineyards. I like this Chablis-style Chardonnay, but it is not as popular as the bigger Valley floor versions.
      Our decision to make small quantities of other varietals from outside the mountain appellations was guided by the desire to broaden the terroir concept in our winemaking. Our Chardonnays come from Carneros and Sonoma vineyards, the Syrah from Paso Robles and Santa Barbara, and the Zinfandel from Amador County. All are excellent growing areas that produce some of the finest examples of these varietals.


AA: Your Cabernets have a long standing reputation as some of the most highly regarded of all Napa wines. You produce your wines to be approachable both in youth, and in price. How do you feel about the soaring, un-approachable prices of Napa cult wines from producers with little or no history compared to yours and other established wineries? Is this trend helping or hurting the image of Napa viticulture? Does this trend mislead the consumer to equate quality to price?

RC: In my opinion, consumers look for value in the long-term. This philosophy has been a cornerstone of our wine program since we began, and I think that it is especially critical in today's marketplace. We always want the consumer to feel that he or she is getting an exceptional wine at a price that represents a very good value. I do think that some of the sharp increases in Napa Valley wine prices during the late 1990's ultimately generated a consumer backlash. We have heard grumblings in both domestic and overseas markets related to price hikes that didn't seem to have a cost-related component. Also, the price escalations for domestic wines in general helped open the door to a flood of imported wines into the U.S.
      Wine pricing is an inexact process, involving two fundamental considerations - actual costs and perceived value. Unlike virtually all other beverages, wine has an extremely high ingredient cost which is influenced by such important elements as:

1.) the cost of growing premium winegrapes on increasingly expensive land and under stringent viticultural controls that translates into high grape prices, not to mention the higher costs of farming mountain vineyards;
2.) the extraordinarily high capital costs associated with the wine industry;
3.) the add-on expenses of making great wines, in terms of using the best French oak barrels, highest quality corks, top-line packaging, and so on; and
4.) labor costs incurred with the kind of hands-on, small-lot winemaking that produces great wines.

Then, after all of these costs are factored into the retail price, the winery receives only half of the shelf price, at most, with the balance going to distribution and marketing.
      The second and more hard-to-define pricing consideration is perceived value. An excellent quality Cabernet Sauvignon from the Napa Valley has to be above a certain threshold price to be considered among the top wines. To be at that pricing threshold, yet not lose the good-value component, is a difficult challenge.
      Moreover, wine is a product that is purely sensory and subjective. To me it seems that consumer expectations are too often dictated by pricing. There is a price-quality correlation that is not necessarily accurate. Why would a winery charge $125 bottle for their Cabernet if it is not twice as good as one of $60? In reality both wines are most likely excellent, but the "why pay less" theory of conspicuous consumption often comes into play.
      In the end, Napa Valley wines will always be among the finest wines on the market. The consumers will have to decide for themselves which of those wines represents the best quality-price ratio. Our commitment at Robert Craig Wine Cellars is to be a leader in that segment of the market.


AA: The Napa Valley currently has 13 officially recognized sub-AVAs, but most lack the consumer recognition and cachet of "Napa Valley" and many producers choose to label their wines hyphenating the sub-appellation with Napa. After almost a decade and a half as an officially recognized appellation, do you feel consumers recognize Mt. Veeder as an individual growing region distinctive from the broader Napa Valley?

RC: I believe it is important to link Napa Valley to the various sub-AVAs within the Valley. The Napa Valley Vintners Association has specifically requested that this be done to keep the prominence of Napa Valley in the minds of consumers. Also, the AVA system is relatively new in California, and consumers are still learning about appellations. They need the familiar "Napa Valley" name into order to put the more specific sub-appellations into context. That is one of many reasons why your Appellation America website is sure to be a great educational resource for wine consumers.


AA: What image would you like the consumer to have of the Mt. Veeder appellation and its wines? How do you get the message out?

RC: First and foremost is the image of Mt. Veeder as an appellation of immense beauty that produces great wines of wonderful power, concentration and complexity. It is also important to convey the dedication required by Mt. Veeder growers and vintners who willingly face the many challenges of mountain vineyards to craft wines in this style. Mountain vineyards are much more difficult and expensive to establish and farm than those on the Valley floor. Crop yields are lower in the mountains, so the wines have to be of sufficient quality to command higher prices in order to balance the economics of mountain winemaking.
      With regard to increasing public recognition of the Mt. Veeder Appellation, typically the AVAs for mountain locations are made up primarily of smaller producers, and that is certainly true of Mt. Veeder. Therefore, the cost of financing major awareness campaigns is not possible to cover. However, the Mt. Veeder Appellation is very proactive in communicating through its website: http://www.mountveederwines.com, the annual Mt. Veeder Appellation consumer wine tasting held in the fall, and through special Appellation tastings for representatives of restaurants and retail shops. The Appellation also donates an auction lot to the Napa Valley Wine Auction, featuring most producers of Mt. Veeder wines.
      A major contribution of Appellation America can be to further educate wine consumers about the qualities that make mountain grapegrowing regions, such as Mt. Veeder, so special and worthy of their attention.