Tutored Tasting

BUBBLY

Speaker: Eric LAGRE

Tutored Sparkling Thursday 19 th July 2012 Speaker: Eric LAGRE, Sommelier

TASTING LIST

Kiki (Ant Moore), Sparkling , Brut, Marlborough, New Zealand, 2009

Mauzac Nature (Robert & Bernard Plageoles) , Domaine des Très Cantous, Gaillac AC, France, NV

Club , Edouard Brun (Aÿ, Grande Vallée de la Marne), Brut, NV

Champagne Moutard-Diligent (Buxeuil, Barséquanais), Cuvée 6 Cépages, Brut, 2005

Nyetimber, Blanc de Blancs, West Chilington, West Sussex, England, 2003

Abrau Durso, Cuvée Alexander II, Brut, , , NV

Codorníu, Reina Maria Cristina, Blanc de Noirs, Brut, Reserva, DO , Penedès, Spain, 2008

Frassinelli, di Conegliano Valdobbiadene Superiore DOCG, Extra Dry, Veneto, Italy, NV

G.D. Vajra, Moscato d’Asti DOCG, , Italy, 2011

Cascabel (Duncan Ferguson & Susana Fernandez), Sparkling Shiraz, McLaren Vale, South Australia, 1998

Introduction: The ten sparkling featured in the present tasting were chosen to illustrate different aspects of and wine style. A wine description sheet for every single one of these ten entries includes a technical description, tasting notes and a paragraph placing the wine in its context. These sheets are in order of tasting and follow a narrative. By the end of your read, as you leaf through from one sheet to the next, a global picture of the industry and its market should emerge. In order to make that read easier, the narrative had to be introduced by an essay about the different techniques used nowadays to turn a wine sparkling, plus another essay about the determining factors of style, and some basic statistical data. Websites are quoted along the way to allow you to seek further information. Additional articles and maps follow the series of sheets when the paragraph format does not allow space to be thorough enough. A booklet published by the CIVC will also tell you everything you need to know about Champagne.

What is Sparkling Wine? Sparkling wine is a generic term that applies to an incredibly diverse category of wines. “Vin effervescent”, as sparkling wine is called in France, is defined as follow in the 1988 edition of the French “Dictionnaire du Vin”: “Sparkling wine is a wine that releases carbon dioxide in the shape of bubbles that rise then burst to its surface”. Sparkling wines might have the bubble in common, but the bubble is achieved through a variety of winemaking techniques. Beyond the degree of impact each winemaking technique has on the aromatic profile of the resulting wine, style is determined by a series of factors:

- internal atmosphere of pressure - sweetness level - blend - colour

How does one put bubbles into wine? A variety of winemaking techniques has been developed over the ages. Each development was made possible in its day by the invention of new technologies. According to www.effervescents-du-monde.com , these methods are:

- méthode rurale or méthode ancestrale - méthode Champenoise or traditional/classic method - transfer method - tank method or metodo Italiano - continuous method or Russian method - Dioise/Asti method - Carbonation/gasification/injection method METHODE RURALE: Also dubbed méthode ancestrale , this is the first method ever devised to produce sparkling wines. In 1531, monks at the abbey of Saint-Hilaire, Languedoc-Roussillon, were already employing this method to produce Blanquette de Limoux. Nowadays, Blanquette de Limoux is made by the , but Blanquette méthode ancestrale is still produced and has its own . The method is also used to produce Mauzac Nature in Gaillac, Southwest, where it is known as méthode gaillacoise , and Bugey- Cerdon méthode ancestrale in Bugey-Cerdon, Ain. In France, the last remaining home to the method, total volume of production is microscopic, if not near insignificant, for more reliable methods have now taken over. All sparkling wines but injected wines are made by natural methods according to a basic principle: the dissolution of endogenous CO 2 under pressure in a sealed container in a process known as “prise de mousse”. The méthode rurale is the precursor of the méthode Champenoise, both methods seeing the prise de mousse take place in the bottle. In the méthode rurale, wine is bottled before it is fully fermented to dryness. Therefore, a fair amount of residual sugars remains hence the wine is unstable, which means that no addition of sugar and/or yeast is needed for the fermentation process to start again in the bottle. As a matter of fact, no sugar and/or yeast can legally be added by this method. Historically, the fermentation of the base wine would be stunned naturally by cold weather conditions at the end of the season, but nowadays, the purpose is served by refrigeration equipment. After winter, the single fermentation process resumes naturally in the bottle with the new warm season. Yeast metabolises more natural sugar in the fermenting juice into alcohol, with CO 2 as a by product. Pressure mounts, eventually causing the gas to dissolve into the wine. Once most sugars and nitrogenous compounds are depleted, the yeast dies by lack of nutrients then forms sediments known as . As the fermentation process stops, the prise de mousse is complete. A complex chemical reaction between the decomposing dead yeast and the wine, in a process known as autolysis , results in yeastiness and more subtle bakery aromas and flavours. Since the wine is partially fermented prior to bottling and no yeast is added, there is but a small amount of lees hence its impact on the aromatic profile of the wine is limited and not so complex. Regulations do not impose disgorgement, a process aiming at removing the sediments, hence possible cloudiness from the lees. No filtration is imposed either, and since the prise de mousse is rather unpredictable by this method, the resulting wine can display variable levels of sweetness; dry mostly, but possibly off dry or even medium dry. When disgorgement/filtration is used, not only control on clarity is gained, but also on sweetness. Wine is lost during the disgorgement process, and when topping up prior to commercialisation is required, the wine cannot be sweetened, for no sugar can be added at any stage of the winemaking process by the méthode rural.

METHODE CHAMPENOISE: As we just saw, the first purposely sparkling wine was not made in Champagne. Regardless, through centuries of refinement, Champagne has become the world’s leading sparkling wine and the vinous embodiment of luxury and celebration.

The term méthode Champenoise , like Champagne itself, is protected by EU regulations, and may only apply to sparkling wines produced according to the prescribed method within the delimited Champagne region. Wines made in the fashion of Champagne but produced elsewhere may be labelled as traditional method or classic method . In South Africa, the method is more specifically known as méthode Cap Classique (www.capclassique.co.za ). Some producers, particularly in the US and in Russia, still label their sparkling wines as Champagne, but such wines cannot be sold on the EU market. The history of the traditional method is as murky as the resulting wine is now clear and bright. Sparkling winemaking was only revived in the region of Lombardy in the second half of the last century, but some claim that the first sparkling wine ever made by the traditional method was produced there in the early 1500s, even though production seems to have stopped virtually as soon as it started. As for Dom Pérignon , the Benedictine monk was aware of the méthode rurale, having stayed at the abbey of Saint Hilaire before being appointed as cellar master at the abbey of Hautvillers, near Epernay, from 1668 to his death in 1715. There, the story goes that he invented the méthode Champenoise, crying “Come quickly, I am drinking the stars” after sampling the fruit of his experiments. But the story is an embellishment, to say the least, which was put together in 1821 by Dom Grossard to raise the abbey’s profile, and probably his own, having been reduced to simple priesthood after the French revolution of 1789. Even so, in 1889, the Champagne “Syndicat de Commerce” declared that Dom Pérignon was the father of the method Champenoise, and Moët & Chandon is more than happy to exploit the legend as a marketing tool.

The méthode Champenoise involves fermenting dry base wine a second time in the bottle, the second fermentation in the bottle being triggered by the addition of liqueur de tirage , a cocktail of sugar and yeast. The first sparkling Champagne by that method was most probably drunk in London. In taverns, it was common practice to sweeten wine prior to drinking it, as observed by Fynes Moryson in 1617. Wine was shipped in cask, and in order to replenish their cellars, gentlemen would send their own bottles, often stamped with the family crest, to be filled by their merchants. It is not unconceivable to imagine a gentleman having had sugar added at bottling rather than in the glass with each serving, unknowingly triggering the sparkling winemaking process. This is pure speculation, but one thing is for sure: in 1662, the English scientist Christopher Merret presented a paper on winemaking at the Royal Society which included a demonstration that adding sugar to wine in a bottle, and then sealing it, produced a second fermentation in the bottle and resulted in bubbles when the bottle was open. This took place thirty years before the technique was first documented in France. Dom Pérignon had not yet entered the abbey of Hautvillers. Some even say that actually, contrary to popular belief, the monk’s first project was to get rid of the bubble, for re-fermentation of still light wines, a common feature in the Champagne region, where the climate is so marginal, caused bottles to shatter and a great deal of the production to be spoilt every year. But this is fantasy also, for glass was a very expensive commodity at the time. Consequently, wine was stored and traded in barrels, not in bottles. In England, glass was coal rather than wood fired, making it the only glass able to sustain high internal atmosphere of pressure, and natural from Portugal was reintroduced through the Port trade as the standard bottle stopper, quickly making the wooden peg obsolete. Cork was the only stopper able to tightly seal the fizz within the strong bottle. Without these technologies, both studied by Merret, Champagne could have never been developed. The word Mousseux, implying effervescent, appeared in 1724 in association to the wines of Champagne, though the Champenois may have enjoyed sparkling wines as early as 1700. The winemaking process worked in such mysterious ways that some attributed the sparkle to the phases of the moon (Blanquette méthode ancestrale still sees the prise de mousse take place with the first moon of March according to the monks’ trade secret). Most of all, the process was so unreliable that words had to be invented to describe various levels of fizz: Pétillant, demi-mousseux or Crémant, and Grand Mousseux. These terms still survive today in other sparkling wine . Only with several key developments will Champagne as we know it today come into being in the early 1800s.

Jean-Antoine Chaptal, the French chemist and statesman who gave his name to the chaptalisation process, identified the relationship between sugar and fermentation in a seminal work dated 1801. Strong of this understanding, the pharmacist André François measured the precise amount of sugar needed to maximise the second fermentation process in the bottle, allowing Champagne houses to produce sparkling wines with greater confidence and consistency.

Madame Barde-Nicole Ponsardin, aka , assumed control of the eponymous Champagne house after her husband’s death, shortly after the turn of the 19 th century. Under her leadership, the house pioneered the process of remuage, or riddling. Denominations producing sparkling wine by the traditional method impose minimum periods of maturation on lees to add optimum complexity through autolysis to their respective styles: 15 months for basic Champagne, of which 12 must be spent on the lees, and 9 months for cava and Crémants for instance, though the more premium wines are aged much longer in practice, often well over three years. After the ageing on lees is complete, the substantial lees deposit needs to be removed if one wants to offer wine that looks attractively clear and bright in the glass. This is the purpose of remuage . It involves adding a riddling agent to the liqueur de tirage, thereby giving weight to the lees deposit. Regularly, over weeks, bottles are shaken sharply with a movement of the wrist and gradually lifted from their horizontal storage position till standing upside down, or sur pointe. With the introduction of the , the process is now widely mechanised. At the end of the process, the deposit is eventually gathered in a plug against the stopper in the neck of the bottle. The plug is removed in a process known as dégorgement or disgorgement. Originally removed manually, the plug is now frozen in a bath then removed mechanically. Wine is lost in the process hence the clear wine is topped up with a cocktail of wine and sugar known as liqueur d’expédition before putting to market. That sweetening process is known as dosage .

Chrispoher Merret Dom Pérignon Veuve Clicquot

Champagne making process

Manual riddling Vs Gyropalette

Riddling scheme using a pupitre TRANSFER METHOD: The transfer method is a cost effective variation of the traditional method. Second fermentation and ageing on lees still take place in the bottle hence wines by this method can achieve finesse and complexity. However, instead of going through the costly and painstaking riddling and disgorging processes, the wine is decanted under pressure into tanks together with the liqueur d’expédition then filtered at bottling to get rid of the lees deposit. The method is widely used in the New World, especially in the USA, New Zealand and Australia. But bear in mind that the finest wines produced in these countries are always made by the traditional method.

The method is illegal in Champagne . But since Champagne never undergoes its second fermentation in 25cl bottles, as served on aircrafts, or quarter bottles (the only sizes in Champagne that do not legally require mushroom-shaped stoppers) neither than in Jeroboams or other outsized bottles (though certain producers make it a speciality, notably Pommery, Veuve Clicquot and Henriot), the method is needed but only as a bottling process . It is then known as transversage .

Quarter Bottle 18.8 0 centilitres Quarter Litre B ottle (used on aircrafts) 25.00 centilitres Half Bottle 37.5 0 centilitres Standard B ottle 75 .00 centilitres Magnum 2 bottles 1.50 litres Jeroboam 4 bottles 3.00 litres Rehoboam 6 bottles 4.50 litres Methuselah 8 bottles 6.00 litres Salmanazar 12 bottles 9.00 litres Balthazar 16 bottles 12.0 litres Nebuchadnezzar 20 bottles 15.0 litres

TANK METHOD: The method, which sees the second fermentation take place in tank rather than in bottle, is much faster, far less labour intensive and far more cost effective than the traditional method. It aims at producing sparkling wine in a style approaching that of Champagne, though tank-fermented wines will never compare to bottle-fermented wines. Indeed, far less wine is in direct contact with the lees by this method hence optimum quality and complexity cannot be achieved, but the economical benefits brought about by processing wine in bulk are such that it is easy to understand why the method is so popular the world around.

In 1852, the French Edmé-Jules Maumené, occupant of the municipal chair of chemistry in Reims, was one of the first to come up with the idea of fermenting sparkling wine in a large container rather than in bottle. He pioneered the Afroforo. Base wine would undergo its second fermentation in this sealed tank then be left to settle and clarify naturally till bottling. The Italian Martinotti tried to develop the concept and give it an industrial application, but with relative success. In Italy, the tank method is still known as metodo Martinotti . But since the method is so widely used in Italy, most Italians would refer to it as metodo Italiano . Martinotti’s system needed refinement to be commercially viable, and the tank method as we know it today was eventually developed by the French Eugène Charmat in 1907 hence it is best known as méthode Charmat. Charmat’s main contribution was to swap the wooden Afroforo with a steel version known as autoclave. The autoclave was vitrified on the inside to resist the attack by wine and sulphuric acids. Nowadays, stainless steel autoclaves are the norm, and the method is simply known after the name of the tank itself as tank method. In Spain, Gran Vase was abbreviated to granvas to translate cuve close (sealed tank), which is how the tank method is alternatively called in France.

Note that, contrary to the bulk of production by the tank method, often made from imported base wine outside Italy, every Italian sparkling wine that bears an appellation is made from hand-picked grown within the delimited area according to strict quality rules.

CONTINUOUS METHOD: The Russians, and the Germans as well as Lancer in Portugal, often use an accelerated version of the Charmat method known as the Russian method or Continuous method . The method is a derivation of an experimental tank method that Anton Frolov-Bagreyev developed to an industrial scale in order to turn Stalin’s vision of a “Champagne for the masses” into reality in 1936. Anton’s afratofor allowed “Champagne” to be made in 26 days only. Soon, large producing plants with these large high pressure steel tanks were built, first in Gorki (Nizhny Novgorod), then in 21 other cities round Russia. Anton Frolov-Bagreyev was awarded the Stalin Prize in 1942 for having fathered the technology then in 1943 he published a book, the title of which was to give its name to a sparkling wine production plant in Moscow and a brand of iconic status: Soviet Champagne.

In 1950, at the Gorki plant, experiments with a continuous-flow process through interconnected tanks did not prove conclusive, but eventually the complex of Akratoforovs (usually 5, but up to 8 interconnected tanks) was successful at the Moscow Soviet Champagne Plant in 1953. Another plant of the kind was soon built in Leningrad. The continuous method was patented in 1959 then its three innovators, Agabalyan , merzhanian and Brusilovsky , were awarded the Lenin Prize in 1961.

The continuous method is rather complex and aims at reducing production costs and accelerating the winemaking process. Indeed, sparkling wine by the continuous method costs 20% less to produce and only takes about three weeks to achieve, the time taken to complete the riddling process alone by the traditional method. The dry base wine, together with the liqueur de tirage, undergoes its second fermentation in the first tanks, which act as fermentors. Mounting pressure channels the wine into biogenerators, in the middle of the chain, where the yeast cells are absorbed by rings of wood shavings. It is around these rings that a degree of lees contact and autolysis occurs, though the system acts more as a clarifying process than as an ageing one, with relative impact on the aromatic profile of the resulting wine. The wine is once again pushed under its own pressure into chillers, where the ultimate atmosphere of pressure is achieved and stabilised. At this stage, the wine is virtually clear and bright and its internal pressure is maintained in buffer tanks till bottling.

DIOISE/ASTI METHOD: The method Dioise is a variation of the transfer method. In its first phase, the process starts like the méthode rurale, not like the traditional method, which is where both methods differ. The method Dioise is responsible for the making of Clairette de Die, in Die, Rhône Valley. There, the wine is made from Blanc à petit Grains. The aromatic variety is best enjoyed at an optimum level of freshness and with a degree of residual sugars. To guarantee maximum freshness, the grapes are picked, pressed immediately then the juice is chilled at 0°C till needed for commercialisation. The juice can alternatively be partially fermented prior to refrigeration. When needed, the wine is bottled and, as it warms up, the fermentation resumes in the bottle, thereby triggering the prise de mousse. Before fermentation is complete, the process is stopped by chilling then the wine is decanted into pressure tanks. It is filtered at bottling so that yeast cells and nitrogenous compounds are eliminated, thereby stabilising the wine and preventing any possibility of re-fermentation in the bottle. This way, a significant level of residual sugars is preserved.

Asti, made in Piedmont, Italy, is the tank-fermented version of the Clairette de Die. The Asti tank method differs from the Charmat/Martinotti method in the sense that it is the natural course of the fermentation process of the must that causes the prise de mousse, not the second fermentation of dry base wine triggered by an addition of liqueur de tirage.

CARBONATION METHOD: This is the simplest and least expensive way of putting bubbles into wine. The bubble is not the result of a fermentation process in a sealed container. There is therefore no prise de mousse process involved since the CO 2 is not endogenous but exogenous. The base wine is stabilised through

filtration to the desired degree of sweetness then chilled to -2°C. A reserve tank of food-graded CO 2 is connected to a saturator, a sealed container in which the gas is dissolved into the base wine, under pressure, in a continuous stream. The resulting sparkling wine is stored under pressure in a buffer tank till bottling. The big, fast-dissipating bubbles the method creates may be suitable for mineral water and soda, but some think that they are totally unacceptable in sparkling wine. There is no fermentation process involved, so no lees ageing process either. It is just a matter of injecting

CO 2, and since the gas is inert, the process has no impact on the aromatic profile of the wine. The quality of injected wines matches that of the base wine, which can be good. In the EU, wines made sparkling by injecting exogenous CO 2 cannot qualify as QWPSR. Therefore, it cannot be sold as quality wine but as basic only.

The determining factors of style:

Internal atmosphere of pressure: Sparkling wine is marketed at full pressure, medium pressure or low pressure. To each level of pressure corresponds a specific style (see table below). Each country might use different descriptive words, but each style obeys winemaking standards across Europe. Indeed, EU regulations impose strict standards of production for each respective style, starting with a minimum level of pressure, needless to say, but also a minimum alcohol level. (log onto www.wine-and-bubbles.com for more details)

min Internal atmosphere >1 g/l dissolved CO 2 1 to 2.5 bar >3 bar >3.5 bar * of pressure at 20°C (≈ 1 bar at 2g/l) France Vin Perlant Vin Pétillant Vin Mousseux (VM) Vin Mousseux de Qualité (VMQ) including those with appellation (VMQPRD –e.g. Champagne, Crémant, …) Italy Vino Frizzante Vino Spumente Spain Vino con Aguja Vino Espumoso Cava Portugal Vinho frisante Vinho espumente/espumoso Germany Spritzer Perlwein Schauwein Sekt England Beady wine Pearlwine/ Perlwine Sparkling wine *note that Champagne achieves around 5 bar on average, but still, only the minimum 3.5 bar of internal atmosphere of pressure is required in Champagne, whereas in some other EU appellations, higher minimum levels legally apply (e.g. minimum 4 bar for Cava).

Level of sweetness: Sparkling wine is also marketed at various levels of sweetness. The level of sweetness is actually a labelling requirement under EU regulations (see table below). Some markets are more inclined to drinking sweeter styles, especially Eastern Europe and Russia, but also Italy and Scandinavia, while others are archetypal dry markets, notably the UK in the EU, but also Australia and the USA in the New World.

Sparkling Wines Still Light Wines EU regulation n° 607/2009 of 14 July 2009 EU regulation n° 753/2002 SWEETNESS / DOSAGE RZ before 2010 RZ * since 2010 SWEETNESS RZ

Brut Nature (Zero Dosage) 0-3 g/l 0-3 g/l Bone Dry Or not exceeding 9 g/l provided that the Brut Natur total acidity expressed as grams of Dry 0-4 g/l tartaric acid per litre is not more than 2 Extra Brut 0-6 g/l 0-6 g/l grams below the residual sugar content Extra Herb Off dry Or not exceeding 18 g/l provided that Brut 0-15 g/l 0-12 g/l Medium dry 4-12 g/l the total acidity expressed as grams of tartaric acid per litre is not more than 10 Herb grams below the residual sugar content

Extra Sec 12-20 g/l 12-17 g/l Extra Seco/ Extra Dry / Extra Trocken

Sec 17-35 g/l 17-32 g/l Seco / Trocken Medium 12-45 g/l (Sweet) Demi Sec 33-50 g/l 32-50 g/l Demi Riche/ Semi Seco/ Semi Dulce / Halbtrocken /Halbsüss

Doux >50 g/l >50 gl/l Sweet >45 g/l Dulce / Sweet /Mild *note that the new regulation allows a margin of + or – 3 g/l, which means that a sparkling wine that contains 9 g/l residual sugars can legally be labelled as either Extra Brut or Brut, or even Extra Dry.

The old regulation seemed unclear because the brackets of sweetness were overlapping, but the new regulation, with its 3 g/l tolerance makes things more confusing I feel. Especially if one considers the discrepancy in sweetness levels between still light wines and sparkling wines under EU regulations and the contradiction in terms brought about by the use of the word “Sec”, the French for “dry”, which actually corresponds to a “medium sweet” level of sweetness in still light wines, for instance. The wine tasting notes will use the still light wine standards to describe the perception of sweetness on the palate. Blend: Dom Pérignon did not invent sparkling wine, nor did he invent a sparkling wine method in particular, but there is one technique he can be credited for, and that is blending. The concept he developed aimed at guaranteeing a consistency of style, though it can also be used to create a specific style. Three factors determine a blend:

- : the quality of the vintage varies year on year. The grapes used in the making of sparkling wine are often grown in marginal climates, hence optimum ripening is only achieved in exceptional . Only then will a vintage wine be made, and vintage sparkling wine is the exception, not the rule. Most sparkling wine is indeed non-vintage, meaning that it is a blend of more than one vintage. The wine from previous vintages, or reserve wine, is used to balance lacking qualities in the wine made in the current vintage, thereby evening vintage variation.

- Cru: certain plots are known for yielding grapes of better quality than neighbouring plots, and so regardless of vintage variation. They seem to have a of their own, and regions often classify according to their respective potential, from Grand Cru, for the vineyards yielding the best grapes, down to Premier Cru then straight Cru for the vineyards yielding the less exceptional and more average grapes. Champagne and Burgundy follow that pattern, though Champagne classifies entire villages, not specific plots of land like Burgundy. Blends made from grapes strictly grown in vineyards of Grand Cru status can be labelled accordingly, and similarly for 1er cru wines. When optimum microclimatic conditions are met, any cru can yield wines of exceptional quality. Champagne makes a speciality of its Cuvée Prestige wines (e.g. Dom Pérignon by Moët & Chandon), which blend the best cuvées regardless of the status of the vineyard, though they are most likely to be of Grand Cru and 1er cru status.

- Variety: Contrary to popular belief, Champagne varieties are a minor part of the grapes used in the making of sparkling wines. These varieties are often vinified at high temperatures to even their characters. Each variety in a Champagne blend brings particular aromatics to the wine but it is their respective contribution to structure that counts most: for finesse, for structure and for weight. Wines made to showcase more varietal character, and therefore often vinified at cooler temperatures, are often mono-varietal, (e.g. Prosecco). Purely aromatic varieties, like Muscat Blanc à Petits Grains, have necessitated the adaptation of entire winemaking methods so as to retain integrity and pungency of character.

Colour: Most sparkling wine is made white, and so regardless of the colour of the grape varieties used. Champagne wine labelled as “Blanc de Blancs” is made from 100% white grapes (mostly Chardonnay) while “Blanc de Noirs” is made from 100% black grapes (Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier), but anywhere else in the world, these terms are rather meaningless. Under EU regulations, up to 15% of a mono- varietal wine can be made from a number of different grape varieties hence a Blanc de Noirs blend can actually include white grape varieties. In California, such a blend can even be in style, the same way as in California, white is rosé, or “blush” as Americans call it.

Rosé sparkling wines continue to have strong momentum in some countries like the UK, but overall, the style still remains marginal. It can be achieved through skin contact, but it is usually achieved by adding liqueur to white base wine. The later technique is prohibited for the making of still light rosé wine in the EU, but it is perfectly acceptable for the making of sparkling wine, even at premium level in Champagne.

As for red sparkling wine, it is very niche market to say the least.

In France, Germany, Italy and Spain, sparkling wine consumption has moved from celebratory to casual, everyday drinking, often as an aperitif. The trend is now reaching Japan and the UK, and even though it is something to be pushed elsewhere, there is definitely real potential for growth in the sector. On the global market, sparkling wine has a very low average price. Virtually, the whole market is below Champagne prices. In volume terms, Champagne represents 1% and 12% of the global wine and sparkling wine consumption respectively, but it brings more than 50% of its revenue to the sparkling wine industry. Cuvée Prestige Countries like the USA, Australia and Argentina have been showing signs of premiumisation, and England is looking to Champagne establish its emerging brand at the high end of the market. Actually, in the mind of some consumers in some markets, the Grandes best English and New World Chardonnay/Pinot Noir blends by the traditional method now challenge the best . Marques Champagne But even if, in quality terms, top sparkling wines are the equal of bulk of Champagnes, they do not seem to be able to claim similarly high prices, for, as a whole, Champagne is still seen as the ultimate sparkling wine and the pinnacle of quality. This Low priced Champagne dominance of Champagne in terms of perception remains a problem for the image of sparkling wines. & Super Premium The premium categories, especially Champagne, were showing good growth prior to the financial crisis of 2008. Only Sparkling through heavy discounting have they managed to regain then maintain market share since then. At the other end of the

Standard scale, the overwhelming volume of unbranded wines that sells at very low prices is very resilient whatever the economical Sparkling context. In spite of some very strong international brands like Freixenet and Martini, over 50% of sales are unbranded, which leaves room to expand branded sales. In the wake of the success of Jacob’s Creek sparkling in the UK, many mass market still wine brands are now extending into sparkling wine.

[Source: Sparkling Wine 2009 / Proceedings of the 1st International Sparkling Wine Symposium]

SPARKLING WINE TASTING Tutored by Eric LAGRE Tasting notes by Eric LAGRE and Magda KOTLARCZYK, WSET Diploma graduates (with the participation of WSET student Nora ESPINOSA CORONEL)

NARRATIVE

Kiki (Ant Moore), Sparkling Sauvignon Blanc, Brut, Marlborough, New Zealand, 2009

Here, the fizz is the result of injecting base wine with inert CO 2. This late development in winemaking is bubble for bubble’s sake. It raises the question: Does the bubble alone add any extra dimension to a wine experience? Or more bluntly, are injected wines worth anything?

Mauzac Nature (Robert & Bernard Plageoles) , Domaine des Très Cantous, Gaillac AC, France, NV Mauzac Nature is made by the “méthode rurale”, the forerunner of the traditional method. Here, the fizz is achieved by completing the wine’s single fermentation process in the bottle, not by fermenting dry base wine a second time in the bottle by adding sugar and yeast, as in the traditional method. The invention of the more reliable traditional method was wrongly attributed to Dom Pérignon in the late 17 th century, which raises the question: Could England possibly be the birth place of Champagne as some suggest?

Club Champagne, Edouard Brun (Aÿ, Grande Vallée de la Marne), Brut, NV Champagne Moutard-Diligent (Buxeuil, Barséquanais), Cuvée 6 Cépages, Brut, 2005 Let’s compare a standard Brut Non Vintage Champagne with a more niche, not to say quirky offer: Vintage Champagne from more than the trinity of everybody knows about. Négociants Manipulants produce most wines in the region. Here, one operates in the Marne, the heartland of the appellation, while the other operates in the Aube, the southern part of the appellation, only later included to the delimitation. The former wine is made in a reductive style, modern and fresh, while the later is in a more reductive and old fashioned style, though incredibly fine and elegant, which raises the question: Should we believe that nothing good can come from the Aube?

Nyetimber, Blanc de Blancs, West Chilington, West Sussex, England, 2003 Abrau Durso, Cuvée Alexander II, Brut, Krasnodar, Russia, NV Sparkling wine was first produced to satisfy demand on the domestic market, and it is still the case in two of the top 5 producing countries, Germany and Russia, as well as in emerging England. Russia and Germany are greedy for the bubble hence their sparkling wine production is hardly exported and therefore not visible in the UK. The English sparkler reflects the British industry’s focus on quality while the Russian example is obviously targeted at the reputedly premium UK market. The later is indeed in stark contrast to the bulk of production in Russia, often sweet, swiftly and cheaply made by the tank method from imported base wine. Both wines are very terroir-driven and fine, which raises the question: Can sparkling wines equal Champagne in quality terms and therefore justify premium or even super-premium prices?

Codorníu, Reina Maria Cristina, Blanc de Noirs, Brut, Reserva, DO Cava, Penedès, Spain, 2008 Frassinelli (Gianluca Frassinelli), Prosecco di Conegliano Valdobbiadene Superiore DOCG, Extra Dry, Veneto, Italy, NV This couple of brand-like appellations was the first to find success on the export market in the wake of that of Champagne. This success is somewhat diluted in the UK because of New World exports exclusively targeted at the British market, notably Australian, New Zealand and Californian sparkling wines. One cannot help but wonder why Prosecco is so successful, for it is only made by the tank method in a rather commercial style contrary to Cava, which is made by the traditional method like Champagne. Cava does not seem to grow market share as steadily as Prosecco, which raises the question: Is the modern palate more receptive to fresher, though simpler wines?

G.D. Vajra (Aldo & Milena Vaira) , Moscato d’Asti DOCG, Piemonte, Italy, 2011 Cascabel (Duncan Ferguson & Susana Fernandez), Sparkling Shiraz, McLaren Vale, South Australia, 1998 Grape varieties can bring different shades to a landscape dominated by dry and white sparkling wine. Indeed, regardless of the colour of the varietals used, most sparkling wine is white. The average varietal is also rather neutral or at best semi aromatic in character. Here, in contrast, Moscato d’Asti is lusciously sweet and pungently aromatic, and the Australian speciality from the unlikely Shiraz grape is nearly opaque in the glass, to the point that one cannot even perceive the bubbles. To me, the former wine is too sweet and the later too quirky for my palate, which raises the question: Is it surprising that some styles remain so niche market? Cuvée: Kiki, Brut Vintage: 2009 Producer: Ant Moore www.antmoore.com Origin: Marlborough, New Zealand Style: White sparkling wine by the carbonation method Blend: 95% Sauvignon Blanc 5% Chardonnay Alcohol: 12%abv Residual sugar: 11g/l Supplier: Boutinot www.boutinot.com Wholesale price: £7.11 DPD ex VAT Retail: Virgin Wines www.virginwines.co.uk Retail price: £11.99

The base wine is a standard New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc made from grapes grown in the Wairau, Waihopai and Awatere valleys of Marlborough. The grapes are selected to provide tropical fruit aromas yet still offering low alcohol. The wine is vinified in small batches then aged on lees for six months to soften the palate and build weight. The Chardonnay, fermented and aged in new French hogsheads, adds complexity. The only difference between this sparkling version and the still light original is the fizz, which was just put there by injecting CO 2. The gas being inert, no aromas or flavours would develop in the process. Only bubbles were added. Virgin Wines advertises the wine on its website as being all a New Zealand Sauvignon Blanc can offer and more, for its qualities are enhanced by “the delightful frisson of bubbles”, to which they add “we adore Champagne, and we love Prosecco too, but this is a new and exciting way to enjoy the bubbles.” I do understand why one would enjoy the bubbles in a bottle- or a tank-fermented wine, for an extra aromatic dimension is brought about by autolysis in the process. Autolysis is the complex chemical interaction between the disintegrating dead yeast and the wine after the fermentation process in the sealed container is complete. The longer the wine ages on its lees the stronger this aromatic influence, which takes the shape of yeastiness, bread, biscuit, brioche and other bakery notes. But this advert seems to suggest that the neutral impact of injection on aromas and flavours provides consumers with a purer experience of the bubbles and that the bubbles alone add value! In a booklet strictly dedicated to the bubble, www.champagne.fr states that a full second elapses between the moment a wine is taken in the mouth and the moment the aromas and flavours are perceived in the pleasure centre of the brain. On the other hand, it only takes 2/10 of a second to perceive the prickly sensation of the bubbles on the tongue, let alone that, prior to that physical acceleration of pleasure, the visual effect of the bubbles in the glass will already have triggered pleasure in anticipation. You see, even the “Champenois” find value in the bubble for bubble’s sake. But would Champagne people go as far as implying that injected wines offer a purer pleasure experience? I don’t think so! No doubt that the complexity developed through autolysis and ageing on lees stimulates then intensifies and prolongs pleasure (sorry to start the tasting with such a risqué subject). Personally, I do not understand injected wines, but it might just be because I am some frigid wine drinker, who knows? Something I know for sure is that it is very difficult to gage how much of the stuff is being produced worldwide, for data is kept rather like a shameful secret! So, what do you think of this latest and most modern development in sparkling winemaking? Does it push your button?

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and medium lemon in colour. The bubbles are small and of (very) low persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean and exhibits a medium intensity of youthful aromas that are rather overripe, verging on yellow fruit preserve and marmalade. The fruit character is exotic, with Mango, passion fruit and star fruit dominating the more classic Sauvignon Blanc aromas of gooseberry and cut grass, plus a hint of red in the shape of cranberry.

Palate: The medium-bodied wine is medium in alcohol. The mousse is delicate (by lack of it really). The combination of medium plus acidity and medium dryness translates into a taste of melted mango and passion fruit sorbet. To that core flavour profile of medium intensity, one can pick on sweetened lemon and lime juice, gooseberry and a hint of grass or kiwi. The length is medium minus, with only the acidity and the bitter, green edge of fruit skin lingering on the palate.

Assessment of quality: Reading the notes over, the wine offers a fair deal of complexity, and one cannot but call it good. In order to bring some commercial appeal, the edge of the fizz has been softened by some residual sweetness. To that effect, a few batches were stabilised through filtration before fermentation to full dryness was complete. At the end of the day, what is the point of such an over-processed product? I don’t mind a Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc, but why adding bubble for bubble’s sake without adding anything good to the aromatic profile?! But I anticipated there would be fans of this commercial style in the audience, and I was right. Cuvée: Mauzac Nature, Brut Vintage: NV Producer: Les Vins de Robert & Bernard Plageoles Vignerons Domaine des Très Cantous www.vins-plageoles.com Appellation: AOP Gaillac (Southwest region of France) Style: White sparkling wine by the “méthode rurale” Blend: Mauzac Gris and Mauzac Rose Alcohol: 12%abv Residual Sugar: 10g/l Supplier: Les Caves de Pyrene Ltd www.lescaves.co.uk Wholesale price: £12.75 DPD ex VAT Retailer: The Theatre of Wine www.theatreofwine.com Retail price: £17.60

Wine by the “méthode rurale” is the most ancient expression of sparkling winemaking in the world. The style is hardly made outside France, where it was common place 200 years to the end of the 17 th century, at which date the traditional method was perfected then took over. It is only used in 5 out of the 33 French sparkling wine appellations, if one includes the “méthode dioise”, which, some would argue, is a hybrid between the méthode rurale and the transfer method aiming at preserving the aromatic integrity of the Muscat Blanc à Petits Grains “Clairette de Die” is made from. In 2011, total production by the method only represented just over 2% of the 550 million bottles of French sparkling wine put to market, of which 90% was “Clairette de Die”, hence one can safely say that, with 0.32 million bottles a year, Gaillac sparkling wine is microscopic in volume terms. All the other “vins effervescent Français” with appellation (Champagne, Crémants and other mousseux and Pétillants) represent 75% of the total production and are made by the traditional method, while the balance is made by the “méthode Charmat”. The Gaillac appellation covers 2,500ha between 73 communes in the north Tarn. The full spectrum of wine styles is made there and it is the only sparkling wine appellation in the Southwest. 94% of its bubbly is made by the “méthode rurale” and 6% by the traditional method. Domaine Plageoles has been producing Gaillac wines since 1805. The free-standing vines are trained to the goblet system and grown on calcareous clay at a high density of 5,000 vines per hectare and yield 40 to 45 hl/ha. After having researched the local archives, near extinct varieties were sourced and replanted in the domaine to produce organic wines with minimum intervention. The grapes are hand-picked then pressed directly as legally required. The juice is left to settle for 24 hours then racked off the gross lees and fermented with indigenous yeasts. The must is chilled so that the fermentation process is interrupted before it is complete. Note that sparkling wine by the “métode rurale” is always made from fermenting juice and that no sugar can legally be added. The bubble is achieved by completing a single fermentation in the bottle contrary to Champagne and other sparkling wines by the traditional method, which see dry base wine bottled together with a liqueur de tirage (a cocktail of sugar and yeast) to trigger a second fermentation. Here, in other words, the bubble is the result of the fermentation of the natural sugars in the juice whereas it is that of the fermentation of added sugars in Champagne (sparkling wine by the traditional method is actually the only wine in the EU that can see sugar added to dry base wine). This Mauzac Nature is bottled at 10.5%abv, with still 25 to 50g/l of fermentable sugars remaining. As the wine warms up, it starts fermenting again, thereby bringing the alcohol level up to 11 or 12%abv and the residual sugars down to 10g/l. This process only starts after several months and is rather unpredictable hence the resulting wine can be demi-sec or brut depending on the level of success of the re-fermentation process in the bottle. The internal atmosphere of pressure needs to exceed 3 bar. This wine of great originality is put to market without disgorgement (extraction of the lees deposit after riddling) hence some cloudiness from the lees. Disgorgement is not a legal requirement but in Die. “Clairette de die” is always bright and clear, for the “méthode dioise” implies decanting the wine into a tank then filtering it under pressure at bottling to stabilise it and preserve a fair degree of sweetness.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is pale gold in colour and quite cloudy (this haziness is not a fault but the consequence of the winemaking technique). The bubbles are small and of medium persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean and exhibits a medium intensity of fully developed aromas of apple , peary and peach, with floral notes of Acacia and honeysuckle and herbal notes very reminiscent of “herbes de Provence”. The aromatic profile has a strong yeastiness and vegetable earthiness to it also, with notes of sweet artichoke, cabbage juice and other root vegetables, notably potato skin.

Palate: This medium-bodied wine is medium in alcohol and medium plus in acidity. The same mix of stone fruit, white fruit and vegetable juice with underlying yeastiness as picked on the nose is found on the palate. The wine very much tastes like rustic cider with additional herbs and lemon and lime citrus zest. The attack is medium dry in sweetness, but turns rather dry in the medium finish. That sensation of dryness in enhanced by the lingering bitterness of herbs, root vegetable and stone fruit kernel.

Assessment of Quality: The wine is good, though its off-track aromatic profile makes it rather difficult to appreciate compared to more commercial styles on the market. It might therefore prove to be an acquired taste. The wine is all in all rather mediumish, rustic and yeasty, but fairly complex and well-balanced. I feel that it needs the accompaniment of food to shine, and it could be a rather interesting pairing with pork dishes for instance. Cuvée: (MA : Marque d’Acheteur) East India Club, Brut Vintage: NV Producer: Edouard Brun & Cie www.champagne-edouard-brun.fr Registered in Aÿ (Grande Vallée de la Marne) Appellation: Champagne Style: White sparkling wine by the “méthode champenoise” Blend: 60% Pinot Meunier (Vallée de la Marne) 20% Pinot Noir () 20% Chardonnay (Vitryat) Alcohol: 12%abv Dosage: 10g/l Supplier: Bought direct from producer via Chalié-Richards & C° www.chalie-richards.co.uk Wholesale price: €12.32 ex cellar / £12.61 DPD ex VAT (shipment dated April 2012) Retailer: Eton Vintners www.etonvintners.com Retail price: £22.50

Champagne was the first wine by the traditional method to meet with commercial success hence it became the template for quality sparkling winemaking in the world. Champagne is 1% of all wines produced globally, and if it only represents 12% of all sparklers put to market, it brings a good 50% of its revenue to the sparkling wine industry. The traditional method turns dry base wine sparkling through a second fermentation in the bottle triggered by the addition of liqueur the tirage (a cocktail of sugar and yeast). No sparkling wine labelled as “Champagne” or “made by the méthode champenoise” can be sold in the EU but when made in Champagne. The Club Champagne is standard Champagne. Indeed, 83% of the production blends different vintages and three varieties to produce a white sparkling wine in a Brut (10 to 12 g/l dosage) and predominantly reductive style. And that bulk of production is principally made by the “Grandes Maisons Champenoises”, which are companies that mostly buy in grapes, for they only own 14% of the total vineyard. Edouard Brun & Cie is indeed a négociant manipulant. NM Champagne represented around 68% of the 320 million bottles of Champagne put to market in 2011 and brought 2/3 of its revenue to the industry. The region counts 15,656 growers, and when they are not selling to a Maison, they produce their own Champagnes. Every carries either the brand name of the grower or that of the cooperative the grower belongs to. Together, RM, SR & RC Champagnes (Récoltant manipulant, Société de Récoltants and Récoltant coopérateur) take 23% of the market while CM Champagne (Coopérative Manipulant) only takes 9%. Both Maisons and Vignerons form part of the CIVC (www.champagne.fr ), which is the industry’s governing body, but they also have their own syndicates: the UMC for the Maisons and their Grandes Marques ( www.maisons-champagne.com ) and the SGVC ( www.sgv-champagne.fr ) for the Vignerons. The growers recently created their own “Champagnes de Vignerons” trademark ( www.champagnesdevignerons.com ). Grower Champagne is usually more terroir driven, for it is made from much more locally sourced grapes, but it is often not produced in big volumes. Therefore, it is hardly exported. Gathering in big groups geared up for global distribution is what gives the Grandes Marques, altogether with their consistency of style, so much power, visibility and recognition. Only 5 groups make Just under a third of the volume of sales and bring over a third of the industry’s revenue: LVMH/Moët & Chandon, Lanson, Vranken-Pommery Monopole, Laurent- Perrier, and Pernod Ricard/Mumm. If, like here, the wine is taken on by a company as its own label or by a négociant for redistribution, the registration number on the label will start with MA (Marque d’Acheteur) or ND (Négociant Distributeur), which leaves you with only an address to work out which of the 336 NM, 2016 RM, 14 SR, 2735 RC or 43 CM Champagne producers actually made the wine. Alongside standard Brut, Non-Vintage Champagne, 8.9% is rosé, 2.4% demi-sec (32 to 50g/l dosage), 1.8% vintage and 3.8% Cuvée de prestige (super premium Champagne made from selected lots, often of Grand Cru quality -e.g. Moët & Chandon’s Dom Pérignon). In the scheme of things, Edouard Brun is a very small family company. It was founded in 1898 and is now owned by the Delescots. Only 8 members of staff help Philippe Delescot in the vineyard, the winery and the office. In excess of 200,000 bottles are produced every year. The core of the blend is made from grapes grown in 8ha of vineyard owned by the family around the Grand Cru village of Aÿ, north of Epernay, and several 1er Cru villages also in the Grande Vallée de la Marne or just south of Reims in the Montagne de Reims. But most grapes are bought in from contracted winegrowers in the Marne. The Pinot Noir is wood fermented and 10% to 30% of the blend is made of reserve wine, but all in all, the wine is made in a reductive style for maximum freshness. All the wines undergo to add roundness. This Champagne is matured for 15 months, the minimum legal requirement, of which 12 must be spent on lees prior to disgorgement and dosage.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale lemon yellow in colour. The bubbles are small and of medium persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean, with a medium plus intensity of fully developed aromas. Fruit aromas of bruised apple, grapefruit and lemon citrus, yellow peach and some apricot are clearly defined. The honey and brioche-like autolytic character has got the supporting role, adding a warm edge to the fruit-driven profile of the wine.

Palate: The medium-bodied wine tastes off dry. The mousse is delicate but its slight prickly effect on the tongue contributes to the overall sense of freshness brought about by high, rather tartaric acidity and underlying minerality. It is so fresh that one could forget to notice the medium alcohol. The medium intensity of acidulated, candied fruit, like lemon sherbet and pear drop, plus unripe pineapple and green apple, is quite playful and adds to the appeal. The autolytic character only translates into some yeastiness at first but, in the medium plus finish, soon develops into attractive notes of brioche that soften the edges of the wine on the palate.

Assessment of quality: No doubt that the wine is very good. The off-dryness and the acidulated candy character of the fruit could have limited the appeal of the wine to something rather commercial had it not been for the subtle autolytic aromas and flavours, which add complexity and interest. The intensity of fruit is in balance with the acidity, teasing each other in a rather playful manner. The wine needs to be drunk now and should not be kept too long if one wants to enjoy this delight of freshness to the full. Cuvée: (NM: Négociant Manipulant) 6 Cépages, Brut Vintage: 2005 Producer: Moutard-Diligent www.champagne-moutard.fr Registered in Buxeuil (Côte des Bar) Appellation: Champagne Style: White sparkling wine by the “méthode champenoise” Blend: All the grapes originate from Buxeuil and Polisy in the Barséquanais 1/6 Arbanne white varieties 1/6 Pinot Meunier black varieties 1/6 Chardonnay 1/6 Pinot Noir 1/6 1/6 Alcohol: 12%abv Dosage: 10g/l Supplier: Hallgarten Druitt & Novum Wines www.hallgartendruitt.co.uk Wholesale price: £24.94 DPD ex VAT Retailer: www.corkingwines.com Online retail price: £35.45

Like Champagne Edouard Brun, Champagne Moutard, established in 1927, is a small family-owned Négociant Manipulant. But it is registered in the Aube, the southern part of the appellation, while Edouard Brun operates in the Marne, the heartland of the Champagne region [see attached map]. At the end of the XIX century, virtually wiped out the 60,000ha of vineyards in the Champagne region. In 1898, Vignerons and Maisons formed the AVC (Association Viticole Champenoise www.avc.net ) to start rebuild the industry on the best , making sure that only the sparkling wines made within the delimited Champagne region could bear the Champagne brand name. It took a series of decrees to agree on that delimitation. First, the 10 February 1911 decree only acknowledged 12,000ha within the Marne. But the historical producers in the south eventually had that delimitation extended to the Aube with the 22 July 1927 decree, thereby increasing the vine area to the present 34,000ha. The entirety of the Champagne vineyard area is now in full capacity of production, and in 2011, the first phase of the 2003 project of extension of the delimitation was approved. The vineyard area could potentially be “doubled” back to its original size once the second phase is complete. Since the “Échelle des Crus” was created in 1919, before the Aube was re-included, no village in the south was granted either premier or grand cru status. The system, which classifies entire villages in three categories, thereby only allowing them to sell their grapes at a given price accordingly, was abandoned in the early 1990s. From then on, the price of grapes would be left to the law of offer and demand on the free market. Hopefully, a true vineyard classification modelled on that of Burgundy could emerge with the revised delimitation, which would see lesser plots lose their Premier or Grand Cru status, but other quality plots gain such status in the Aube. In the 1930s, overproduction and counterfeiting lead to the collapse of the Champagne market, and eventually, quality production had to be regulated on 30 July 1935. It is from that decree that the entire 1936 French appellation system stems hence there is no need to indicate the Champagne appellation by anything other than “Champagne”. The 6 grape varieties that form this cuvée were commonly grown in the region prior to the Phylloxera crisis. The replanting programme that followed focused on three noble varieties, including the well-known, established and therefore commercially viable Burgundy grapes. Pinot Noir, Pinot Meunier and Chardonnay represent 38.4%, 32.2% and 29.1% of the total planting area, while all the other varieties, which cannot be replanted, only represent less than 0.3%. A seventh grape variety, , is noticeably missing here. Locally known as Fromenteau, it represented a staggering 50% of the vineyard area 300 years ago. With “Le Nombre d’Or” by Champagne Aubry, “6 Cépages” by Champagne Moutard is the only blend of this kind. The grapes used in its making were grown around Bar sur Seine and come from either the 22ha owned by the company or from contracted winegrowers. Another singular feature of this cuvée is that all the varieties are fermented in 2nd and 3 rd fill Burgundy barrels from Meursault, Chassagne and Puligny Montrachet, hence a rather old fashioned style. Malolactic fermentation adds roundness. The complexity of this wine is the result of 6 years spent maturing prior to commercialisation, twice as long as the 3 years on lees legally required for vintage Champagne.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale gold in colour. Its bubbles are small and of medium persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean. The medium (fine rather than pronounced) intensity of fully developed fruity, flowery, nutty and autolytic aromas, all integrated into one single aromatic experience, none trying to out-stage the other, but each one precisely defined, make the word “elegance” spring to mind. Lime blossom, peach and pear, strawberry yogurt and underlying minerality bring freshness to an array of autolitic aromas of brioche, digestive biscuit, butterscotch, plus very slightly smoky notes of toasted wood and vanilla oak.

Palate: It is so high in acidity, though soft and fresh, that one could forget to notice the medium alcohol. The off-dryness and core acidulated candy character of fruit of this medium-bodied wine are reminiscent of what was picked on in the Edouard Brun (here, the two sides of the appellation meet). But in contrast, the zing is neutralised by a creamy mousse and bakery notes. Peach, pear and toffee apple merge into fresh hazelnut, almonds and yeastiness then harmonise well with the dry wood flavours in the long finish (one can actually perceive a degree of wood tannins on the gums).

Assessment of quality: The wine is such a perfection of balance, precision and integration that I would call it outstanding. Its combination of freshness of acidity, intensity and complexity of fruit and long finish holds the promise of long years of most pleasurable drinkability. The finesse of this wine has a lot to do with the quality of the vintage, but who said that nothing good could come from the Aube?! Cuvée: Blanc de Blancs, Brut Vintage: 2003 Producer: Nyetimber Ltd www.nyetimber.com Appellation: Product of England (West Sussex) Style: White sparkling wine by the traditional method Blend: 100% Chardonnay Alcohol: 12%abv Dosage: 12g/l Supplier: Boutinot www.boutinot.com Wholesale price: £25.50 DPD ex VAT Retail: Berry Bros & Rudd www.bbr.com Retail price: £35.95

English sparkling wine is so hot right now! Its quality has already made its mark on the international wine scene. The best examples are yielded by vineyards which are an extension of the Champagne terroir. Indeed, they share a similar climate (most years) and the exact same soil as Champagne, thanks to the “chalky seam” that runs from champagne, through Chablis, under the Channel and reappears in the south coast of England between Wessex and the South East. That recognition in terms of quality drives the ambition of many investors to make the region count in terms of volume of production too by the end of the decade [see attached article on UK wine production]. English Sparkling wine does not come cheap, but since they believe that the product is on par with Champagne, these investors are certain that they will be able to take a share of the super premium sparkling wine market where Champagne stands alone to this day. I look through the window and think that the weather this year might dampen that ambition, let alone that a survey in the August issue of shows that only 53% of consumers believe that the best English sparkling wines are just as good as Champagne. The focus is on establishing a British brand on the domestic market, though Britons are a tough crowd rather difficult to please, as other surveys show that it is to tourists, especially the French, eager to compare the stuff with the real McCoy, that English sparkling wines appeal the most. 3 million bottles were put to market in 2012, twice as much as in 2011, which is still a drop in the global sparkling wine ocean. Although offer still outstrips demand, and most buyers remain on strict allocation, producers need to sell out and create a real buzz around their wines the year England is in the public eye thanks to international events as huge as the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and the Olympics taking place. English sparkling wine must indeed demonstrate that it has come of age, otherwise, the wave of investment pouring into the industry at the moment might just lead to overproduction. A 8 year plan from planting to market is needed to produce sparkling wine in England. Some investors are about to complete it hence the problem might emerge sooner than one expects. But let’s celebrate for now! Nyetimber Manor is mentioned in the Domesday Book and was once home to Anne de Cleves, fourth wife of Henry VIII. Nearly 1000 years later, it is producing one of the finest sparkling wines in the world. Stuart and Sandy Moss purchased the estate in 1986 as they were convinced that the gentle south-facing slopes of the South Downs in West Sussex would be ideal for sparkling wine production. 15ha were planted with Chardonnay, Pinot Noir and Pinot Meunier in West Chiltington in 1988 then the first wine, a Blanc de Blancs, was produced in 1992. In a blind tasting in France, that very wine caused a debate as to which area of Champagne it came from. Since then it won many international medals and beat many a Champagne Grande Marque in international competitions. Other cuvées followed and the estate would eventually yield 60,000 bottles a year. The present owner, Dutch Eric Heerema, acquired the estate in 2006, and under his stewardship, the planting area extended to 160ha (not all producing yet) scattered between 9 vineyards. The best technology was invested in and a world-class team was hired. The target production figure is 1 million bottles on average, which would make the estate the biggest sparkling wine producer in the UK. The grapes, all grown on the estate, are hand-picked, strictly selected, and handled in crates half the size of those used in Champagne to prevent the delicate fruit from bruising. These grapes are then pressed well within 24 hours to guarantee the best possible quality of juice. In the winery, each batch from each plot is processed separately. The wine spends as much time on the lees as possible, often well in excess of three years, to develop maximum complexity –in other words, wines are not released until they have reached optimum drinkability.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and medium lemon in colour. The small bubbles are of medium persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean and the medium plus intensity of fully developed aromas is dominated by an autolytic character of salted, roasted almond, buttered brioche and marzipan. The peachy aroma is more that of the kernel than that of the fruit. Lemon citrus, yellow flowers and mineral notes bring a savoury freshness to the nose. The terroir-driven scent of brine is like an evocation of the seashore and England as an island.

Palate: This medium plus bodied wine has a medium plus intensity of far fresher fruit than in both previous Champagne examples, altogether more acidulated and confected in character. The medium alcohol is hardly perceptible through the zesty lemon and lime that enliven the more exotic and ripe flavours of mango and pineapple, both indicating how unusually hot the vintage was for the region. The freshness and savouriness are such that one perceives the wine as being off dry at best. The autolitic character, for instance, sees sweet caramel, honey and buttered brioche soon turn into salted almond in the long finish, thereby adding complexity and layers to the wine.

Assessment of quality: This is by no means my best experience of the wine. The vintage brings about a richness of fruit which I find detrimental to the combination of freshness and finesse that is the trademark of the estate and what I was used to till now. Don’t get me wrong, this wine, well-balanced, integrated and complex as it is, is very, very good. But it lacks the “je ne sais quoi” of elegance that makes the Cuvée by Champagne Moutard stand out.

The UK is by far the fastest growing market for Vintage Champagne. One could believe that that national preference is what drives English producers to focus on vintage sparkling wine, but the truth is that the industry is still young and demand so strong that they can simply not wait an additional three years to build up the stocks required to make a well-structured non-vintage blend. England could boast to be some extension of the Champagne terroir and to have a claim for having invented Champagne in the first place, but it should definitely take a leaf out of Dom Pérignon’s book. The art of blending, not only varieties but also vintages, especially in a climate as marginal and unreliable as that of England, is the only way to guarantee consistency, both of style and quality. Beware Britannia! Cuvée: Alexander II, Brut Vintage: NV Producer: Abrau Durso www.abraudurso.ru Origin: Product of Russia (Krasnodar region) Style: White sparkling wine by the traditional method Blend: 66% Chardonnay 6% 23% Pinot Blanc 5% Pinot Noir Alcohol: 12.5%abv Dosage: 7g/l Supplier: Berkmann Wine Cellars www.berkmann.co.uk Wholesale price: £12.75 DPD ex VAT Retailer: www.simplywinesdirect.com Online retail price: £20.99

Most sparkling wine was originally produced to slake local thirst. Amongst the top 5 producers in the world, it is still the case in Germany and Russia. In 2010, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Russia put well in excess of 80% of the 2,332 million bottles consumed globally to market between them (sparkling wine consumption representing 7.4% of the near 32 billion bottles of wine consumed in the world that year according to IWSR). The UK appears right to the bottom of the producer’s leader board in 59 th position for wine and 30 th for sparkling wine. But the UK is the 5th biggest wine consumer and 6 th biggest sparkling wine consumer hence most of the 109 million bottles of sparkling wine drunk in 2010 (6% of the UK wine consumption) had to be imported. As much as wine production is microscopic in the UK, it has got ambitions for top quality, growth and export in the long run. Germany and Russia, 1 st and 3 rd biggest sparkling wine consumers in the world, with respectively 487 and 297 million bottles drunk in 2010, have such greed for the bubble also that they import rather than export, but in contrast, their production is mostly poor in quality. In Germany as in Russia, only 2% of the production is made by the traditional method, and 85% to 90% of the balance, made by the tank method, uses imported base wine. Sekt, as sparkling wine is known in Germany, is better quality than Russian Shampanskoye, especially when made from locally-sourced grapes, in which case it is labelled as Deutscher Sekt. In Russia, the Sovietskoye Shampanskoye or soviet Champagne brand owned by Soyuzplodimport, which represents 35% of the total production, is made swiftly and cheaply by the continuous tank method, not to mention the counterfeited bottle- and tank-fermented wines made by injecting CO 2 that cripple the market [see attached article on Russian production]. Russian sparkling wine is rarely seen on the western export market and Abrau Durso is the only Russian brand distributed in the UK today. Its style is specifically targeted at the reputedly premium UK market. Russian sparkling wine made bone dry by the traditional method is indeed scarce and not to the taste of the sweet-toothed, bargain-seeking Russian consumer. Not only is Abrau Durso a brand [see attached producer profile] it is also the name of a village at the centre of Russia’s finest winegrowing region, Krasnodar, on the north-eastern shore of the . Located 14km west of the city of , Abrau Durso is named after two rivers: the Abrau that forms a small, natural lake (the largest in the ) in front of the winery, and the Dyurso, which falls to the Black Sea two kilometres farther west. Russian winegrowers must contend with a fiercely continental climate with unusually hot, dry summers and severe winters. So extreme was the last winter that it brought the Russian wine industry on the brink of wipe out. Hourly average temperatures of minus 15°C were recorded, which is at the limit of resistance for Vitis vinifera. Abrau Durso itself, though less affected, since its vines were sheltered from the biting winds and protected from the freezing rain under snow, is expecting a 40 to 50% drop in yield this year. However, from one region to the other, there is divergence of terroir, as with all wine regions. While the area of Rostov tends to see the hottest summers with drought being an issue, the direct proximity of the Black Sea gives a semi-Mediterranean climate to Abrau-Durso. Abrau Durso grows its own grapes or buys them in. In 2002, the local earth dam located upstream of the Dyurso River collapsed, washing away most of the vineyards in the Valley, and the region as a whole does no longer grow its own grapes, but imports them from other neighbouring Russian wineries. Abrau Durso produces most of its wines by the Charmat method, but it manages to rank as the number one producer of sparkling wine by the traditional method, for 15% of the balance is made by the later method. Alexander II Brut is one example of these wines it produces by the traditional method from handpicked grapes grown in the estate on chalky marl soils, the same as in Champagne. Second fermentation in the bottle then ageing on lees takes place in tunnels 45-60 metres below ground at an even temperature of around 12°C. This complex of tunnels and caverns was dug into the hills beside the winery at the end of the 19 th century. One can assume that the present cuvée was aged on its lees for less than 3 years, for otherwise, it would have earned the vyderjhannoye label.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale lemon yellow in colour. Its bubbles are small in size and medium in persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean. It exhibits a medium intensity of aromas, with a rather forward scent of manure and hints of petrol most definitely derived from Riesling (a singular German twist to an otherwise classic Champagne blend). The wine is freshened up by aromas of rose and some eastern European variety of bruised but juicy, yellow apple reminiscent of golden. The wine is softened by subtle autolytic notes of yeast and brioche, plus honey in the fresher floral form of honeysuckle.

Palate: The wine is most definitely dry and, since its steely minerality and high acidity cut right through, one does perceive it as being medium minus in body. The sensation in the mouth is so cool that one could forget to notice the medium alcohol. Green apple, unripe pear, white peach, cranberry juice, lime (juice and zest) and strong mint flavours add to the overwhelming sense of freshness. The autolytic character it not a dominant feature. The subtle yeasty and honeyed notes do not compromise this terroir-driven echo of the fierce Russian winter in the glass.

Assessment of quality: The Russian sparkling wine market is very vibrant but the bulk of its production is of such low quality that I was not expecting much from this wine. Its steeliness and freshness, very terroir-driven, took me by surprise. Reputed restaurants in London have adopted this sparkler as their house bubbly, for it is so thirst quenching to drink as an aperitif. The balance of acidity, fresh minerality and lively intensity of fruit is just right. The nose is a bit of an acquired taste, but combined to the subtle autolytic character of the wine, it brings that extra level of complexity and interest. In the end, this is rating among my favourite fizzy wines in its type! But I must confess that it proved a bit too odd a style to many members in the audience. Cuvée: Reina Maria Cristina, Blanc de Noirs, Brut, Reserva Vintage: 2008 Producer: Codorníu www.codorniu.co.uk Appellation: DO Cava (Penedès in the Catalan region of Spain) Style: White sparkling wine by the traditional method Blend: 87% Pinot Noir 13% Chardonnay Alcohol: 11.5%abv Dosage: 8g/l Supplier/retailer: Noel Young Wines www.nywines.co.uk Wholesale price: £12 DPD ex VAT Online retail price: £15.89

In the wake of the globalisation of the Champagne brand , Spanish Cava and Italian Prosecco started exporting with great success also , a trend that others now try to follow the world over. The plans for the expansion of the Champagne delimitation attracted no outrage. No appellation saw it as an incursion into their market, but rather as an increase in the size of the motor pulling the entire sector firmly forward. Cava is one of the only appellations not to be attached to a particular region of origin. It can indeed be produced in Valencia, Aragón, Navarra, La , Castilla y León and Estramadura from locally authorised varieties. But the term, adopted in 1972 to replace the potentially misleading term “Champagña”, originates from Cataluña, where in excess of 95% of all cava is produced, mostly from , and Xarel-lo. Cava means cellar in Catalan, which refers to the fact that Cava must be made by the traditional method and therefore aged on its lees in a cellar. In Spain, 95% of the sparkling wine production is Cava or “vino espumoso natural por el método traditional”, while the balance is made by the tank method or “granvas”, an abbreviation for “Gran Vase” or “Cuve Close”. In 2011, around 215 million bottles of Cava from the region of Penedès were sold, which is the equivalent of only 2/3 of Champagne sales. But for the first time, exports outstripped those of Champagne, with 152 million bottles of Cava against 138 million bottles of Champagne. In the UK, Champagne and Cava take a near 2/3 of the sparkling wine market between them, though Champagne is ahead with 35 million bottles sold against 32 million for Cava. The 2008 financial crisis saw the Champagne industry lose 37% of its share of the UK market by 2010. Champagne has now recovered its full share of the market, but all the running in the sector is made by supermarket exclusive labels, often sold as special deals, sometimes for as low as £10 a bottle. Last year’s Champagne promotions have narrowed the price differential with Cava and Prosecco and stalled the momentum in the sparkling wine market, but promotions have also kicked lumps out of the Grandes Marques, thereby probably damaging the image of Champagne as the top, exclusive premium bubbly. This might open a window of opportunities for premium Cava and other premium sparklers like English sparkling wine. On the global market, the two market leaders for Cava, Freixenet and Codorníu, share 75% of the total production and 95% of the total export between them. Codorníu, founded by José Raventós in the 1870s, was the first Spanish producer to make Cava. But Freixenet, founded by Pedro Ferrer in 1889, is now the number one producer. Both companies, still family-owned, are two of the largest sparkling wine producers in the world, with their own winery outposts in California alongside such big Champagne houses as Moët & Chandon, Mumm, Roederer, Piper Heidsieck and Taittinger. They are bitter rivals also. Once, Codorníu took legal action against Freixenet for not respecting the minimum ageing requirements, then in turn, Freixenet accused Codorníu of illegally blending Pinot Noir. Nowadays, both Burgundy grapes, Pinot Noir and Chardonnay, can be used in the blend. The present cuvée was created in 1997 to honour the Queen Regent Maria Cristina, who granted Codorníu the title of “Purveyor of the Royal Household” in 1897. In 2010, the 2008 vintage was released as the first Spanish “Blanc de Noirs”. The grapes are picked at night then promptly transported to the winery to keep them at 10°C and avoid premature fermentation and leaching of the colour into the must. Gentle is applied till just before the colour starts extracting. The varieties are vinified separately. The blend is bottled together with the liqueur de tirage then stored in underground cellars at a constant temperature of 16°C to undergo the secondary fermentation then age on its lees for 18 months hence its Reserva status. Cava must spend at least 9 months on its lees prior to disgorgement, 15 for Reserva and 20 for Gran Reserva. It must also achieve at least 4 bar atmosphere of pressure, and attain an alcoholic strength of 10.8 to 12.8abv. Yields, set at 100 litres of juice or must per 150kg of grapes, are the same as for Crémant, made in seven appellations in France and 1 in Luxembourg, but higher than in Champagne. Champagne uses the finest base wine in the world, legally requiring 25.5hl of must per 4 tonnes of grapes, which represents roughly 96 litres for 150kg. Champagne producers might even discard the taille and only use the first 20.5 hl, known as Cuvée, which corresponds to 77 litres of fine juice per 150kg of grapes. Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale lemon green in colour. Its bubbles are small to medium in size and medium in persistence.

I must confess that my first intention was to present the Gloria Ferrer Blanc de Noirs produced by Freixenet in California. Unfortunately, it is no longer distributed in the UK. It would have been surprising to find a Blanc de Noirs looking pink in the glass, the same way as is actually rosé, or Blush as the Americans call it. I only went for the second best option, with no visual impact. Paradoxically, Both Blanc de Noirs wines, Gloria Ferrer and Reina Maria Cristina, contain Chardonnay, which would be unthinkable in Champagne and probably in England. One must know that, under EU regulations, a wine can be called varietal as long as it contains more than 85% of one single variety hence the present blend qualifies as Blanc de Noirs regardless.

Nose: The wine smells clean and exhibits a medium intensity of developing aromas, with a slight yeastiness from autolysis, very much in the background. The wine is overtly mineral, quite chalky, with hints of rubber on the edges, but what dominates is the fresh fruit, with creamy mixed red berry yogurt (raspberry, strawberry and cranberry) and some riper notes of peach and mango.

Palate: This medium-bodied wine is medium in alcohol and dry. The creaminess of the mousse clashes somewhat with the mineral chalkiness of the wine. The fruit brings an overall sense of freshness only enhanced by high acidity. The combined lemon, lime and pink grapefruit juices and zests add a bitter twist to the green apple, lemon drop and creamy red berry yogurt. There is some yeastiness there, but the autolytic character only reveals itself in the medium finish, with notes of bitter almond.

Assessment of quality: The wine is very good. There is a great balance between the intense freshness of fruit and the high acidity. The bitter edge and chalky texture of the wine definitely make it a food wine, and it would be a great accompaniment to a meaty fish cooked simply in a kettle with onions. The only slight disappointment comes from the fact that, with such extended ageing on lees, one would expect a bit more autolytic character and complexity. The wine is probably still young and needs some time to show its true potential. Cuvée: Prosecco Superiore, extra dry Vintage: NV Producer: Frassinelli www.frassinelli.it Origin: Conegliano Valdobbiadene DOCG, Veneto Style: White sparkling wine by the Charmat-Martinotti tank method Blend: Prosecco Alcohol: 11%abv Dosage: 16g/l Supplier: Thorman Hunt & C° Ltd www.thormanhunt.co.uk Wholesale price: £7.42 DPD ex VAT Retail: Noel Young Wines www.nywines.co.uk Online retail price: £10.79

Prosecco and Cava are the most successful sparkling wines on the export market, which Champagne first opened. In terms of style and winemaking technique, Italy is the exact negative of Spain, for much of all “bollicine d’Italia” is made sweet and only 7% by the traditional method or “metodo classico”. Despite being of great quality, Italian sparkling wine by the traditional method, produced essentially within the Franciacorta DOCG in Lombardy and the Trento Doc in Trentino, is as little exported as it is made. It has been given little chance to shine in a context of fierce competition, having to contend with Champagne in terms of quality and Cava in terms of price, both brands being firmly established on the export market. Most Italian sparkling wine is made by the Charmat method or “metodo Martinotti” or simply “metodo Italiano”. Contrary to Russia and Germany, Italy exports 2/3 of its sparkling wine production. Italy produces wines by the tank method but follows strict quality rules, strictly using grapes grown within defined delimitations: Prosecco in the Veneto, Asti in Piemonte and Lambrusco in Emillia-Romagna. Up to a staggering 225 million bottles of Prosecco were consumed in 2011, compared to twice fewer Asti and four times fewer Lambrusco. Prosecco is actually the name of a rather neutral white grape variety native to the Veneto region in the north east of Italy. Its neutrality is enhanced by the cool climatic conditions in which the vines are grown, in close proximity to the Alpes. The variety gives its name to some wines of the region, overwhelmingly sparkling in style. Prosecco is indeed rarely still, but a fair amount of frizzante (with lower internal atmosphere of pressure) and 2/3 of the production labelled as spumante (with full internal atmosphere of pressure) are made. 25% of the production bears the Conegliano Valdobbiadene DOCG appellation, when made near the river Piave according to stricter quality requirements, while the rest is of more generic DOC or TGI status. 60% is made dry and 40% sweet, but as the wine I selected demonstrates, the labelling of the sweetness level for sparkling wines is relative in EU regulations, “dry” actually standing for “medium sweet”. The present example, labelled as “extra dry”, is therefore sweeter than every single one of the wines labelled as “brut” in this tasting. In the 19th century Champagne was noticeably sweeter than the Champagne of today. The trend towards drier Champagne began when Perrier-Jouët decided not to sweeten its 1846 vintage prior to exporting it as it came, or brut, to London. The designation “Brut Champagne”, the modern standard, was created for the British in 1876. In Western Europe, the UK is indeed the archetypal dry wine market while Italy is the only market with Scandinavia to have preserved a sweet tooth. The Martini & Rossi brand, which embraces both Prosecco and Asti, is the only Italian brand of sparkling wine with an international significance. Prosecco is the biggest sparkling wine export after Cava, but here in the UK, according to the 2011 Brand’s Report by Nielsen, the Prosecco Martini brand does not feature in the top 10 most successful brands in supermarkets. Asti martini ranks 5th before the Borgo San Leo and La Marca brands of Prosecco, respectively ranking 8th and 9 th behind the Freixenet, Codorníu and Marqués de Monistrol brands of Cava, ranking 1 st , 3 rd and 4 th respectively, which is less surprising. Note that Australian Brands Jacob’s Creek and Hardys Crest, New Zealand brand Lindauer, and Californian Brand Blossom Hill are strongly represented, coming 2 nd , 6 th , 7 th and 10 th respectively, which is a rare feature in Europe. Production of sparkling wines in Australia and especially New Zealand is very small in comparison to that of the 5 leading countries, but both countries export a great deal, especially to the UK. As for the USA, the 6 th biggest sparkling wine producer, the country hardly exports, and only 4% of these exports reach Europe, or the UK to be more exact. Seen from the UK, this uncharacteristic success of New World sparklers blurs the overall European picture and dilutes the export success of Cava, and Prosecco especially. The present example of Prosecco is made by Gianluca Frassinelli. This qualified oenologist is the son of Renzo Frassinelli, who established the small family-run 10ha estate Azienda Agricola Frassinelli in 1966. The grapes are crushed, pressed immediately then cold fermented to preserve as much freshness of fruit as possible. The dry base wine is then put into hermetically sealed tanks altogether with a liqueur de tirage to undergo a second fermentation at a low temperature then age on its lees for 60 days prior to filtration and bottling.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale lemon green in colour. The bubbles are small and of medium persistence. A very frothy rim forms at the surface.

A very frothy rim is characteristic of sparkling wines made by the tank method, though bottle-fermented sparklers from the New World can achieve that same effect when surfactants are added. The chemical is normally used in car polish so that rain slides along the paint work to avoid marking it when it dries.

Nose: The wine smells clean and exhibits a medium intensity of youthful aromas. Bubblegum and pear drop are ubiquitous cold fermentation light esters. This artificial edge to the aromatic profile of the wine is salvaged by juicy green and yellow apple, lemon citrus, a perfume of fruit blossom and a freshness of underlying tartaric minerality.

Palate: This light-bodied wine is off dry. The level of sweetness turns the medium intensity of citrus fruit into lemonade. One can pick on white fruit and blossom, like apple and pear. The alcohol is only medium, but, for once in this tasting, it is not well-integrated and a warming sensation on the gums is noticeable, even though the acidity is high. The finish is rather short and simple.

Assessment of quality: The wine is rather easy-drinking and all in all very commercial. Despite the shortness of its finish and its simplicity, the wine is good. It qualifies as “none offensive” in my book, and the younger members in the audience were taken by its appeal and thirst quenching freshness. Thanks to its qualities, Prosecco works wonders on its own on a hot summer’s day or with salads. Cuvée: Moscato d’Asti Vintage: 2011 Producer: A.G. Vajra www.gdvajra.it Origin: Moscato d’Asti DOCG, Mango, Piemonte Style: White frizzante/pétillant wine by the Asti tank method Blend: Moscato Bianco (Muscat Blanc à Petits Grains) Alcohol: 5.5%abv Residual Sugar: 154g/l Supplier: Liberty Wines Ltd www.libertywine.co.uk Wholesale price: £9.25 DPD ex VAT Retail: Noel Young Wines www.nywines.co.uk Online retail price: £14.49

In Western Europe, most sparkling wine is made from neutral or semi aromatic grapes in a dry style. Sweet wines from pungently aromatic grapes are more marginally produced, and for the style to be achieved, the classic methods had to be adapted. Both Clairette de Die and Asti are typical example of aromatic sparkling wines, the former being the bottle-fermented cousin of the later. The Asti tank method is to the Charmat method what the méthode dioise is to the traditional method: the fruit of a single fermentation as opposed to that of a second fermentation induced by the addition of liqueur. Asti is said to be losing momentum on the market, but still, 106 million bottles were consumed in 2010 (which dwarfs the mere 11.5 million bottles of Clairette de Die in comparison). When fully sparkling, the wine is labelled as Asti, but around 20% of the production is not as fizzy but frizzante and labelled as Moscato d’Asti. To make Moscato d’Asti, grapes must be picked at 10% potential alcohol (9% for Asti). Both Asti and Clairette de Die are made from the pungently aromatic Muscat Blanc à Petit Grains grape, and in order to preserve the aromatics, last minute fermentation is required. Consequently, the grapes are pressed directly and the juice is clarified then kept fresh at 0°C till needed for commercialisation, at which point it will be fermented. The fizz is achieved in a sealed container as the wine completes a single fermentation. No sugar can be added. The natural sugars in the fermenting juice alone are converted into alcohol by the fermenting yeasts, with CO 2 as a by-product. The gas eventually dissolves into the wine as the pressure builds up. Fermentation must bring the alcohol to a minimum of 5.5%abv (7.5%abv for Asti) and the internal atmosphere of pressure to a minimum of 1.7 bar (3 for Asti). When the desired level of sweetness is reached, fermentation is interrupted through refrigeration and the yeasts and nitrogenous nutrients are removed through filtration at bottling (the high residual sugar content would otherwise start fermenting again in the bottle, resulting in a higher internal atmosphere of pressure, a dryer style and some cloudiness from the lees). Aromatic sparkling wines need to be drunk soon after they are put to market if one wants to enjoy them at their best. The present example is made at the G.D. Vajra estate, situated in Vergne (the highest village in the Commune of Barolo). The estate was established in 1972 by Giuseppe Domenico Vaira (the “j” is a typing mistake that just stuck). Milena and Aldo Vaira are the current owners. Both have worked the vineyards since the early 1970s. The Vaira family owns 40ha of sustainably farmed vineyards in such strategic spots as Bricco delle Viole, Fossati, La Volta and Coste di Vergne. The vineyards are planted with , and at elevations between 350-400 meters, which results in distinctive and aromatic wines. This wine was made from Moscato Bianco grown in a single vineyard site in Mango, actually closer to Barolo than to Asti. The 2.5ha south-facing plot is at 420-470 metres above sea level. The grapes were hand-picked and manually sorted in September. They were then made into wine according to the standards of the appellation; the juice was left to clarify through static cold settling and eventually fermented for one week at 14 ° in stainless steel.

Appearance: This white sparkling wine is clear and bright and pale gold in colour. The bubbles are small and of medium persistence. A frothy rim forms at the surface.

Moscato d’Asti is the wine that displays the smallest, slowest and most persistent bubbles of all sparkling wines, for the more residual sugar, less alcohol and less dissolved CO 2 in a wine, the smaller, more persistent and slow rising the bubbles. But what can bubbles tell you when the least imperfection in the glassware or trace of cooking fat or detergent causes the bubbles to grow large then rise fast to dissipate in a flash? One could indeed argue that size, speed and persistence of the bubbles are not reliable indicators in a tasting exercise. If the finesse, intensity and persistence of the effervescence were to be a sign of quality, what would one make of the more restrained fizz in old Vintage Champagnes of outstanding quality then?!

Nose: The wine smells clean and exhibits a medium plus intensity of youthful aromas typical of the Muscat grape: Turkish delight, grapy scent, perfume of rose water and honeysuckle, plus lemon and lime citrus.

Palate: The same character as picked on the nose can be tasted, plus some tinned peach and apricot, honey and more confected character of white fruit and citrus. Despite a low alcohol and very welcome salty notes, the wine feels lusciously sweet. The acidity is high, but not high enough to counterbalance that stickiness, which feels like that of refined sugar more than that of the natural and more tartaric fruit sweetness, as if it had been added.

According to EU regulations, the same way as no wine can be made pink by blending red and white wines, no sugar can be added once a wine has been fermented to full dryness. The only wine to which none of these rules applies is Champagne. Its making implies adding liqueur de tirade and therefore sugar to a dry wine base to trigger a second fermentation, and red wine can be combined to the liqueur d’expédition at bottling to turn a white Champagne Rosé.

Assessment of quality: The wine is not very complex and its sweetness is out of balance with the acidity, but it is good. Someone with a sweet tooth will very much be delighted by this wine... it is all a matter of taste in the end. Cuvée: Composé Sparkling Shiraz Vintage: 1998 Producer: Cascabel www.cascabelwinery.com.au Origin: McLaren Vale, South Australia Style: Red Sparkling wine by the traditional method Blend: Schiraz Alcohol: 13%abv Dosage: 20g/l Supplier: Boutinot www.boutinot.com Wholesale price: £13.64 DPD ex VAT Retail: www.allaboutwine.co.uk Online retail price: £20.99

When it comes to sparkling wines as a whole, the bulk of production on the global market is white, regardless of the colour of the grape varieties it is made from. Similarly to aromatic sparkling wine, rosé sparkling wine represents a marginal volume of production, though it is increasingly popular in some markets like the UK. But to put it mildly, red sparkling wine is niche market, for only a near insignificant volume is made. Italian Lambrusco is probably the most iconic and commercially successful example of red sparkling wine. A decent 50 million bottles were consumed in 2010. Despite 40% of the production being exported, Lambrusco is not so visible in the UK, for the USA is the near “exclusive” target market outside Italy. France produces some sparkling red in the Touraine, but it is mostly drunk locally. The only red sparkling wine available here in the UK, to some degree, is Australian. Australia makes a speciality of red sparkling wine from the unlikely Shiraz grape, and despite producing it in very small quantities, it managed to make it a success here by targeting the UK as its main export market. In preparation to this tasting, Australian sparkling Shiraz has proven easier to source than generic Russian or, more surprisingly, German Sparkling wines. The present example was produced by Cascabel, a winery established by Aussie Duncan Ferguson and Spaniard Susana Fernandez. They only own 5ha on which they grow a mosaic of Rhône and Spanish varietals. In this instance, the handpicked grapes were bought from a nearby vineyard in McLaren Vale. The base wine was fermented at 30°C in a 1.5 ton stainless steel open fermenter with some whole bunches and regular punching down. The choice was made to macerate the wine on its skins for 3 to 4 weeks to gain structure, despite the process being somewhat detrimental to fruit freshness and vibrancy of colour. The wine was then pressed directly into 2 year old French oak barrels then aged for 12 months till it was eventually transferred to tanks to settle naturally. In late 1999, the wine was bottled at the winery, where it underwent the second fermentation then ageing on lees for 12 years. Only last October was the wine taken to a small winery in Adelaide Hill to be disgorged prior to commercialisation. Therefore, this wine is brand new to the UK market.

Appearance: This red sparkling wine is clear and bright and of a strange medium dark cherry colour (probably garnet, but with more than a tint of ruby to it). The bubbles are small (as far as one can tell) and medium in persistence.

Nose: The wine smells clean and displays a medium plus intensity of fully developed aromas. The fruit is dark, with loads of black cherry and blackberry, plus an array of spices, either sweet, like cinnamon and vanilla, or dry, like clove, chocolate and coffee bean. The dry wood, somewhat toasted, gives the nose a scent of old, dusty attic, or it is a mix of tobacco box and cold ashtray?

Palate: This medium-bodied wine is medium dry and high in acidity. One can perceive medium tannins through the delicate mousse, which brings some sap and leather to the aromatic profile of the wine. The wine is medium in alcohol and intensity of fruit. It tastes like something between black cherry preserve and mulled wine, with the same cocktail of dark fruit and spice as picked on the nose. In the medium plus finish, the fruit turns to strawberry and one is left with the taste of some old and somewhat yeasty red in the mouth.

Assessment of quality: This style needs getting used to, or so I thought. I was amazed to see people at the tasting really enjoying it, including women. As Magda says “This could be lovely as a dryer still light wine.” So, why would anyone put so much effort and freeze capital for so long in order to make this wine? Abstraction made of the bubbles, the wine is very good despite the sweetness, which was only added to achieve some commercial appeal. The sweetness is indeed out of balance with the acidity and the level of fruit development. This wine definitely needs food to be enjoyed, but what on earth can you pair that with?! All a wine culture needs inventing if that type of wine wants to become commercially successful. 9 NEW VITICULTURAL ZONES

“COEURS DE TERROIR” 1 IN THE FUTURE REDELIMITATION 2 OF THE AOC CHAMPAGNE 3 1- Vallée du Bouvancourt 2- Vallée de la Vesle 3- Vallée de L’Ardre 4- Vallée de la Marne 5- Vallée du Surmelin 6- Vallée du Petit Morin 4 7- Côte de l’Île de France 8- Côte de Champagne 5 9- Côte des Bar

6

7

8

9

CHAMPAGNE from terroir to wine

vignerons et maisons vignerons et maisons

CHAMPAGNE from terroir to wine

Contents

4-5 š Geographical location 6-7 š Climate 8-9 š Soil and sub-soil 10-11 š Champagne grapes 12 š Mass selection and clonal selection 13 š Planting 14-15 š Sustainable 16-17 š Pruning 18-19 š Summer maintenance 20-21 š Harvesting 22-23 š Pressing 24 š Clarification 25 š alcoholic fermentation 26 š Malolactic fermentation – Clarification 27 š Blending 28-29 š Bottling and second fermentation 30-31 š Maturation on lees 32 š Riddling 33 š Disgorgement 34 š Dosage 35 š Final corking - shaking and final inspection 36-37 š Labelling

38-39 š Glossary location Geographical Geographical Geographical location 4

The Champagne production K_\i\ Xi\ ]fli dX`e ^ifn`e^ zone (AOC vineyard area) is regions: the Montagne de Reims, Vallée de la Marne, defined and delimited by the Côte des Blancs and Côte des law of 22 nd of July 1927. It lies 9Xi%Kf^\k_\ik_\j\\eZfdgXjj some 150 kilometres to the 281,000 individual vineyard plots, each with an average size east of Paris, extending into f]Xifle[() ‘ares ’ (1,200 squa- the departments of the Marne i\d\ki\j % (67% of plantings), Aube (23%), 9\_`e[ k_`j dfjX`Z f] Aisne (9%), Haute-Marne and micro-vineyards lies a unique Seine-et-Marne. The zone ZfdY`eXk`fe f] eXkliXc ]XZkfij% stands at roughly 34,000 hecta- Climate, soil and topography have produced a region with res of vineyards, spread across almost as many geographical 319 villages (‘crus’) of which permutations as there are acres 17 traditionally rank as ‘Grands f]m`e\pXi[%DXb`e^k_\dfjkf] that diversity is Champagne’s Crus’ and 44 as ‘Premiers Crus’. (,#'''$jkife^ k\Xd f] n\cc$ giXZk`j\[n`e\^ifn\ij%

Vineyard in the Vallée de la Marne The t wenty terroirs

within the 08 ARDENNES -CHAMPAGNE-ARDENNE- Champagne AOC 02 AISNE (Each one of these terroirs shares a dominant -PICARDIE- vine variety, rootstock, subsoil and climate)

55 MEUSE -LORRAINE-

77 SEINE ET MARNE -ILE DE FRANDE- CITRY SUR MARNE NANTEUIL SUR MARNE SAACY SUR MARNE

51 MARNE -CHAMPAGNE-ARDENNE-

52 HAUTE MARNE -CHAMPAGNE- 10 AUBE ARDENNE- -CHAMPAGNE-ARDENNE- COLOMBEY LES DEUX EGLISES RIZAUCOURT BUCHEY

VILLENAUXE LA GRANDE MONTGUEUX Two Côte des Blancs villages, but in the Aube

89 YONNE -BOURGOGNE-

21 D’OR -CHAMPAGNE-ARDENNE-

The Champagne wine-growing region

Aisne N 31 N 44 Geographical location D 6 Massif de

Saint-Thierry Geographical N Fismes Reims Vallée de Ard Ai re sn AISNE l'Ardre e D931 D977 5 Ville-en- D982 D 967 Tardenois D 386 Montagne A 4 Verzy

Vallée de la Marne Châtillon- N 51 de sur-Marne Vesle Aÿ Reims N 3 MAR A4 Château- Dormans NE N 3 Thierry Épernay D 3 N 44 Avize S urm D 51 Châlons-en-Champagne Charly-sur-Marne elin Côte Vertus des Blancs

N44 D982

Ornain Gra nd M or N 4 N34 in Vitry-le-François Sézanne N4 N 4 D13 Côte de Sézanne MARNE

D 236 Aube

A 26 N 19 Villenauxe- la-Grande

SEINE ET MARNE N 19 HAUTE MARNE AUBE

SEINE

D960 YONNE Montgueux Bar- Troyes N19 5A sur-Aube

N 71 Côte des Bar A5   Bar-    N77 Verzy  sur-Seine Aube   Essoyes

Mussy-sur-Seine Our Armançon 0 5 10 km Les Riceys D 444 ce

K_\m`e\pXi[j`e:_XdgX^e\Xi\gcXek\[XkXck`kl[\jf]0'$*''d\ki\j#fegi\[fd`eXekcpjflk_#\XjkXe[jflk_\Xjk$ ]XZ`e^jcfg\j%8m\iX^\^iX[`\ek`jXifle[()#i`j`e^kfe\Xicp-'`ejfd\Xi\Xj%

Champagne’s undulating to moderately steep terrain creates ideal vineyard sites that combine good drainage with fgk`dld\ogfjli\kfjlec`^_k% Climate Climate

6

The Champagne region lies at the northernmost limit of vine cultivation (latitudes 49°5 and 48° North for Reims and Bar-sur-Seine respectively). It is distinguished by a dual climate that is sub- ject to both continental and oceanic influences.

:fek`e\ekXc`eÕl\eZ\jYi`e^f]k\e$[\mXjkXk`e^n`ek\i]ifjkjYlkXcjfgifm`[\ _`^_c\m\cjf]jlej_`e\`ek_\jldd\i%

Oceanic influences keep temperatures on the low side but also ensure steady iX`e]Xcc#n`k_efdXafiÕlZklXk`fej`ek\dg\iXkli\]ifdp\Xikfp\Xi%

Springtime in Boursault Villedommange in winter Climate

7

Around Chouilly and Cramant in summer

8m\iX^\XeelXck\dg\iXkli\`jaljk((—:% K_\d\XeeldY\if]jlej_`e\_flijg\i year is 1,680, rising to 2,100 hours or more in certain years (1976 and 2003, ]fi`ejkXeZ\ %

K_`j ZfdY`eXk`fe f] n\Xk_\i `eÕl\eZ\j dXb\j ]fi ZfejkXek# df[\iXk\ gi\Z`g`kXk`feÆXe\Xi$`[\XcgXkk\ief]iX`e]Xcck_Xkgifm`[\jk_\m`e\jn`k_aljk \efl^_nXk\ikfgif[lZ\hlXc`kp]il`k%D\XeXeelXciX`e]Xcc]fik_\:_XdgX^e\ i\^`feXjXn_fc\`jZcfj\kf.''dd#iXe^`e^]ifd-''ddkf0''dd[\g\e - [`e^fek_\Xi\X%

Jldd\iXe[n`ek\iXc`b\#k_\m`e\pXi[jXi\Xkk_\d\iZpf]mXi`XYc\n\Xk_\i% N`ek\i]ifjkj feXm\iX^\(%([XpXp\Xif]k\dg\iXkli\jY\cfnÆ('—:#lgkf *[Xpj`ejfd\gcXZ\j ZXeY\j\m\i\\efl^_kfb`cck_\m`e\j%C`b\n`j\# jgi`e^]ifjkjZXe[\jkifpeXjZ\ekc\Xm\jXe[Yl[j#[iXdXk`ZXccpi\[lZ`e^ p`\c[gfk\ek`Xc +/cfjj`e)''* %Ale\dXpYi`e^Zfc[#n\kn\Xk_\ik_Xk `ek\i]\i\jn`k_Õfn\i`e^Xe[]il`kj\k#`eZi\Xj`e^k_\`eZ`[\eZ\f]ÊZflcli\Ë Yl[fiY\iip[ifg Xe[Êd`cc\iXe[X^\Ë jklek\[Y\ii`\j %Jldd\i]i\hl\ekcp j\\j m`fc\ek k_le[\ijkfidj k_Xk c\Xm\ k_\ m`e\pXi[j i`m\e n`k_ ^lcc`\j% ?X`cjkfidj Xi\ Xefk_\i ]i\hl\ek d\eXZ\# j\i`fljcp [XdX^`e^ m`e\j Xe[ ^iXg\Zcljk\ijXc`b\ `e)'''#*(j\gXiXk\Yflkjf]_X`cn`g\[flkp`\c[j XZifjjX*#'''$_\ZkXi\Xi\X %

Hautvillers in autumn Soil and

Soil and subsoil subsoil 8

Chalky subsoil

The subsoil in Champagne is predominantly limestone. Outcropping sediments are likewise composed of 75% limestone (chalk, marl and limestone proper). This type of terrain provides good drainage and also explains why certain Champagne wines have a distinctly mineral taste.

Champagne’s extensive chalk deposits show as outcrops in the vineyard Xi\Xjf]k_\:k\[\j9cXeZj#:k\[\J„qXee\Xe[M`kip$c\$=iXeƒf`j#YlkXi\ Yli`\[[\\gle[\i^ifle[fek_\DfekX^e\[\I\`dj%

K_\Z_Xcb`e:_XdgX^e\Zfej`jkjf]ZXcZ`k\^iXelc\jk_XkXi\]fid\[]ifd k_\ jb\c\kXc gcXk\j f] ZfZZfc`k_fgfi\j dXi`e\ g_pkfgcXebkfe # Xe[ `j Z_XiXZk\i`q\[ Yp k_\ gi\j\eZ\ f] Y\c\de`k\ ]fjj`cj dXi`e\ `em\ik\YiXk\j f]k_\D\jfqf`Z\iX %9\`e^_`^_cpgfiflj#Z_XcbXZkjXjXeXkliXci\j\imf`i _fc[`e^ *'' kf +'' c`ki\j f] nXk\i g\i d* # gifm`[`e^ k_\ m`e\j n`k_ aljk \efl^_nXk\i\m\e`ek_\[i`\jkjldd\ij%

:_Xcb [iXnj `e nXk\i k_ifl^_ ZXg`ccXip XZk`fe% K_\ \]]fik i\hl`i\[ kf kXg `ekfk_`jnXk\ijlggcpglkjk_\m`e\jle[\ialjk\efl^_nXk\ijki\jj`ek_\ ^ifn`e^j\XjfekfXZ_`\m\k_Xk[\c`ZXk\YXcXeZ\f]i`g\e\jj#XZ`[`kpXe[Y\iip XifdXgfk\ek`Xc%

A chalk pit in Reims Lithological formations of the Champagne vineyard

A 26 N 44

Massif de Soil and subsoil Saint-Thierry N 51 9 Fismes Reims Vesle Vallée de l'Ardre N 31

Villeen Ard re Tardenois Vesle Montagne A 4 Verzy de Reims Châtillon Vallée de la Marne N 51 surMarne N 44 Château A 4 ierry Dormans Aÿ N 3 Marne Épernay Avize CharlysurMarne Surmelin Côte des Blancs Vertus

N 44 PetitMorin

N 4 Saulx Vitry N 4 leFrançois GrandMorin Sézanne N Côte de Sézanne Villenauxe laGrande

Rock types Troyes Montgueux Aube

Chalk N 60 N 19

Hard and soft limestone, BarsurAubeLandion calcareous sands A 5 Marls (calcareous clays) Côte des Bar BarsurSeine Clays and argillaceous alluvium Essoyes Seine Ource

Siliceous sand N 71

Laignes MussysurSeine Slope wash (composite rock) Les Riceys Champagne Champagne grapes 10 grapes

Montigny-sous-Châtillon vineyard

It is the special nature of the Champagne terroir that determines the choice of plantings. Black Pinot noir and Meunier, and white Chardonnay now account for all but a fraction of the area under vine. Other approved varietals are the white Arbanne, Petit Meslier, Pinot blanc and Pinot gris – together less than 0.3% of plantings.

K_\j\jdXcc\oZ\gk`fejXgXik#k_\G`efkef`iXZZflekj]fi*0f]:_XdgX^e\Ëj jli]XZ\Xi\X#]fccfn\[Ypk_\D\le`\i ** Xe[k_\:_Xi[feeXp )/ %

K_\ G`efk ef`i g\i]fidj Y\jk `e Zffc The Meunier is more robust and less The Chardonnay is king in the Côte des limestone terrain and largely predomi- gife\ kf ]ifjk [XdX^\ Y\ZXlj\ `k 9cXeZj#p`\c[`e^[\c`ZXk\cp]iX^iXekn`e\j nates in the Montagne de Reims and Yl[jcXk\i%@k`jgXik`ZlcXicpn\ccjl`k\[ n`k_ Z_XiXZk\i`jk`Z efk\j f] Õfn\ij# k_\:k\[\j9Xi%@k`jk_\G`efkef`ik_Xk kf k_\ dfi\ ZcXp\p jf`cj f] k_\ MXcc„\ Z`kilj Xe[ jfd\k`d\j d`e\iXcj% K_\ adds backbone and body to the blend, de la Marne and will tolerate the Chardonnay is the ideal blend compa- gif[lZ`e^n`e\jn`k_k\cckXc\XifdXjf] dfjk X[m\ij\ n\Xk_\i Zfe[`k`fej% K_\ e`fe]fin`e\jk_XkXi\Yl`ckkfX^\% i\[Y\ii`\jXe[gc\ekpf]Z_XiXZk\i% Meunier adds roundness to the blend, gif[lZ`e^jlggc\#]il`kpn`e\jk_Xkk\e[ to age more rapidly than their Pinot noir Zflek\igXikj% Champagne

ierry Château CharlysurMarne

N 3 Vallée delaMarne N Main grapevarietiesbyChampagnecommune Vallée del'Ardre Pinot Noir Meunier Chardonnay laGrande Villenauxe

G PetitMorin

randMorin Fismes Dormans Saint-Thierry Massif de A 4 Tardenois Villeen Montgueux Surmelin Côte deSézanne Sézanne surMarne Châtillon

N 4

N 60

Ardre

N 44 N

N Vesle

31 A 26 A Épernay N 51 Troyes Reims Aÿ Vertus Avize BarsurSeine Côte desBlancs Verzy Marne

N 51 A 4 A

Les Riceys Laignes

N 44 N de Reims Montagne

S

eine N 4 N

Côte desBar

N 71 N BarsurAube MussysurSeine 44 N

A 5 N 19 Saulx Essoyes

leFrançois Vitry

Aube Ource Landion

11 Champagne grapes Mass selection clonal selection clonal

Mass selection and and selection Mass and clonal 12 selection

These two methods provide Champagne wine- growers with the best available vines in terms of superior fruit (mass-selected vines) and disease-resistance (clonally selected vines).

Ever since the phylloxera epidemic (late 19 th to early 20 th Century), vine stocks _Xm\Y\\efYkX`e\[]ifd^iX]k`e^kf^\k_\i=i\eZ_Xe[8d\i`ZXem`e\j%M`e\ j\c\Zk`fe[\g\e[jfek_\k\iif`i`ehl\jk`fe#Ylkk_\]Xmfli`k\gcXek`e^`e :_XdgX^e\kf[Xp`jk_\+(9 /(f]gcXek`e^j %?`^_cpX[XgkXYc\#k_\+(9 n`cc ^ifn aljk XYflk Xepn_\i\ Xe[ gXik`ZlcXicp ]Xmflij ZcXp\p jf`cj% K_\ JF+gi\]\ijdf[\iXk\cpc`d\jkfe\jf`cjn_`c\k_\**'0:[f\jY\jk`ejf`cj ZfekX`e`e^m\ipc`kkc\c`d\jkfe\%

;\ZX[\jf]i\j\XiZ_`ekfm`e\j\c\Zk`fe give today’s Champagne winegrowers k_\ Z_f`Z\ f] jfd\ ,' fi jf Zcfe\j f] k_\ k_i\\ Xggifm\[ 8F: mXi`\kXcj% Pre-multiplication is carried out by the :fd`k„ `ek\igif]\jj`fee\c [l m`e [\ Champagne (CIVC), the industry trade XjjfZ`Xk`fe Xcjf i\jgfej`Yc\ ]fi k_\ [`jki`Ylk`fef]Xggifm\[jZ`fej%

Fd\^X$j_Xg\[^iX]k`e^ Protection of a young rooted vine Mass selection Planting Planting and clonal 13

Nursery

The grubbing-up I\^lcXk`fej jg\Z`]p X dXo`dld `ek\i$ifn jgXZ`e^ f] (%, d\ki\j Xe[ Xe `ekiX$ifnjgXZ`e^f]'%0'$(%,d\ki\j#kfkXcjgXZ`e^Y\`e^e\m\idfi\k_Xe and replanting of vines )%,d\ki\j%K_`jgif[lZ\jXeXm\iX^\gcXek`e^[\ej`kpf]ifl^_cp/#'''gcXekj (or the planting of g\i_\ZkXi\#X`d`e^kffgk`d`q\]il`khlXc`kpk_ifl^__`^_$[\ej`kpgcXek`e^% new plots) must be K_\dfi\k_\m`e\j_Xm\kfZfdg\k\n`k_e\`^_Yfli`e^gcXekj]finXk\iXe[ elki`\ekj#k_\jdXcc\iXe[Y\kk\ik_\ZifgcfX[g\im`e\%8efk_\iX[mXekX^\ notified to the autho- f]_`^_gcXek`e^[\ej`kp`jk_Xk`k]Xmflijk_\[\m\cfgd\ekf]Xefgk`dXcC\X] rities. Planting must 8i\X@e[\o C8@ #jfgifdfk`e^g_fkfjpek_\j`j% take place before the E\ngcXek`e^jXi\jlYa\Zkkfjki`Zk

GcXek`e^1j\kk`e^lgf]k_\m`e\jkXb\j Sustainable viticulture Sustainable Sustainable viticulture 14

Cover crop

The environmental impact of the Champagne industry was assessed in a study conducted in the early 2000s. Based on those findings, there are four major issues for action:

Reduction of additives, and the control of risks to health and the environment. For more than twenty years now, the industry has been investing huge sums in research Xe[[\m\cfgd\ekX`d\[XkZfekifcc`e^k_\gfjj`Yc\Zfej\hl\eZ\jf]Zifggifk\Zk`fe%

K_\i\jlckkf[Xp`jXj`^e`ÔZXeki\[lZk`fe`ek_\hlXek`k`\jf]g\jk`Z`[\jlj\[#Xe[^i\X - k\ijX]\^lXi[j`ek_\nXpn\lj\k_\d%?Xc]f]Xcck_\gif[lZkjefnlj\[`e:_XdgX^e\ Xi\Xggifm\[]fifi^Xe`Zlj\%:_XdgX^e\`jXdfe^

The preservation and enhancement of terroir, bio-diver- sity and landscapes. Vineyard soils Gifk\Zk`e^k_\jf`cX^X`ejkXcc]fidjf][\k\i`fiXk`fe`jXcfe^$jkXe[`e^gi\fZZlgXk`fe`e Champagne, with particular attention to the physical, chemical and biological properties f]jf`c%J\m\iXc`e`k`Xk`m\j_Xm\Xci\X[pY\\ekXb\eYpk_\`e[ljkipkfgifk\ZkXe[X[[ mXcl\ kf `kj _\i`kX^\%

;XkXZfcc\Zk\[fm\ik_\gXjk)'p\Xij dfe`kfi`e^f]\Xik_nfidgfglcXk`fejXe[d`Zif - ÕfiX `e[`ZXk\k_Xk:_XdgX^e\jf`cjkf[Xp\eafpXe\oZ\cc\ekc\m\cf]Y`fcf^`ZXcXZk`m`kp%

The river Marne in Troissy Sustainable viticulture Sustainable Sustainable

15

Bio-diversity and landscapes The ‘marc’ (or pommace) is delivered to authorised distilleries K_\ i\^`fe `j _fd\ kf eld\iflj Xi\Xj f] jg\Z`Xc \Zfcf^`ZXc n_\i\`k`jYifb\e[fneYpj\gXiXk`feXe[\okiXZk`fe%8n`[\ interest, where bio-diversity is maintained by the conservation iXe^\ f] Zfdgfle[j Xi\ i\Zfm\i\[ ]fi i\ZpZc`e^1 \k_Xefc ]fi f]eXkliXc_XY`kXkj% `e[ljki`Xc lj\ Xe[ dfkfi ]l\c2 ^iXg\$j\\[ f`c2 gfcpg_\efcj# anti-oxidants and natural colour pigments; tartaric acid with K_\fm\iXcc]fZlj_\i\`jkf`dgifm\k_\\Zfcf^`ZXc`e]iXjkilZkli\ gfk\ek`XcXggc`ZXk`fe`egifZ\jj\[]ff[j#Zfjd\k`ZjXe[_ldXe f]k_\m`e\pXi[ Zfm\iZifgg`e^Y\kn\\em`e\jXe[XZifjjjcfg\j# _\Xck_gif[lZkj% Xe[k_\\jkXYc`j_d\ekf]_\[^\ifnj 2Xcjf^ifle[nXk\idXeX - ^\d\ekfejcfg\j#n`k_Xe\p\kfjfclk`fejk_XkÔk_Xidfe`fljcp Activities linked to Champagne production also generate n`k_`ek_\cXe[jZXg\% Xifle[ ('#''' kfee\j g\i p\Xi f] `e[ljki`Xc$kpg\ nXjk\1 metals, wood, glass and packaging materials including plastic, gXg\iXe[YfXi[% The accountable management of water, effluent, by-products and waste Kf[Xp#.,g\iZ\ekf]k_`jnXjk\`jjfik\[Xe[gifZ\jj\[]fi Water management i\ZpZc`e^#X`d`e^]fi(''g\iZ\eki\Zfm\ip`ek_\e\Xi]lkli\% Champagne producers use various methods to reduce k_\`i Zfejldgk`fe f] nXk\i% K_\j\ `eZcl[\1 k_\ \Zf$[\j`^e fi \Zf$i\]liY`j_d\ek f] Yl`c[`e^j2 `dgifm\[ jpjk\dj f] The energy and climate challenge cleaning, recycling and/or collection; and reducing water K_`j`jgifYXYcpk_\Y`^^\jkZ_Xcc\e^\]XZ`e^dXeb`e[`ek_\ nXjkX^\ n_\i\m\i gfjj`Yc\% NXk\i Zfej\imXk`fe i\dX`ej X years and decades to come – and one addressed by the Cham- gi`fi`kp#d\Xen_`c\dX`ekX`e`e^_`^_jkXe[Xi[jf]_p^`\e\`e gX^e\ i\^`fe cfe^ Y\]fi\ k_\ gXjj`e^ f] c\^`jcXk`fe% @e \Xicp gi\jj`e^Z\eki\j#Zlm\i`\j le`kj_flj`e^k_\]\id\ek`e^mXkj  )''*k_\ZXiYfe]ffkgi`ekf]k_\`e[ljkipnXjXjj\jj\[XjX Xe[fk_\infibgi\d`j\j% n_fc\#cXleZ_`e^k_\:_XdgX^e\:c`dXk\GcXejffeX]k\inXi[j kf[\dfejkiXk\k_\jfc`[Xi`kpn`k_]lkli\^\e\iXk`fej% Management of effluent :\ccXi_p^`\e\i\c`\jfe]i\hl\ekZc\Xe`e^#n_`Z_`eklie^\e\iX - K_XkGcXekf[Xp\eZfdgXjj\jÔm\dX`e]fZljXi\Xj#(-i\j\XiZ_ k\j\]Õl\ek$Yfie\fi^Xe`ZdXkk\i% and development programmes and more than 40 individual pro- a\Zkj\`k_\ile[\inXpfi`ek_\g`g\c`e\%K_\dX`eÔ\c[jf]XZk`fe Kf[Xp#0)g\iZ\ekf]\]Õl\ekjXe[c`hl`[Yp$gif[lZkjXi\ki\Xk\[fi are: buildings/installations; viticultural and oenological practices; gifZ\jj\[]fii\ZpZc`e^%K_\kXi^\k]fik_\]lkli\`j(''g\iZ\ek% Xe[]i\`^_kkiXejgfikXe[Ylj`e\jjkiXm\c n_`Z_i\cXk\jkfk_\ i\jgfej`Yc\gifZli\d\ekf]^ff[jXe[j\im`Z\j]ifdjfliZ\jXj Waste and by-products Zcfj\Xjgfjj`Yc\kfk_\`e[ljkipËjZ\eki\jf]jlggcp % 8ccf]k_\nXjk\Xe[Yp$gif[lZkjf]:_XdgX^e\n`e\Xe[^iXg\ gif[lZk`feXi\gifZ\jj\[]fii\ZpZc`e^% Pruning Pruning

16

Chablis training, before pruning Cordon training, before pruning

Chablis-pruned and tied-up vine Cordon-pruned and tied-up vine

Pruning commences in the month following the harvest, as soon as the leaves start to fall, and continues until mid-December. It resumes in mid-January, after the winter dormant period, continuing until late March or such time as the vine reaches the four-leaf stage (when all pruning must cease). Pruning encourages the sap to flow towards the fruit-bearing buds, favouring a good balance of vigour and produc- tivity. Pruning gives the vine its shape, avoiding tightly packed foliage so as to encourage photosynthesis and create space for air to circulate between the clusters. Pruning also regulates vine development, rejuvenating ‘leggy’ plants by hard pruning at regular intervals. Picking up of the vine shoots Pruning

17

Guyot training, before pruning Vallée de la Marne training, before pruning

Double-Guyot-pruned and tied-up vine Vallée de la Marne-pruned and tied-up vine

Double-Guyot pruning

Gile`e^ `j k_\ dfjk ]le[Xd\ekXc f] Xcc k_\ m`e\pXi[ - Vallée de la Marne pruning (exclusively reserved for kXjbj% @k `j X gli\cp dXelXc XZk`m`kp n_`Z_ i\hl`i\j X Meunier vines):cfe^gile`e^fej_fikZXe\j% jg\Z`ÔZkiX`e`e^Xe[X[`jk`eZk`m\[`gcfdX%@e:_XdgX^e\# `k_XjY\\ei\^lcXk\[j`eZ\(0*/% N_Xk\m\ik_\d\k_f[f]gile`e^#k_\Xm\iX^\dXo`dld eldY\if]]il`k`e^Yl[jg\im`e\dljkefk\oZ\\[(/g\i There are four approved pruning methods jhlXi\d\ki\f]m`e\pXi[% in Champagne: - Chablis pruning:cfe^gile`e^fecfe^ZXe\j% As pruning draws to a close in late March/early April, the - Cordon and Cordon Permanent pruning: short – or e\okkXjbÆXcjfdXelXcÆ`jkfk`\$lgk_\m`e\jY\]fi\k_\ jgliÆgile`e^#feXj`e^c\le`cXk\iXccfe^ZXe\% fej\kf]Õfn\i`e^%K_\j_ffkjXi\XkkXZ_\[kfk_\jlggfi - - Guyot pruning: long pruning on short canes which may ting wires, so avoiding unruly growth and preparing the Y\j`e^c\#[flYc\fiXjpdd\ki`Z% m`e\j]fijldd\idX`ek\eXeZ\% Summer Summer Summer maintenance maintenance 18

Budburst marks the start of seasonal growth and with it a series of tasks aimed at limiting yields and promoting good-quality fruit.

Desuckering ljlXccpkXb\jgcXZ\`ed`[$DXpXe[i\]\ijkfk_\dXelXci\dfmXc f]efe$]il`k]lcj_ffkj#\eZfliX^`e^k_\m`e\kf]fZlj`kj\e\i^`\jfek_\]il`k$ bearing shoots

At the pre-bunch closure stage when the shoots are 50 centimetres long, they dljkY\c`]k\[Xe[XkkXZ_\[kfn`i\jilee`e^jfd\*'Z\ek`d\ki\jXYfm\k_\ jlggfikn`i\j%BefneXj lifting , this operation is still done by hand but could Y\Zfd\d\Z_Xe`q\[Xjm`e\pXi[jfgkkf`ejkXccm`e\jgXZ\ij%

The next task, also manual, is trellising : separating the shoots and stapling k_\d kf n`i\j% K_`j `dgifm\j c\X] [`jki`Ylk`fe# Xccfn`e^ dXo`dld c`^_k

Desuckering Lifting Summer Summer maintenance

19

Trellising

8m`e\Y\]fi\g`eZ_`e^YXZb

g\e\kiXk`feXe[Xcjf\eZfliX^`e^X`iZ`iZlcXk`fek_Xkgi\m\ekjifk%Ki\cc`j`e^`j \jj\ek`Xc ]fi :_XdgX^e\ m`e\j j`eZ\ _`^_$[\ej`kp gcXek`e^ j`^e`ÔZXekcp `eZi\Xj\jk_\c\X]Xi\X`e[\o%K_\[\ej\c\X]ZXefgpdljkY\\m\ecp[`jki`Ylk\[ Y\kn\\ek_\m`e\j#Xe[Xcfe^k_\]lccc\e^k_Xe[_\`^_kf]\XZ_gcXek dXo` - dldjkXe[`e^_\`^_k#(%*'d\ki\j %

The shoots continue to grow throughout the summer, right up to harvest time, and must be regularly pinched back, either by hand or machine, to prevent the m`e\]ifdgif[lZ`e^]fc`X^\Xkk_\\og\ej\f]]il`k%

List of main vineyard tasks (known locally as ‘roies’) in hours per hectare

Chablis pruned vines Cordon de Royat pruned vines Total pruning 210 170 Tying up 90 60 Desuckering 40 40 Trellising 70 80 Pinching-back 110 120

Pinching back Harvesting Harvesting

20

The year 1956 saw the launch of a ripening observation network that monitors crop conditions for the accurate timing of harvests. Twice a week, just as the grapes start to change colour (‘véraison’), samples are taken from some 450 control plots spread throughout the Champagne area. The selected clusters are then checked for rate of colour change; average weight; estimated sugar and total acidity content; and incidence of botrytis.

K_\j\Ôe[`e^j`e[`ZXk\k_\[\^i\\f]^iXg\i`g\e\jjYpmXi`\kpXe[YpZil#Xe[ k_\:@M:j\kjg`Zb`e^[Xk\jXZZfi[`e^cp%K_\Ôe[`e^jXcjfj\im\kf[\k\id`e\k_\ hlXek`kpf]^iXg\jg\i_\ZkXi\k_Xkn`ccY\Xggifm\[]fi8F:gif[lZk`fe Xjg\i @E8Fi\^lcXk`fej 2Xe[k_\d`e`dldi\hl`i\[XcZf_fcZfek\ekYpmfcld\%

@e^ff[p\Xij#gXikf]k_\ZifgdXpY\j\kXj`[\XjXgi\ZXlk`feX^X`ejk]lkli\ Zifg]X`cli\ [l\kf]ifjk#_X`c#\kZ fiX[`jXggf`ek`e^m`ekX^\%DXeX^`e^k_\j\ i\j\im\jkfZbj befneXjk_\Êi„j\im\`e[`m`[l\cc\Ë `jk_\i\jgfej`Y`c`kpf] k_\:@M:%

Harvesting is entirely manual, but may be preceded by mechanical thinning to dXb\c`]\\Xj`\i]fik_\g`Zb\ij%8F:i\^lcXk`fejjg\Z`]pn_fc\Zcljk\igi\jj`e^# \]]\Zk`m\cpilc`e^flkk_\lj\f]d\Z_Xe`ZXc^iXg\_Xim\jk\ijXjn\befnk_\d

A team of pickers Harvesting

21

8gfik\if]g`Zb`e^YXjb\kj kf[Xp%

K_\ e\ncp g`Zb\[ ^iXg\j Xi\ kiXej]\ii\[ kf g\i]fiXk\[ Y`ej n`k_ X dXo`dld ZXgXZ`kpf],'b`cfj%;iX`eX^\j_fc\jfek_\j`[\jXe[Yfkkfdf]k_\Y`ejb\\g X`iZ`iZlcXk`e^Xifle[k_\^iXg\jXe[[iX`ef]]Xepal`Z\cfjk`ek_\Zflij\f] _Xe[c`e^%Jfd\(#0''gi\jj`e^Z\eki\j#[`jki`Ylk\[XZifjjk_\8F:i\^`fe#b\\g kiXej`kk`d\jkfXd`e`dld%

A 50 kilo bin

The grapes on the way to the press Pressing Pressing

22

Pressing centres are very strictly regulated, in line with more than 20 approval criteria that were introduced in 1987. These cover pressing and capacity; daily press loads; type of press used; pressing and sulphuring; and hygiene standards.

FeXii`mXcXkk_\gi\jj`e^Z\eki\#\XZ_[\c`m\ipf]^iXg\j`jn\`^_\[Xe[i\Zfi - [\[%

K_\gif[lZk`fef]n_`k\n`e\]ifdgi\[fd`eXekcpYcXZb$jb`ee\[^iXg\j knf$ k_`i[jf]k_\_Xim\jk [\g\e[jfeÔm\YXj`Zgi`eZ`gc\j1gi\jj`e^`dd\[`Xk\cpX]k\i g`Zb`e^2n_fc\Zcljk\igi\jj`e^2X^\ekc\#^iX[lXc`eZi\Xj\`egi\jjli\2cfnal`Z\ \okiXZk`fe2Xe[]iXZk`feXk`fe k_\Zc\Xi\i#gli\ial`Z\jk_XkXi\[iXnef]]Xkk_\ Y\^`ee`e^f]gi\jj`e^Xi\j\gXiXk\[]ifdk_fj\gif[lZ\[Xkk_\\e[ %

Al`Z\\okiXZk`fe`jjki`Zkcpc`d`k\[kf),%,_\Zkfc`ki\jg\i+#'''b^dXiZ#j\gX - iXk`e^k_\Ôijkgi\jj`e^al`Z\ k_\Zlm„\#i\gi\j\ek`e^)'%,_c ]ifdk_\j\Zfe[ k_\kX`cc\#i\gi\j\ek`e^,_c %

Traditional press loading Pressing

23

Press handlers at work

Zfcfli`e^X^\ekj%KX`cc\dljkjgif[lZ\`ek\ej\cpXifdXk`Zn`e\jÆ]il`k`\i`e pflk_k_Xek_fj\dX[\]ifdk_\Zlm„\Ylkc\jjX^\$nfik_p%

:_XdgX^e\ gi\jj\j iXe^\ `e ZXgXZ`kp ]ifd )#''' kf ()#''' b`cfj f] n_fc\ ^iXg\j%DXelXccpfg\iXk\[#m\ik`ZXcYXjb\kgi\jj\jn\i\jkXe[Xi[k_ifl^_flk k_\i\^`felek`ck_\cXk\(0/'j#Xe[jk`ccXZZflek]fijfd\)/f]gcXek%K_\ `ekif[lZk`fe f] d\Z_Xe`ZXc d\k_f[j f] Êi\kifljj\Ë k_\ Yi\Xb`e^$lg f] k_\ gi\jj ZXb\ Y\kn\\e ZpZc\j  k_\e c\[ kf k_\ `eZi\Xj`e^ lj\ f] _fi`qfekXc presses with a lateral membrane, angled pressing plates and a rotating press A chardonnay berry gXe% ?fi`qfekXc gi\jj\j k_\j\ [Xpj Xi\ Zfdglk\i$Zfekifcc\[# n`k_ X dlck`$ ]leZk`fefg\iXk`e^jpjk\d%

@]ifj„:_XdgX^e\`jdX[\m`XdXZ\iXk`fe#[\jk\dd\[YcXZb$jb`ee\[^iXg\jXi\ c\]kkfdXZ\iXk\`eXkXeblek`ck_\[\j`i\[Zfcfli`jXZ_`\m\[ )+$.)_flij %

9`enXj_`e^`jZfdglcjfipX]k\i\XZ_j\gXiXk\gi\jjcfX[%8jgXikf]k_\`iZfd - d`kd\ekkfjljkX`eXYc\m`k`Zlckli\#k_\Xlk_fi`k`\j`e:_XdgX^e\jg\Z`]pd\k_f[j ]fik_\gifg\idXeX^\d\ekf]gi\jj`e^nXjk\gif[lZkj%Jfc`[i\j`[l\jc\]kfm\i A pinot noir berry X]k\igi\jj`e^ k_\ÊX`^e\jË Xi\j\ek]fi[`jk`ccXk`fe#Xe[n`e\ipnXjk\nXk\i`j i\ZpZc\[Xe[ki\Xk\[jfXjkfXmf`[Xepi`jbf]\em`ifed\ekXcgfcclk`fe%

LATERAL MEMBRANE PRESSURE Vertical loading Pressing stage ROTATING CAGE LATERAL MEMBRANE

Breaking up of the marc unloading (retrousse) HATCH

ROTATING CAGE JUICE COLLECTOR

TWO LOADING HATCHES INTERNAL DRAINS INTERNAL DRAINS Horizontal press with lateral membrane – how it works Clarification (debourbage) Clarification Clarification

24 (debourbage)

Sulphuring

8jk_\al`Z\`j\okiXZk\[#`kÕfnj`ekffg\ekXebj befnecfZXccpXjÊY\cfejË  n_\i\`k`jki\Xk\[n`k_jlcg_`k\j jlcg_li[`fo`[\fiJF) Xkk_\iXk\f]-$('^&_c [\g\e[`e^fek_\mXi`\kXc#k_\Zfe[`k`fef]k_\^iXg\jXe[k_\dljkj`ehl\j - k`fe n_\k_\iZlm„\fikX`cc\ %

Jlcg_`k\jXi\lj\[XjXgi\j\imXk`m\%K_\`iXek`j\gk`Zgifg\ik`\j_\cgkf`e_`Y`k k_\^ifnk_f]dflc[jXe[le]i`\e[cp`e[`^\efljYXZk\i`X%K_\`iXek`fo`[Xek XZk`fejX]\^lXi[jk_\g_pj`ZfZ_\d`ZXcXe[j\ejfiphlXc`kpf]n`e\j%

Clarification (débourbage)

;„YfliYX^\`jk_\j\kkc`e^f]k_\]i\j_cpgi\jj\[^iXg\al`Z\gi`fikf]\id\ekXk`fe# jfXjkfgif[lZ\n`e\jn`k_k_\gli\jk\ogi\jj`fef]]il`k%

@ek_\Ôijk_flij#k_`jgif[lZ\jXZcfl[`e\jj[l\kf\eqpd\jk_XkXi\\`k_\i eXkliXccpgi\j\ek`ek_\al`Z\fiX[[\[%K_\ÕfZZlcXk\[dXkk\i]fidjXj\[`d\ek Xkk_\Yfkkfdf]k_\mXkXcfe^n`k_fk_\igXik`Zc\jjljg\e[\[`ek_\al`Z\ gXik` - Zc\jf]^iXg\jb`e#j\\[j#\kZ %8]k\i()$)+_flij#k_\Zc\Xial`Z\`j[iXnef]]Xe[ ZcXi`Ô\[YpÔe`e^%K_\j\[`d\ekjfiÊYfliY\jË ($+g\iZ\ekf]k_\mfcld\ Xi\ i\Zfi[\[Xe[j\ekkfk_\[`jk`cc\ip%

K_\ZcXi`Ô\[dljkjXi\kiXej]\ii\[kfk_\ÊZlm\i`\Ë k_\iffdZfekX`e`e^k_\ ]\id\ek`e^mXkj kfZfdd\eZ\k_\ÔijkjkX^\jf]]\id\ekXk`fe%

Control of fermentation rification alcoholic alcoholic fermentation

fermentation 25

A fermentation cellar

Alcoholic fermentation

8]\ngif[lZ\ijjk`cc]\id\ekk_\`in`e\j`efXb ZXjbj#klej#\kZ Ylkdfjk gi\]\ik_\idfjkXk`ZXccpZfekifcc\[jkX`ec\jj$jk\\cmXkj%:XgXZ`kpiXe^\j]ifd), kfj\m\iXc(''_\Zkfc`ki\jXe[k_\Zfek\ekf]\XZ_mXk`jZXi\]lccpcXY\cc\[Yp Zil#gi\jj`e^]iXZk`fe#mXi`\kXcXe[m`ekX^\%

:_XgkXc`jXk`feÆk_\X[[`k`fef]jl^Xikfk_\]\id\ek`e^dljkÆ`jlj\[Xj e\Z\jjXipkfgif[lZ\Xn`e\n`k_Xd`e`dldXcZf_fcc\m\cf]((%

Selected yeasts ( saccharomyces cerevisiae Xi\XcjfX[[\[#\`k_\i`ec`hl`[]fid fiXjX[i`\[XZk`m\p\Xjk#kf]XZ`c`kXk\k_\Zfekifcf]]\id\ekXk`fe%K_\pnfib YpZfejld`e^dfjkf]k_\jl^Xi`ek_\^iXg\j#\oZi\k`e^ZXiYfe[`fo`[\Xe[ XcZf_fc`ek_\gifZ\jj%K_\pXcjfi\c\Xj\XcXi^\eldY\if]dfc\Zlc\j jlg\i`fi XcZf_fcjXe[\jk\ij k_Xk_Xm\XdXafi\]]\Zkfek_\XifdXjXe[ÕXmflij`e k_\n`e\%K_\gifZ\jj`j_`^_cpZfdgc\o#ljlXccpcXjk`e^XYflkX]fike`^_kXe[ ZXlj`e^Xe\ofk_\id`Zi\XZk`fek_XkdljkY\ZXi\]lccpZfekifcc\[%K\dg\iXkli\j _`^_\ik_Xe(/$)'—:`eZi\Xj\k_\i`jbf]ÕXmfli\mXgfiXk`feXe[dXpZXlj\k_\ ]\id\ekXk`fekfÊjk`ZbË ^i`e[kfX_Xck %

Progress is monitored on a daily basis, checking the temperature and overall Zfe[`k`fef]k_\]\id\ekXk`fe%

Casks in a Champagne cellar Malolactic Malolactic Malolactic Clarification fermentation (MLF) 26 fermentation (MLF) Clarification

Malolactic fermentation (MLF)

8]k\i gi`dXip ]\id\ekXk`fe dXp Zfd\ dXcfcXZk`Z ]\id\ekXk`fe DC= # `e n_`Z_ malic acid is broken down into lactic acid by Oenococcus oeni YXZk\i`X%DC=Xcjf ^\e\iXk\jYp$gif[lZkjk_Xkdf[`]pk_\fi^Xefc\gk`ZgifÔc\f]k_\n`e\#dX`ecpYp cfn\i`e^`kjXggXi\ekXZ`[`kp%:_XdgX^e\n`e\dXb\ijXi\^\e\iXccp`e]Xmflif] DC=#n`k_k_\\oZ\gk`fef]X]\ngif[lZ\ijn_fgi\]\ikfXmf`[`kXckf^\k_\i%Jfd\ kXb\XgiX^dXk`Zm`\n#Zfej`[\i`e^`ke\Z\jjXip]fijfd\n`e\jYlkefk]fifk_\ij%

K_\DC=gifZ\jj`jb`Zb$jkXik\[Ypjkfi`e^k_\n`e\jXkXZfejkXekk\dg\iXkli\f] Xifle[(/—:#Xe[`efZlcXk`e^k_\dn`k_j\c\Zk\[jkiX`ejf]cpfg_`c`q\[YXZk\i`X% 8Z`[Zfek\ek`jZfek`elfljcpdfe`kfi\[kfXjj\jjk_\iXk\f]]\id\ekXk`fe#n_`Z_ `jljlXccpZfdgc\k\n`k_`e+$-n\\bj%K_\n`e\jXi\k_\e[iXnef]]Xe[ZcXi`Ô\[%

Clarification :cXi`ÔZXk`fe`eZcl[\jÔe`e^#Ôck\i`e^ lj`e^ b`\j\c^l_i ZcXp# Ôck\i$gX[j# plates, membranes or cartridges) Xe[Z\eki`]l^`e^%K_`j\c`d`eXk\jk_\ lees and other impurities, producing clear, natural base wines (known locally as ‘vins clairs’) that are ready ]fiYc\e[`e^`ekfXÊZlm„\Ë cfZXck\id ]fi X Yc\e[\[ :_XdgX^e\ % 9Xj\ n`e\j Xi\ ZcXjj`Ô\[ Yp mXi`\kXc# vintage, vineyard (or sometimes the individual vineyard plot) and pressing ]iXZk`fe n_\k_\iÊZlm„\ËfiÊkX`cc\Ë % Malolactic Blending Blending

27

A ‘vins clairs’ tasting

Assemblage is the art of blending wines from different grapes, vineyards and vintages, so as to produce a wine that is greater than the sum of its parts. The aim of the cellar master or winegrower who orchestrates the blend is a unique Cham- pagne that, vintage after vintage, expresses and perpetuates the particular vision and style of each individual producer.

9c\e[jdXpZfdY`e\n`e\j]ifdXn_fc\iXe^\f]m`e\pXi[j#Yi`e^`e^kf^\k_\i [`]]\i\ekm`ekX^\jXe[[`]]\i\ekmXi`\kXcjÆX_`^_cpZi\Xk`m\\o\iZ`j\k_Xki\c`\j \ek`i\cp fe k_\ n`e\dXb\iËj j\ejfip d\dfip Xe[ \og\i`\eZ\ f] k\iif`i Xe[ kXjk`e^%K_\i\XcZ_Xcc\e^\`jkfgi\[`Zkk_\[\m\cfgd\ekf]Xn`e\fm\ik`d\# Y\Xi`e^`ed`e[k_\[\Z`j`m\`eÕl\eZ\f]j\Zfe[]\id\ekXk`feXe[dXkliXk`fe fec\\j]fccfn`e^Yc\e[`e^%

K_\ n`e\dXb\i dljk Ôijk [\Z`[\ n_Xk kpg\ f] n`e\ kf Zi\Xk\# n_\k_\i X non-vintage wine (using reserve wines); a vintage wine that captures the le`hl\ jkpc\ f] Xe \oZ\gk`feXc p\Xi2 Yc\e[\[ ifj„ ZfekX`e`e^ X gifgfik`fe f]i\[jk`ccn`e\]ifd:_XdgX^e\ 2YcXeZ[\YcXeZj dX[\fecp]ifdn_`k\$ jb`ee\[ ^iXg\j 2 YcXeZ [\ ef`ij dX[\ fecp ]ifd YcXZb$jb`ee\[ ^iXg\j 2 fi j`e^c\$m`e\pXi[:_XdgX^e\ ]ifdXj`e^c\m`ccX^\ %

FeZ\Yc\e[`e^`jZfdgc\k\#k_\n`e\dljkY\jkXY`c`q\[`egi\gXiXk`fe]fiYfkkc`e^ gXik`ZlcXicp`dgfikXek]fijgXibc`e^n`e\j %K_`j`j[fe\YpZ_`cc`e^#n_`Z_dXp Y\gifcfe^\[ $+—:]fiXn\\b #j_fik d\Xen_`c\jk`ii`e^k_\n`e\jXe[`e[lZ`e^ ZipjkXcc`qXk`fe fiZfek`elflj%K_\X`df]jkXY`c`jXk`fe`jkf`e[lZ\ZipjkXcc`jXk`fe f]kXikXi`ZjXckjk_\e\c`d`eXk\k_\d#jfgi\m\ek`e^ZipjkXc]fidXk`fe`ek_\Yfkkc\[ n`e\%JkXY`c`jXk`fe`j]fccfn\[Ypi\e\n\[ZcXi`ÔZXk`fe% Bottling Bottling Bottling and second and second fermentation

28

Bottle fermentation transforms still wine to sparkling wine – hence the name ‘prise de mousse’, literally ‘capturing the sparkle’.

K_\n`e\dXb\ib`Zb$jkXikjk_\\]]\im\jZ\eZ\YpX[[`e^Xjn\\kjfclk`febefne Xjk_\Êc`hl\li[\k`iX^\ËÆXd`okli\f]jk`ccn`e\]ifd:_XdgX^e\n`k_ZXe\fi Y\\kjl^Xi )'$)+^iXdj&c`ki\#]fiXi`j\`egi\jjli\Ypk_\\e[f]]\id\ekXk`fe f]lgkfj`oYXij #gcljj\c\Zk\[#XZZc`dXk`q\[p\XjkZlckli\jXe[X[[`k`m\jk_Xk Xjj`jkk_\Êi\dlX^\ËgifZ\jj i`[[c`e^ %K_\j\Zfej`jkf]Y\ekfe`k\fiY\ekfe`k\$ alginate that make the sediment heavier, encouraging it to slide down to the e\Zbf]k_\Yfkkc\#e\Xik_\Zfib%

=ifd_Xc]$Yfkkc\kfa\ifYfXd#k_\ilc\jf]k_\:_XdgX^e\Xgg\ccXk`fe]fiY`[ k_\kiXej]\ii`e^f]k_\e\ncp\]]\im\jZ\ekn`e\]ifdfe\Yfkkc\kfXefk_\i%8cc Champagne wines must be sold in the bottle in which they underwent their

K_\[`]]\i\ekYfkkc\j`q\j#]ifdÊhlXikËkfEXYlZ_f[fefjfi (,c`ki\j Bottling and second Bottling and second and second fermentation fermentation 29

Traditional bottling machine

j\Zfe[]\id\ekXk`fe%K_\Yfkkc\jlj\[dljkY\dX[\f]jkife^^cXjj#`eXZZfi[XeZ\n`k_jki`Zkjg\Z`ÔZXk`feji\cXk`e^kf gi\jjli\i\j`jkXeZ\Xe[^\e\iXc[liXY`c`kp%K_\pdljkY\ZXgXYc\f]n`k_jkXe[`e^_`^_gi\jjli\Xe[i\g\Xk\[_Xe[c`e^%

FeZ\Ôcc\[#k_\Yfkkc\jXi\_\id\k`ZXccpj\Xc\[n`k_Xgfcp\k_pc\e\jkfgg\ibefneXjXÊY`[lc\Ë#n_`Z_`j_\c[`egcXZ\Yp XZifneZXg%8]\ngif[lZ\ijjk`cclj\Zfib]fik_\Êk`iX^\Ë Yfkkc`e^ jkfgg\i%K_\Yfkkc\jXi\k_\ekiXej]\ii\[kfk_\Z\ccXi Xe[jkXZb\[ÊjlicXkk\jË1_fi`qfekXccp#ifnlgfeifn#ljlXccp`ejk\\cZX^\j%

@ej`[\k_\Yfkkc\#k_\n`e\le[\i^f\jXj\Zfe[]\id\ekXk`fek_XkZfek`el\j]fi-$/n\\bj%K_\p\XjkjZfejld\k_\ jl^Xi#kiXej]fid`e^`kkfXcZf_fcXe[ZXiYfe[`fo`[\#i\c\Xj`e^\jk\ijXe[fk_\ijlg\i`fiXcZf_fcjk_XkZfeki`Ylk\kfk_\ n`e\Ëjj\ejfipgifÔc\%

Bottles stacked ‘sur lattes’ Maturation

Maturation on lees on lees 30

Deep inside the cellar, protected from the light and kept at a constant temperature of around 12°C, the bottles embark on a long period of maturation – an all-important process of aging that is a major feature of Champagne winemaking.

8ZZfi[`e^kfk_\ilc\jf]k_\:_XdgX^e\Xgg\ccXk`fe#n`e\jdXpefkY\Yfkkc\[ lek`ck_\(jkf]AXelXip]fccfn`e^k_\_Xim\jk%K_\pdljkk_\ejg\e[Xd`e`dld f](,dfek_jdXkli`e^`ek_\gif[lZ\iËjZ\ccXij#f]n_`Z_()dfek_j`jdXkliX - k`fefec\\j%M`ekX^\Zlm„\jXi\dXkli\[]fiXkc\Xjkk_i\\p\Xij%@egiXZk`Z\#dfjk :_XdgX^e\n`e\jXi\Z\ccXi\[]fiZfej`[\iXYcpcfe^\ik_Xek_`j%

K_\c\\jdX`ecpZfej`jkf]p\Xjkjk_Xk_Xm\dlck`gc`\[`ek_\Yfkkc\Xe[]fid\[X [\gfj`k%9pk_\\e[f]j\Zfe[]\id\ekXk`fe#Xcck_\jl^Xij_Xm\Y\\eZfejld\[ Xe[k_\p\Xjkj^iX[lXccp[`\Xe[[\Zfdgfj\%K_\gifZ\jj`jbefneXjXlkfcpj`j# i\c\Xj`e^dfc\Zlc\jk_XkXi\jcfncpkiXej]fid\[Xjk_\p`ek\iXZkn`k_k_fj\`e k_\n`e\%

Bottles stacked ‘sur lattes’ Chalk pit cellar (crayère) Maturation Maturation on lees 31

K_\jg\Z`Xck`iX^\jkfgg\id\Xen_`c\Xccfnjd`elk\hlXek`k`\jf]fop^\ekf\ek\ik_\Yfkkc\Xe[jdXccXdflekjf]ZXiYfe [`fo`[\kf\jZXg\$`efk_\infi[j#k_\j\Xc`jefkg\i]\ZkcpX`ik`^_k%K_\Z_f`Z\f]jkfgg\i`jZi`k`ZXc`e[\k\id`e`e^k_\jg\\[ f]k_\:_XdgX^e\Ëj[\m\cfgd\ek%

K_\j\knfgifZ\jj\jÆXlkfcpj`jXe[jcfnfo`[Xk`fek_ifl^_k_\jkfgg\iÆfZZlij`dlckXe\fljcp`ek_\Zflij\f]dXkliXk`fe fec\\j%Kf^\k_\ik_\p\eZfliX^\k_\[\m\cfgd\ekf]k\ik`XipXifdXj#jcfncpkiXej]fid`e^k_\ÕfiXc#]il`kpefk\jf]pfle^ :_XdgX^e\n`e\j`ekfk_\i`g\i#aXdd`\i#elkk`\iXifdXjk_XkXi\kpg`ZXcf]dfi\dXkli\n`e\j%M\ipfc[n`e\j_Xm\X [`jk`eZk`m\cpkfXjkpYflhl\k#n`k_XZ_XiXZk\i`jk`Zn_`]]f][Xdg]fi\jkÕffi%

Riddling Riddling

32

Towards the end of their long resting period, the bottles must be moved and rotated to loosen the deposit left by the second fermentation and persuade it to collect in the neck of the bottle, near the stopper. This process known as ‘remuage’ causes the sediment to slide downwards in preparation for disgorgement (the ejecting of the sediment under pressure).

For that to happen, the bottles are progressively tilted neck-down (‘sur pointe’) Xe[ifkXk\[YpjdXcc`eZi\d\ekj#ZcfZbn`j\Xe[Xek`$ZcfZbn`j\%8jk_\Xe^c\f] k`ck`eZi\Xj\j#k_\]fiZ\jf]^iXm`kp[i`m\k_\j\[`d\ek`ekfk_\e\Zb%

I\dlX^\ `j jk`cc [fe\ dXelXccp `e jfd\ ZXj\j% 8 gif]\jj`feXc Êi\dl\liË (bottle turner) can handle roughly 40,000 bottles a day, placing the bottles e\Zb[fne`eXnff[\eÊglg`ki\Ë 8$]iXd\$j_Xg\[i`[[c`e^iXZb %8lkfdXk\[ remuage is now much more common, using computer-controlled palettes k_XkZXegifZ\jj,''Yfkkc\j`eXj`e^c\fg\iXk`fe#kXb`e^X]iXZk`fef]k_\ k`d\ fe\n\\b`ejk\X[f]j`o Xkef\og\ej\kfhlXc`kp%

Remuage completed, the bottles are stacked neck-down (‘en masse’), ready ]fi[`j^fi^\d\ek%

Riddling by hand Disgorgement Disgorgement

33

Bottles on wooden riddling racks

The purpose of disgorgement is to eject the sediment that has collected in the neck of the bottle during remuage.

9fkkc\jn`k_d\kXcZXgjXi\^\e\iXccp[`j^fi^\[YpdXZ_`e\%K_\e\Zbf]k_\ Yfkkc\`jgcle^\[`ekfXi\]i`^\iXk`e^jfclk`feXkXggifo`dXk\cp$).—:#k_\ek_\ ZXg`jhl`Zbcpi\dfm\[#\og\cc`e^k_\]ifq\egcl^f]j\[`d\ekn`k_d`e`dld cfjjf]n`e\Xe[gi\jjli\%I\dfm`e^k_\ZXgki`^^\ijXj_fik#j_Xig`ekXb\f]X`i k_Xkn`cc_Xm\Xj`^e`ÔZXek`dgXZkfeXifdX[\m\cfgd\ek%

CXi^\Yfkkc\jXe[Z\ikX`egXik`ZlcXiZlm„\jXi\jk`cc[`j^fi^\[Yp_Xe[ Ê~cX volée’), holding the bottle neck down, opening it and then quickly tilting it back Riddling by gyropalette lgnXi[jjfk_Xkfecp\efl^_n`e\`j]fiZ\[flkkfkXb\k_\j\[`d\ekn`k_`k%

Disgorgement by hand

;\gfj`k`ek_\Yfkkc\Y\]fi\i`[[c`e^ Dosage Dosage

34

‘Dosage’ is the addition of a small quantity of ‘liqueur de dosage’, also known as the ‘liqueur d’expédition’. Dosage liqueur is a mixture of cane sugar and wine, either the same wine as the bottle holds or a reserve wine – it all depends on the style of Champagne that the winemaker has in mind. Reserve wines, set aside in casks, barrels or even magnums, add an extra dimension to the winemaker’s repertory of flavours.

;fjX^\c`hl\li^\e\iXccpZfekX`ej,''$.,'^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\%K_\hlXe - k`kpf][fjX^\c`hl\li#Xe[k_\i\]fi\jl^XiZfek\ek`ek_\Ôe`j_\[n`e\#mXi`\j XZZfi[`e^kfk_\jkpc\f]:_XdgX^e\1 › doux   dfi\k_Xe,'^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › demi-sec   *)$,'^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › sec   (.$*)^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › extra dry   ()$(.^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › brut   c\jjk_Xe()^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › extra brut   c\jjk_Xe-^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\ › brut nature , pas dosé or dosage zéro c\jjk_Xe*^iXdjf]jl^Xig\ic`ki\Xe[ efX[[\[jl^Xi%

Dosage Final corking - shaking a shaking and shaking and Final corking, Final corking, corkin final inspection shaking and final inspection 35 final inspection

Champagne stamped on corks

The bottle is sent for K_\Zfib`jjhl\\q\[`ekfk_\e\Zbf] the bottle, covered with a protective corking immediately metal cap (capsule), then held in place after dosage. Today’s n`k_Xn`i\ZX^\ Êdlj\c\kË % corks have a base The bottle is then shaken vigorously (a section made of process known as ‘poignettage’) so that reconstituted cork k_\ [fjX^\ c`hl\li dXii`\j g\i]\Zkcp granules, topped by n`k_k_\n`e\%K_\cXjkgifZ\[li\gi`fi kf ]lik_\i Z\ccXi`e^ `e gi\gXiXk`fe ]fi two slices of natural i\c\Xj\`jÊd`iX^\Ë1XÔeXcZ_\Zbfek_\ cork. The section that c`dg`[`kpf]k_\n`e\% comes into contact The new cork, like the ‘tirage’ stopper, with the wine is known [f\j Xccfn ]fi jfd\ \oZ_Xe^\ n`k_ as the mirror. The cork the outside air, which is why the wine must display the name Zfek`el\jkfX^\fm\ik_\p\Xij% of the Champagne Appellation and state the vintage where relevant.

Corking

Mixing the dosage liqueur into the wine Labelling Labelling

36

This is the final stage before shipment. The cork and wire cage are wrapped in foil that extends down the neck of the bottle to the ‘collerette’ (neck-band). A label is then placed on the front of the bottle, and sometimes on the back too, stating the following:

›K_\nfi[Ê:_XdgX^e\Ë ni`kk\e`eYfc[ % ›K_\YiXe[f]:_XdgX^e\% ›K_\kpg\f]n`e\Xj[\Ôe\[Ypi\j`[lXcjl^XiZfek\ek Yilk#[\d`$j\Z\kZ % ›G\iZ\ekX^\f]XcZf_fcYpmfcld\ mfc % ›9fkkc\ZXgXZ`kp c#Zcfidc % ›EXd\f] k_\ gif[lZ\i fi ZfdgXep eXd\# ]fccfn\[ Yp k_\ eXd\ f] k_\ Zfddle\ n_\i\ k_Xk gif[lZ\i `j i\^`jk\i\[ gclj k_\ kiX[`e^ X[[i\jj# `] [`]]\i\ek Xe[k_\Zflekipf]fi`^`e =iXeZ\ % ›K_\[Xe^\ijf]\m\ejdXccXdflekjf]XcZf_fckfk_\leYfieZ_`c[#fik_\jpdYfc ›8cc\i^\eZfek\ek \^jlcg_li[`fo`[\#jlcg_`k\j#\kZ % ›9XkZ_Zf[\ jfd\k`d\j[`jgcXp\[[`i\Zkcpfek_\Yfkkc\ % ›K_\i\^`jkiXk`feXe[Zf[\eldY\i`jjl\[Ypk_\:@M:#gi\Z\[\[Ypknf`e`k`Xcjk_Xk`e[`ZXk\k_\ZXk\^fipf]gif[lZ\i1 []ff[$Xe[$n`e\ ›Fgk`feXc`e]fidXk`fe k_\mXi`\kXcjlj\[#[Xk\f][`j^fi^\d\ek#j\ejfipZ_XiXZk\i`jk`Zj#jl^^\jk\ Z[\YcXeZj#ifj„# ›N_\i\Xggifgi`Xk\#k_\m`ekX^\Xe[jg\Z`ÔZ[\kX`cji\cXk`e^kfk_\kpg\f]Zlm„\ n_\k_\iXYcXe ›K_\>i\\e;fkjpdYfc`e[`ZXk`e^k_Xkk_\gif[lZ\i`jXd\dY\if]k_\gXZbX^`e^i\Zfm\ipjZ_\d\% :ffg„iXk\li#JI]fiJfZ`„k„[\I„ZfckXekj#E;]fiE„^fZ`Xek;`jki`Ylk\li#D8]fiDXihl\[Ë8Z_\k\li% I„ZfckXek ED]fiE„^fZ`XekDXe`glcXek#ID]fiI„ZfckXekDXe`glcXek#:D]fi:ffg„iXk`m\[\DXe`glcXk`fe#I:]fi gX`i`e^j#\kZ% YcXeZ[\ef`ij#\kZ % only) - on lees, in bottles sealed with a tirage stopper tirage a with sealed bottles in - lees, on Bottled winesaretraditionallyagedinoneoftwoways: \oZcl[\fop^\e#XkZfejkXekcfnk\dg\iXkli\jk_XkZfeki`Ylk\kfk_\n`e\Ëjcfe^\m`kp% K_\^i\Xki\j\im\n`e\jXi\X^\[fek_\`ic\\j]filgkfX[\ZX[\#jkfi\[`efXbmXkjk_Xk `e^Xe[cfe^ Y\pfe[k_Xkgf`ek% :_XdgX^e\n`e\jXi\Yl`ckkfX^\#]fi\m\i\mfcm`e^]ifdk_\dfd\ekf]Ôijk]\id\ekXk`fekfÔeXcZfib X]k\i[`j^fi^\d\ek#[fjX^\Xe[ÔeXcZfib`e^#\`k $ f]n`e\k_Xkk_\n`e\dXb\i_Xj`ed`e[% ]ifdk_Xkf]XcXk\$[`j^fi^\[n`e\%K_\kpg\f]dXkliXk`fek_\i\]fi\[\g\e[jfek_\jkpc\ K_\XifdXk`ZgifÔc\f]XdXkli\n`e\k_XknXj[`j^fi^\[\Xicp`e`kjc`]\`jhl`k\[`jk`eZk [`jki`Ylk`fe% [`jki`Ylk`fe% Xe[jkfi\[`ek_\gif[lZ\iËjZ\ccXij%JlZ_Yfkkc\j (whether natural cork or crown cap) cap) crown or cork natural (whether _\i`ek_\gif[lZ\iËjZ\ccXijfiX]k\i Xi\[`j^fi^\[X]\ndfek_jY\]fi\ Aging (required by certain countries certain by (required

37 Labelling vignerons et maisons

38

CHAMPAGNE from terroir to wine

Glossary

AIGNES: In Champagne, pressing residues (skins, grape : 8[[`k`fe f] jl^Xi kf X dljk Y\]fi\ j\\[j¿ %Jpefepdfljn`k_dXiZ% ]\id\ekXk`fe`efi[\ikf`eZi\Xj\k_\XcZf_fcZfek\ek%

CIVC: :fd`k„ `ek\igif]\jj`fee\c [l m`e [\ :_XdgX^e\% ALCOHOLIC FERMENTATION: Chemical process that, J\d`$glYc`Zfi^Xe`qXk`fen_`Z_dXeX^\jXe[[\]\e[jk_\ k_Xebjkfk_\p\Xjkj#Zfem\ikjk_\jl^Xijf]k_\dljk`ekf Zfddfe `ek\i\jkj f] k_\ :_XdgX^e\ n`e\^ifn\ij Xe[ ethyl alcohol, carbon dioxide and other elements (esters, _flj\j% jlg\i`fiXcZf_fcj `emfcm\[`ek_\[\m\cfgd\ekf]XifdXj%

CLONAL SELECTION: J\c\Zk`fe f] _\Xck_p# hlXc`kp ^iXg\ AOC: The Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée label is the mark mXi`\k`\jYXj\[fek_\Zfek`el`e^jZ`\ek`ÔZXeXcpj\jf]k_\ f]Xgif[lZkk_Xk[iXnj`kj`[\ek`kpXe[Z_XiXZk\i`jk`Zj]ifd ^ifnk_f]k_fljXe[jf]jXdgc\j[iXne]ifdk_\m`e\pXi[j% `kj^\f^iXg_`ZXcfi`^`e%

COCCOLITHOPORE: DXi`e\ g_pkfgcXebkfe% K_\ Z_Xcb AUTOLYSIS: ;\jkilZk`fef]k_\p\XjkjYpk_\`ifne\eqpd\j dfjkcpZfej`jkjf]ZXcZ`k\^iXelc\j]fid\[]ifdk_\jb\c\kXc X]k\ik_\j\Zfe[]\id\ekXk`fe% gcXk\jf]ZfZZfc`k_fgfi\j%

BELEMNITE: DfccljZ]ifdk_\D\jfqf`Z\iX%:_XdgX^e\ COULURE: =cfn\ifiY\iip[ifg% Z_Xcb`jZ_XiXZk\i`q\[Ypk_\gi\j\eZ\f]Y\c\de`k\]fjj`cj%

CRU: In Champagne, a « cru » is synonymous with « wine BELON: @e:_XdgX^e\#fg\ekXebn_\i\k_\al`Z\Õfnj m`ccX^\¾% flkf]k_\gi\jj%

CUVÉE: Knfd\Xe`e^j% BOTTLES:  :_XdgX^e\ `j jfc[ `e [`]]\i\ek Yfkkc\ j`q\j 1 1. K_\Ôijk)#','c`ki\jf]al`Z\\okiXZk\[]ifdXdXiZf] hlXik\i Yfkkc\ )' Zc # _Xc]$Yfkkc\ *.#, Zc # Yfkkc\ ., Zc # +#'''b`cfjf]^iXg\j%2. 8gi\Z`j\Yc\e[f]j\m\iXcYXj\ dX^eld (#,c`ki\ #a\ifYfXd *c`ki\j #d\k_lj\cX_ -c`ki\j # n`e\j% salmanazar (9 litres), balthazar (12 litres), nebuchadnezzar (,c`ki\j % DESUCKERING:  DXelXc i\dfmXc f] efe$]il`k]lc j_ffkj ]ifdm`e\j% BUDBURST: Fg\e`e^f]k_\m`e\Yl[j`ejgi`e^% Glossary

39

DOWNY MILDEW: =le^Xc[`j\Xj\f]m`e\j% MARC: Knfd\Xe`e^j% 1. @e:_XdgX^e\#le`kf]d\Xjli\ lj\[ ]fi gi\jj`e^% @k Zfii\jgfe[j kf +#''' b^ f] ^iXg\j 2. Gi\jj`e^i\j`[l\j jb`ej#^iXg\j\\[j¿ % ESTERS: Chemical elements obtained when acid reacts n`k_XcZf_fc%K_\pZfeki`Ylk\kf[\m\cfgk_\XifdXj`e Xn`e\% MILLERANDAGE: =fidXk`fef]jklek\[#j\\[c\jjY\ii`\j%

FINING:  GifZ\jj f] ZcXi`ÔZXk`fe f] X n`e\ Yp X[[`e^ X MINERAL: :_XiXZk\i`q\jXn_fc\iXe^\f]XifdXji\d`e`j - substance which carries the particles in suspension to the Z\ekf]Z\ikX`ed`e\iXcj Z_Xcb#jXe[jkfe\¿ % Yfkkfdf]k_\ZfekX`e\i%

MUST: >iXg\al`Z\% GRAFTING: @dgcXek`e^f]XjZ`fefekfXefk_\im`e\ZXe\ (stock) which serves as a root system resistant to phyl- cfo\iX% OÏDIUM – POWDERY MILDEW: =le^Xc[`j\Xj\f]m`e\j%

INDIVIDUAL RESERVE:  K_\ :_XdgX^e\ gif]\jj`fe PHOTOSYNTHESIS: The process by which green plants has agreed to create a compulsory individual reserve, jpek_\j`j\fi^Xe`ZdXkk\i#lj`e^k_\\e\i^p]ifdjlec`^_k% Zfekifcc\[ Yp k_\ :@M:% 8cc k_\ gif[lZ\ij Xi\ Zfd - mitted to creating this reserve in years described as m`ekX^\jf]\oZ\cc\ekhlXc`kp%@k`jc`d`k\[kf/#'''b^& RETROUSSE: K_\Yi\Xb`e^$lgf]k_\gi\jjZXb\Y\kn\\e _X Xe[ \eXYc\j k_\ :_Xdg\ef`j kf jXk`j]p ^ifn`e^ \XZ_gi\jj`e^% [\dXe[fikfZfdg\ejXk\]fijdXccm`ekX^\j%

TAILLE: K_\ ,'' c`ki\j f] dljk \okiXZk\[ X]k\i k_\ Zlm„\ KIESELGUHR: D`e\iXcdX[\f]glcm\i`q\[j`c`ZXlj\[]fi [li`e^k_\gi\jj`e^f]XdXiZ% Ôck\i`e^k_\n`e\%

TERTIARY AROMAS: 8ifdXj n_`Z_ [\m\cfg X]k\i k_\ LEES: K_\c\\jZfej`jkdX`ecpf][\X[p\Xjkj#n_`Z_j\kkc\ ]\id\ekXk`fej#[li`e^dXkliXk`feXe[X^\`e^% XjXj\[`d\ekXkk_\Yfkkfdf]k_\mXkXe[Xcjf`ek_\Yfkkc\ ]fccfn`e^j\Zfe[Xip]\id\ekXk`fe% TIRAGE: 9fkkc`e^%

LIQUEUR DE TIRAGE: 8jfclk`fef]p\Xjkj#jl^XiXe[n`e\ k_Xk`jX[[\[kfk_\Zlm\\kfki`^^\ik_\j\Zfe[]\id\ekX - k`fe`ek_\Yfkkc\%

LIQUEUR D’EXPEDITION: 8 jfclk`fe f] jk`cc n`e\ ]ifd Champagne and cane sugar that is added to Champagne X]k\i [`j^fi^\d\ek% K_\ hlXek`kp f] jl^Xi X[[\[ `j n_Xk [\k\id`e\jk_\kpg\f]n`e\ Yilk#j\Z#[\d`$j\Z#\kZ%

MALOLACTIC FERMENTATION: A biochemical, naturally- fZZlii`e^gifZ\jjk_XkkiXej]fidjdXc`ZXZ`[`ekfcXZk`ZXZ`[ k_ifl^_k_\XZk`fef]cXZk`ZYXZk\i`X% ommer avec modération.

vignerons et maisons L'abus d'alcool est dangereux pour la santé. A cons

comité interprofessionnel du vin de champagne

5, rue Henri-Martin - BP 135 51204 EPERNAY Cedex - France

K„c%"** ' *)-,((0*'$=Xo"** ' *)-,,(0.0 `e]f7Z_XdgX^e\%]i$nnn%Z_XdgX^e\%]i www.englishwineproducers.com

THE HISTORY OF ENGLISH WINE PRODUCTION

Pre Roman Britain

Whether or not vines were grown and wine made in Britain before the arrival of the Romans is open to debate as there are no reliable records pointing one way or the other. Wine amphorae, dating from before the Roman conquest, have been discovered on sites in southern England, which could indicate that wine drinking was prevalent. This was probably adopted by the Belgae, who had established themselves in the east and south of Britain prior to the Roman invasion, and who had a liking for wine. The native Celts seem to have preferred beer and , which used local indigenous ingredients. Archaeological discoveries from that time include a 4' high Roman amphora and a silver wine cup, both recovered from the British tombs of Belgic Chieftains of the 1st Century BC. Strong trading links with France and Italy allowed wine to be imported relatively easily and it would therefore seem unlikely that there was any need to establish vineyards in this country.

Roman Britain

It is generally agreed that the Romans introduced the vine to Britain. It has also been inferred that the climate in Britain at that time was warmer. At the end of the first century AD, however, the writer Tacitus declared that our climate was “objectionable”, and not at all suitable for growing vines, which could suggest that someone had at least tried to establish vines, even if they had been unsuccessful.

The Romans liked their wine - whether home grown or imported. After invading Britain in AD 43, wine drinking became more commonplace and whenever Roman villas, houses and garrisons have been excavated, there is nearly always archaeological evidence of wine amphorae and drinking cups, and occasionally grape pips and stems of bunches of grapes.

Recent archaeological investigations in Northamptonshire have uncovered evidence to suggest that vineyards were established on a commercial scale during the Roman occupation. Initial surveys at a 35- hectare Romano-British site at Wollaston in the Nene Valley (near Wellingborough), has revealed deposits of grape vine pollen dating from this time

By the time the Romans began to leave at the end of the fourth century, Christianity became more widespread and wine drinking, playing as it did an important part in Christian ceremonies, was more accepted. Whether this was of local or imported wine, it is hard to say. If there were vineyards, then they were undoubtedly attached to religious institutions such as monasteries.

The Dark Ages followed the Romans. Invasions by the Jutes, the Angles and the Saxons destroyed much of the limited civilisation that the Romans had established during their 300 years of occupation. These warring tribes neither had the time nor the inclination to settle down and set up vineyards, and whatever vineyards there had been undoubtedly became neglected. The early Christians, fleeing from these tribal disturbances, retreated to the corners of these islands, in many cases settling in areas that were unsuitable for vineyards.

With the spread of Christianity in the sixth century to the south and east of the county, old skills were revived and there is some evidence that vineyards were established. However, trade with mainland Europe also increased, including that in wine, which is well documented, and vinegrowing in this country would therefore have been limited.

The Viking invasion in the late eighth century destroyed many monasteries and with that once again vinegrowing and winemaking skills were lost.

King Alfred, who defeated the Danes in the late ninth century, helped re-establish the Christian religion, and in doing so, undoubtedly encouraged the revival of viticulture. By the 10th century, vineyards did exist and wine was made. Documentary evidence from that time indicates that there were vineyards attached to monasteries, particularly in the West country and Central south regions. www.englishwineproducers.com

The Normans

1066 marked the start of an era of viticultural activity that would not be matched until the current revival which began some 900 years later. With William the Conqueror came French Abbots and their monks who were experienced in winegrowing, along with soldiers and courtiers for whom wine was a daily requirement.

The Domesday Book (1085-6) records vineyards in forty-two definite locations. Interestingly enough only twelve of the Domesday vineyards were attached to monasteries. Most belonged to nobles and were undoubtedly cultivated to provide them with wine for their dining tables and altars.

There were two main areas of monastic viticulture: the coastal areas of the South East, and the area covering Somerset, Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire. Many sources point out that the climate improved for a period of 300 years starting from about the time of the Norman invasion and citing this as a reason why so many vineyards were planted.

The wines made at this time were probably all consumed during the cooler weather of the winter and spring following the harvest and in any event, well before the weather warmed up which would have caused the wine to oxidize, spoil and turn to vinegar. Imported wines, of which there appeared to be no shortage, also suffered from the same problems - at least home produced wine did not have to travel far and probably suffered less than imported wines from oxidation, thus partially explaining its apparent popularity.

The Middle Ages to 20th Century

This long 600 year period marks change and gradual decline in English viticulture. Why it did not really become a viable alternative to other crops, as it did in other countries where monastic viticulture was common, is open to debate, but commercial and practical considerations have to be important.

Before the Black Death arrived, the religious orders had prospered, reliant upon a pliable and available workforce. However, finding their manpower depleted by the plague, they took to leasing their land, rather than working it themselves and their new tenants, dependent upon short-term cash crops to pay the rent, did not want to grow vines, which then, as now, can only be grown on a long- term basis. The Black Death itself, which lasted from 1348 until the 1370s, not only cut the population dramatically, but forced changes in agriculture which had far-reaching social and demographic effects.

Although the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1536 is often cited as being the single event that destroyed winegrowing and winemaking in England, it would appear that by this time, many monasteries had given up. The new landowners who had been handed these religious assets, proved reluctant to indulge in viticulture.

It is also said that the British climate underwent some change at this time, becoming generally wetter, with cooler summers and milder winters, leading to less ripe grapes and more fungal diseases, both of which would have been disincentives to profitable winemaking.

Wine had been coming into the country from Bordeaux since Henry II (1154–89) became King of England. Transport conditions and speeds improved and the importation of wine (and other goods) became cheaper. Also, as techniques of preserving wine for long journeys improved, imported wines arrived in better condition. Home produced wines faced, as they do today, considerable competition from imported wines. www.englishwineproducers.com

From the mid-1300s, Great Britain became renowned for its expertise in selecting, importing, bottling and cellaring wine and much of the finest wine came into ports like London, Bristol and Leith. Wines such as Claret, Port, Madeira, , Hock and Mosel were, if not invented, then refined, nurtured and made more famous by their association with Britain.

With these disadvantages, it is perhaps not surprising that commercial viticulture suffered and vineyard owners, unless they were prepared to support their efforts out of funds from other sources, found more profitable uses for their land. However, despite these problems, vineyards were planted and wines were made.

There are records of some vineyards in the 17th century. The great botanist John Tradescant planted 20,000 vines on his employer Lord Salisbury’s estate in Hertfordshire and the vineyards became well-renowned. In 1666, John Rose, Gardener to Charles II at His Royal Garden in St. James’s, wrote a treatise on the cultivation of vines in this country called “The English Vineyard Vindicated”, in which he discussed the question of site selection, vine varieties, pruning and training and care of the vines up to the harvest.

One of the most famous vineyards of this era was that at Painshill Place, Cobham, Surrey, which was planted by the Hon Charles Hamilton in 1740, who was clearly ahead of his time. The property still has a producing vineyard to this day. Painshill’s vineyard however died out at the end of the 1800s and although there were others, the story was much the same. After the initial enthusiasm of the owners (mainly gentlemen of property and considerable income), the uncertainty of the climate and the variability of the crops in terms of both quality and quantity took their toll and the vineyards were abandoned. Tastes and fashions in wines also changed. Sweet, heavy, fortified wines from Australia and South Africa were popular at that time and home-grown wines could never match these.

The last great experiment into commercial viticulture - that is before the start of the modern revival - was that of Lord Bute at Castel Coch (which is its Welsh name - it is more usually called Castle Coch). The third Marquess of Bute was a wealthy landowner and industrialist, who had the wherewithal to indulge his visions and fantasies. In 1873 he sent his head gardener, Mr. Andrew Pettigrew, to France to see how vines should be grown. Following his visit, vines were ordered and in 1875 three acres were planted at the castle. Over the next 35 years, the original site was expanded and a further two sites were planted and in the end totalled over 11 acres.

The Marquess died in 1900 and was succeeded by his 19 year old son, who was equally as enthusiastic. Pettigrew was himself succeeded by his own son (also called Andrew) who continued his father's work.

1911 appears to have been the last successful vintage and the vineyard was grubbed up, just after the First World War, in 1920. It was not until the 1950’s when new vineyards were planted and the modern commercial wine industry was born.

The Revival

The revival had to wait for the arrival of pioneers who wanted to disprove the theory that wine could not be made from grapes grown outside in our climate. A combination of new varieties, more suitable growing techniques, better disease control and an acceptance by the public of the style of wines that those varieties produced, were the key elements in that revival.

There are 3 individuals who, in their own ways, brought about the start of the revival which lead to the planting, in 1951, of the first commercial vineyard of modern times at Hambledon in Hampshire. They were Ray Barrington Brock, Edward Hyams and George Ordish. www.englishwineproducers.com

Ray Barrington Brock must be considered as one of the founding fathers - if not the founding father - of the revival in wine production in the British Isles. Brock established a research station at Oxted in Surrey, where he trialled some 600 different table and wine grape varieties over the 25 years of the station’s life. Through obtaining grapevines and vine cuttings from universities and viticultural research stations in the major winegrowing countries of Europe (including Hungary) as well as Russia and various parts of the United States, he built up a collection of grape varieties that were to become the backbone of the early English and Welsh wine industry: He introduced both Müller-Thurgau (then called Riesling Sylvaner) and Seyve Villard 5/276 (Seyval blanc) to the UK. Brock also built a winery in which he experimented with methods of winemaking to suit those grape varieties that were growing well. To improve his winemaking skills, Brock made contact with various institutions and organizations. This included sourcing the right yeast cultures to suit the winemaking practices being employed. There was no doubt that his enterprise created a lot of good will and people were intrigued to see how English and Welsh viticulture would develop.Brock also published books on the subject and sold vines from the nursery bed he created at Oxted. Many of the earliest vineyards to be planted (Beaulieu, Horam Manor, Elmham Park, Felsted and Yearlstone) obtained vines from him.

Ray Brock’s work on vines must be seen as really quite remarkable. That he should decide to establish a private research station to study a crop that did not have a natural home in our climate is quite a feat in itself; that he should do so with such effort, energy and diligence for little or no personal gain, apart from the satisfaction of seeing it done properly, is another matter. In retrospect the site he chose could have been better - nearer to sea level and less exposed - and undoubtedly this would have resulted in riper grapes and better wine. He always countered this by saying that he felt comfortable in recommending a variety that had performed well at Oxted, knowing that it would therefore ripen in almost any site in the south of the country. The legacy of the Oxted Viticultural Research Station is to be seen in today’s English and Welsh wine industry. He lived to see an industry that was slowly gaining recognition. He died in February 1999, aged 91.

Edward Hyams , who first appears in the Oxted story at the harvest in 1949, shares with Brock the honour of being one of the fathers of the viticultural revival. Through his extensive writing and speaking he did much to publicise the subject and make the public aware that the revival was under way.

In 1946, Hyams was de-mobbed from the Royal Navy and he and his wife returned to Kent. They planted some vines for table and wine, and contacted likely sources for suitable varieties, including some of the same institutions and nurseries that Brock was in touch with, and ended up with some of the same varieties, which were planted in 1947 and 1948. Hyams collaborated with Brock, and also went searching for old varieties already growing in Britain and through an appeal in one of his many articles, discovered a vine growing on a cottage wall at Wrotham in Kent. In appearance it resembled Pinot Meunier and was therefore named Wrotham Pinot. Cuttings were taken and propagated at Oxted. When compared to supplies of Pinot Meunier from France, Brock recorded that Wrotham Pinot had a higher natural sugar content and ripened two weeks earlier.

Hyams greatest contribution to the advancement of viticulture was undoubtedly the massive amount of publicity he created through his writing and broadcasting. His first book was published in 1949, called ‘The Grape Vine in England’, with a forward by Vita Sackville-West. This book marked a milestone in the early years of the revival. It was, and remains to this day, a scholarly work on the subject and contains chapters on the history of the grapevine in England, the work of Brock at Oxted and the cultivation of the vine and winemaking.

In 1953 Hyams edited ‘Vineyards in England’ - a masterly work of 20 chapters, many written by different specialists, covering every conceivable aspect of grape production in the British Isles. The book stands today as one of the most important for anyone contemplating growing vines in England or Wales and despite being over 45 years old, much of it, apart from the choice of varieties, remains relevant.One of his last articles before his death in 1977 cited that “there is no doubt that English vineyards in the right places can produce fine white wines, and that such wine should be the object of English viticulture”. By then of course the revival - for which he was in no small part responsible for instigating - was well under way. www.englishwineproducers.com

George Ordish was by training an entomologist and economist, working on horticultural problems in Europe, Latin America and Africa and took a keen interest in the pests and diseases - those that caused the greatest damage both environmentally and economically and about which he also wrote in detail. One of his first jobs was as an entomologist working in the Champagne region. On returning to his native Kent he was struck by the similarity in the climates and by the differences in the landscape. After local research revealed that England had a history of viticulture, he resolved to see whether he could get grapes to flourish and ripen and, in 1938, planted a few suitable vines in his garden near Maidstone.

Ordish proved to be an accomplished winemaker and he soon saw that good wines could be made from English grown, outdoor fruit. His trial vineyard had proved that grapes would ripen in our climate and these trials prompted his first book on the subject, ‘Wine Growing in England’ which appeared in 1953. This book, which came out in the same year as Hyams’s second book on the subject, drew on many of the same sources. Ordish had also been in contact with Ray Brock and had visited Oxted on more than one occasion.

One notable inclusion in Ordish’s book is the chapter where he sets out the costs and returns from an acre of grapes. The book was yet another medium of publicity for the revival of winegrowing in Great Britain and helped spread the word. It certainly helped add to the number of people in the country who looked on outdoor grapegrowing as a possibility. Ordish went on to write two further books concerning viticulture. He died in 1990.

Between them, Ray Brock, Edward Hyams and George Ordish had questioned why it was that outdoor viticulture in the British Isles had all but died out and had, to acertain extent, shown how it might be revived. Although they had not discovered all the answers, they had, through a combination of practical demonstration, scientific research and publicity, generated sufficient enthusiasm for those with the inclination to, to start planting vineyards. The first modern vineyard, Hambledon in Hampshire, planted in 1951, was the tangible evidence that the revival was underway.

The Modern Industry 1951 onwards

The planting of the vineyard in 1951 at Hambledon in Hampshire by Major-General Sir Guy Salisbury- Jones GCVO, CMG, CBE, MC DL marked a turning point in the history of winegrowing in Great Britain. This was the first vineyard to be planted specifically to produce wine for sale since Castle Coch in 1875. Seyval Blanc was planted on a one acre site, following a visit by Salisbury-Jones to Oxted, which grew well and produced their first crop in 1954. The wine caused much publicity and Salisbury-Jones was besieged by the press and media interest. The name ‘Hambledon’ soon became synonymous with English Wine. The vineyard has just been revived and replanted (this time with the three traditional Champagne varieties), so in time the name will soon be recognised again.

The expansion of vineyards after the planting of Hambledon was painfully slow. The Merrydown Wine Company at Horam in East Sussex, owned by Jack Ward, planted 2 acres in 1955, and became the second commercial vineyard of the revival. Müller-Thurgau was planted, amongst other varieties. In later years, Ward became instrumental in introducing varieties such as Reichensteiner, Huxelrebe and Schönburger to the UK. He was very much a driving force in the industry and was the English Vineyards Association’s (now UK Vineyards Association) first Chairman.

The third vineyard to be planted was in 1957 by Lieutenant-Colonel Robert and Mrs. Margaret Gore- Browne at Beaulieu, in Hampshire, which by 1960 expanded to almost 5 acres. The highest accolade to be awarded in the UK’s annual national competition is named ’The Gore-Browne Trophy and awarded for ‘Wine of the Year’.

Winemaking in those early days was, from all accounts, a fairly hit and miss affair. Both Salisbury- Jones and Gore-Browne built their own wineries and enlisted the help from Anton Massel, a young German who had come across to work for the Seitz Filter company and eventually opened his own laboratory. Massel introduced a number of modern winemaking practices, and better equipment. www.englishwineproducers.com

The real expansion of vineyards in England and Wales started in the early to mid-1960s. Vineyards spread across the country, with new sites, training and pruning systems and above all, grape varieties introduced. The development of the industry had begun.

The real expansion of the vineyard area and the establishment of both sizeable vineyards and wineries started in earnest in the late 1960s and early 1970s. One of the features of English and Welsh viticulture is the diversity of backgrounds of those who plant vineyards. In other countries where new vineyards are being planted, one would expect to see existing landowners - most usually those with land in the vicinity of established vineyards - planting up, together with a smaller number of entrants with no experience of growing at all, but with serious funds, usually made in a completely unrelated industry. In the UK, those planting vineyards come from a much wide cross-section of the community.

Vineyards Established AfAfterter 1976

The years between 1976 and 1995 saw a large number of vineyards planted, including some very sizeable ones.

Plantings in recent years have not been quite so frenzied and the rate of new plantings has certainly declined. Several factors are responsible. A rumoured vine planting ban in 1990/91 persuaded many growers that if they were going to plant it had better be soon and between 1992 and 1994 an abnormally large number of vines were planted. This sudden surge of planting resulted in larger national yields, with the 1996 being the largest on record.

Of course, not all vineyards planted since 1951 in England and Wales have survived. Some vineyards have disappeared through natural causes such as retirement, divorce and death. Vineyards which for whatever reason could not produce sufficient quality and/or quantity of wine to make the enterprise viable have been grubbed out, leaving those capable of producing commercially acceptable wines.

In the last couple of years more hectares have been planted – some 150 - which will be reflected in future statistics, and which shows a new growth in the modern industry, and, importantly, some serious, professional investment.

The nature of the wine business in the UK varies. Some vineyards have bypassed the challenge to produce their own wines and concentrate on growing grapes to sell on to other, mainly larger concerns. Some owners have leased their vineyards to other wine producers, thus reducing the overall number of players in the market

The UK wine industry is now modernizing and producing wines that are competitive in both style and price. One growth area is tourism: vineyards are opening their doors to visitors, introducing appropriate facilities, allowing visitors to see how wine is grown and made, and buy direct. This year VisitBritain has introduced a ‘Taste England’ campaign, encouraging the tourist trade and visitors to explore England’s regional food and drink. There has also been increasing collaboration with regional food, which has been experiencing a resurgence of interest and promotion, largely due to the work undertaken by Food from Britain and the regional food groups.

The UK sparkling wine market

The Modern UK wine industry has gone a long way since the planting of the first vineyard in 1951 at Hambledon in Hampshire with the French hybrid Seyval Blanc. Stephen Skelton MW believes that, to the rate it is growing, the British vineyard is probably near 1,500ha, the highest acreage ever recorded in the UK, already double that of 2004. But according to the data provided for the year 2011 by www.englishwineproducers.com , the UK officially counts 419 vineyards over 1,384ha, of which 1,208ha are actually in production. 124 wineries produced 19,375 hectolitres of wine over the past 5 years (or 2.58 million bottles on average), of which 80% was white and 55% of table wine quality.

In the 60s and 70s, the fashion was for wines made in a German Style -fruity, light in alcohol and with some residual sugar- hence the wide early plantings of German crossings, like Müller-Thürgau especially, and German Hybrids. From the 80s onwards, the UK opened to the global market, with the impact of imports dramatically altering wine culture in the UK. German grape variety names were no longer the flavour of the day and they were soon taken over by proper English-sounding estate names and varieties such as Bacchus, Ortega and Pinot Noir on labels. But the latest revolution in the UK wine industry comes from sparkling wines, which, from only representing 15% of the total production back in 2005, eventually outstripped still light wines in production terms in 2010, and Mike Roberts of Ridgeview reckons that still wine will only represent 10% of the market in the next five to six years. England is definitely gearing up for mainly producing sparkling wine by the traditional method from Champagne varieties, as clearly demonstrated by Chardonnay and Pinot Noir taking equal shares of a staggering 50% of the total varietal planting in the UK (Pinot Meunier is still marginally grown compared to the two Burgundy grapes).

A great deal of the UK wine production is not distributed, but the biggest sparkling wine producers see potential beyond the strong cellar door sales, and they are especially confident about the domestic market, citing the 100+ million bottles of sparkling wine consumed each year in the UK, of which around 35 million bottles are Champagne. Of the 65 million bottles of non-Champagne, only 1% sells for more than £10 a bottle, and since most UK sparklers sell for more, often at around £20 a bottle and above, producers are hoping to take market share away from Champagne. If just 10% of Champagne buyers move to English Sparkling wine, then the market for English bubbly trebles. Ian Kellett, managing director of Hambledon Vineyards, is bullish on the market potential, going as far as saying that “It’s already proven beyond doubt that the UK is the second best sparkling wine region in the world. The UK needs to be a 10, 20, 30 million bottle a year business”. But when put into perspective, the total UK wine production of just over 3 million bottles in 2011 is only tiny in the scheme of things, and sales, made nearly exclusively on the domestic market, only take a 0.14% share of the UK wine market. Already, supply of English sparkling wine is not keeping pace with demand. Most producers are sold out and merchants are on strict allocation. But it is thought that 3 million bottles of British sparklers should be released this year, and based on the planting figures for the past 5 years, as much as 5 million bottles will be coming to market in 2015, giving the UK wine industry a retail value of nearly £100 million, 5 times as much as projected for this year. In order for the UK to become a viable wine business and eventually reach out to the export market, financiers with plenty of resources are needed. One has indeed to overcome the challenging cost of setting up an eight year plan from planting to making wine then getting to market. Quality land is mainly situated on the south-eastern coast of England, and the cost of purchasing a plot there can prove enough of a disincentive to start with.

To date, the largest producers of English wines, regardless of style, are:

- Chapel Down Wines (Kent) this is the single biggest wine producer in the UK. Sparkling wine production follows the “Champagne Maison” model which consists in buying in grapes from contracted growers. - Denbies Wine Estate (Surrey) the largest single vineyard in the UK. - Three Choirs Vineyard (Gloucestershire)

The biggest producers of sparkling wine only are:

- Nyetimber Vineyard (West Sussex) the single largest sparkling wine estate in the UK. - Ridgeview Wine Estate (West Sussex)

But as mentioned above, UK sparkling wine production is booming and once they have completed their production plans, watch out for the following: - Gusbourne Estate (Kent) - Rathfinny Estate (East Sussex)

These are the main players that one will be most likely to pick on supermarket shelves in the years to come. Denbies Wine Estates produces English sparkling wine under the “Taste the Difference” label for Sainsbury, as well as the Broadwood’s Folly brand for Tesco under its “Tesco’s Finest” label. But it is Waitrose that is proving the most ambitious, for they planted vines back in 2008 and they are looking to put their Leckford Estate brand to market by 2017.

Paradoxically, it is feared that the recent wave of investment might translate into such a high level of new planting that it might result in oversupply in the coming few years. If the English sparkling brand has not established itself by then, it might undermine the future prosperity of the industry. To be brutal, if English sparkling wine does not break records in the London Olympics year, invertors will have to worry. [Check “English Wine Week”, the major tasting event that takes place in spring] ENGLISH VINEYARDS WILL THRIVE IF PLANTED IN THE RIGHT PLACES

The black patches in the map above indicate the few areas in The average yield in the UK was 19.76hl/ha over th e past 5 years. The figure is low The second contributing factor to successful flowerin g in June is low England where frost is not likely to compromise successful vine because flowering in June is so inconsistent. Successful flowering results from two rainfall. The black patches in the above map indicate which parts of budding in April. main factors, the first of which is warm conditions. The black then red patches in England suffer the least heavy rainfall in June, thereby making them the above map indicate the areas in England where June mean temperatures are most suitable for good flowering most years. respectively most or fairly suitable for good flowering most years.

In the UK, the vineyards that have survived have done so for a reason, and that is because they were put in the right places. Similarly, the future of the English wine industry is sparkling, because sparkling wine requires base wine high in acidity and low in alcohol. To ripen grapes in the UK, small yields are needed, and since, in order to get very good free-run juice, one can only take a small cut at the press, everything adds to the huge financial constraints already attached to growing vines in England. Fortunately, the good quality pressed juice one is left with can be recycled into still light wines with slightly lower acidity. These wines can be sold, thereby helping with cash flow. The UK might have a microscopic wine industry still, but its reputation for quality fizz is wide. English sparkling wine is indeed fast becoming a convincing alternative to Champagne. It often beats Champagne Grandes Marques in blind tastings indeed. In the last 6 years, English sparklers have won trophies for “World Top Sparkling Wine” no less than 9 times (a performance matched by no other country, which cannot possibly be down to beginner’s luck only). Champagne producers have long been reluctant to getting involved here the same way as they have done in California, but eventually, Didier Pierson-Whitaker from Epernay settled in Hampshire and is now launching the Meon Hill brand. This is yet another sign that British fizz is coming of age. The counties of Hampshire, Sussex and Kent do actually share more than a similar climate to that of the Champagne region. The reason why these counties yield such high quality sparklers lies in the fact that they form some sort of extension of the Champagne terroir. Indeed, a seam of Kimmeridgian (calcareous) clay runs from Champagne right through to Chablis then under the Channel, eventually reappearing in the South Downs. There is therefore every reason to follow Champagne in terms of style, though the UK should develop its own style, or to be more precise, its own brand. Producers still feel that English sparklers, despite their tremendous potential, lack the fizz of a catchy name. The UK sparkling wine market is dominated by instantly identifiable brand-like appellations. France has Champagne, Italy has Prosecco and Spain has Cava. Even South Africa has “Cap Classic”. But England has nothing more compelling than “English sparkling wine” to offer. Christian Seely of the Hampshire producer “Coates & Seely”, managing director of AXA Millésimes, now labels his wines as “Britagne”, which, despite its French-looking spelling should be pronounced “Britannia”. Was the name to catch up among UK producers, the Champagne industry, famously territorial about their brand, might object to the name, only because it looks too similar to theirs. Ridgeview suggests adopting the more English “Merret” name, which it already uses to label one of its cuvées, for It is Christopher Merret who published the first ever record of the traditional method. Not only is England an extension of the Champagne terroir, it might be the birth place of the “méthode Champenoise” in the first place... Can anyone be more controversial? Early in 2011, the Duchess of Cornwall said that English sparkling winemakers should call their product Champagne because it had become so good. Not only would that be in breach of EU regulations, it would turn the brewing argument into a full on war between France and England... same old, same old...

MAP OF THE 4 RUSSIAN WINE PRODUCING REGIONS

THE RUSSIAN WINE INDUSTRY

There are two main production areas in Russia: Tostov (the “gates to the Caucasus” on the Asov Sea) and the northern Caucasus. The northern Caucasus itself counts three wine regions: Krasnodar Kai (on the Black Sea), Stavropol (further east, inland) and Daghestan (on the ).

Russia has no appellation system, and all the wines are labelled as “product of Russia”. There are plans to create that Russian appellation system, and already, the potential introduction of an wine region provokes the ire of producers in California’s Napa Valley. The respect of international systems of indication of origin is critical in order to break onto the export market. The labelling of many a wine with the “Champagne” trademark, which under European law can only apply to wines made in the Champagne region of France, has long been the one single contentious issue preventing Russian sparkling wines from making a breakthrough in the EU. Meeting at the Abrau Durso winery at the end of 2011, members of the Russian Winegrower and Winemaker Union agreed in principle to outlaw the Sovetskoye Shampanskoye trademark by 2022. The decision came under the insistence of Boris Titov, owner of Abrau-Durso, who denies that the proposed ban is related to his involvement in the Champagne region. The negotiation between the CIVC, the Champagne governing body, and the Russian Union is still ongoing and nothing has been signed yet, for many producers fear that sales will plummet once the name is banned.

One must not underestimate the iconic status of the Soviet Champagne brand indeed. Sovetskoye Shampanskoye was the title of the 1943 publication by Russian chemist Anton Frolov-Bagreyev, who seems to have coined the name for the first time. The name was wholeheartedly endorsed by Stalin, who saw in it the ultimate embodiment of the concept of “Champagne for the people” he launched in 1936. It is Anton Frolov- Bagreyev who invented the tank method that turned Stalin’s vision into reality in the first place. Mass production plants multiplied across the country and a standard Sovietskoye Shampanskoye label eventually came into being, thereby elevating the name to brand-like status on the domestic market. From 1954, production of Soviet Champagne became even faster and more cost effectively thanks to the continuous method patented in 1959 by Agabalyan, Merzhanian and Brusilovsky. A bottle would only cost the price of a bottle of vodka at the time; it was cheap, in other words, as much in price as in quality. Soviet Champagne became so popular at home that in 1969, it popped over the Iron Curtain under the registered “Soviet Sparkling” trademark. Calling it СОВЕТСКОЕ ИГРИСТОЕ ® or Sovetskoye Igristoye on the export market meant bringing foreign currencies without going through the hurdle of copyright infringement implied by using the word “Champagne”. Surprisingly, the popularity of the drink survived the collapse of the USSR.

Soyuzplodimport , initially privatised in April 1997 then renationalised in 2002, considered itself the depository of the soviet Champagne name. This heavyweight of the Russian alcohol industry, owner of 43 brands of Vodka, including Stolichnaya, Moskovska and Zubrovska, decided to register the СОВЕТСКОЕ ШАМПАНСКОE® trademark in 2004. The company does not produce wine. Therefore, it is not a member of the Russian Winegrower and Winemaker Union, since it only takes royalties from the Champanskoye plants that produce the wine round the country. Many producers saw the registration of the trademark as a manoeuvre to get protection money from now privately owned companies. Some took the risk of giving up the traditional label and created their own, but most complied, including Istok and Rosspirtprom before they went bust, hence the label is still widely used today to the dismay of the Champagne authorities. Soyuzplodimport is not taking part in the negotiations between the CIVC and the Union, but if an agreement was to be reached, would the company be expected to abandon its registered trademark? Soyuzplodimport still refuses to comment.

Sparkling wine made by the continuous tank method represents a staggering 35% of the Russian sparkling wine market, while less than 2% is made by the traditional method. The balance is made by the Charmat

method at best or by injecting CO 2. The premium or “elitny” segment is starting to develop, but still, the counterfeiting of natural sparkling wine remains a problem, with injected wines passing for bottle- or tank- fermented, but at a fraction of the price. Approximately 85% of Russian sparkling wines are made from imported base wine. When made from locally sourced grapes, sparkling wines are made from Aligoté, Riesling and Pinot Blanc mainly, though a number of hybrids are also used. The average quality of Russian sparkling wines has been improving nonetheless, albeit from a low base, hence a steady price increase year on year, though at a lower rate since the 2008 financial crisis. On the Russian market, the average price for a bottle of sparkling wine went from Rub80 (£1.50) in 1996 up to Rub185 (£3.60) in 2011, of which tax is Rub10 per bottle. But the fact that only 3% of Russian sparkling wines are brut demonstrates that the bulk of production is not in a style that fits the profile of most export markets outside Eastern Europe, Italy and Scandinavia, and that the Russian sparkling wine industry is not yet geared up for making an impact internationally (hence one could wonder what would the eradication of the Soviet Champagne label possibly serve but the export ambitions of Abrau Durso alone).

In 2008, imported sparkling wines represented 5.6% of the market (20.6 million litres in bottle, with 55.4% coming from Italy, 14.9% from France, 14.5% from the Ukraine and 2% from Hungary). This represented a slight fall despite the 2007 ban on importing the once very popular Georgian and Moldovan wines. This fall can partially be explained by the financial crisis, but more specifically by the stringent wine import laws and heavy wine import tax duty in force in Russia. That series of protectionist measures obviously aims at stimulating domestic production. Despite that, foreign imports of sparkling wines have now gone up to 10%, for there is huge growth potential at the inexpensive end. The Russian population is 140 million. If the Russian consumption of still light wines went up to 503 million litres in 2008 from a low 100+ million litres in 1996, it still hasn’t recovered its high 750+ million litre level of 1990. In contrast, the Russian sparkling wine consumption held steady after the difficult years that followed the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990, fluctuating between around 65 and 95 million litres to the new millennium, from when it rose sharply to a staggering 208 million litres in 2008 (a 10 to 15% annual increase since the year 2000). Total production reached 223 million bottles and consumption near 300 million bottles in 2010. One bottle of bubbly for 2 bottles of still light wine is being consumed in Russia today, which is a very high proportion!

In 2008, there were 150 wineries in Russia, of which 25 were producing sparkling wine. Despite Russian sparkling wine consumption still being on the rise, the industry did not manage to go through the 2008 crisis without casualties. Researching the Russian sparkling wine industry feels like reading a novel by John le Carré, and it would certainly provide enough material for a thrilling new Bond film. Take the Russian Sparkling wine giant Istok for instance. It was very profitable back in 2008 when it was number one on the market, producing nearly a quarter of all sparkling wine bottles consumed in Russia, but in spring 2010, Istok was declared bankrupt, why? Regardless of how profitable the company was, it still needed loans to survive the lean parts of the year. Indeed, most of the industry’s revenue is made over the New Year period, with good sales being made on Women’s day in March and over the graduation period in summer. Istok owed Rub200 million in back taxes but could not get a loan from Sberbank to pay them back. The company was forced to watch the ailing car industry receive hefty handouts during the crisis, while, like the rest of the vibrant alcohol industry, the company would not get a drop. Analysts are talking of the government forcing private producers out of business in order to get their assets via the state-owned bank.

Consolidation through state interference is fierce and at least three companies have gone bust then been bought by competitors in the past few years. Today, according to Business Analytica, the five biggest players on the Russian Sparkling Wine market are:

1- Igristiye Vina (or “Sparkling Wine”) 2- Moskovskiy Kombinat Shampanskikh Vin (or “MKShV” or “Moscow Plant of Champagne Wines” – a company now privatised) 3- Moskovskiy Zavod Shampanskikh Vin (or “MZShV” or “Moscow Factory of Champagne wines” –lead by the Kornet brand) 4- Dovino 5- Abrau-Dyurso (or “Abrau-Durso”) ABRAU-DURSO: PRODUCER PROFILE

Sweeter style of sparkling wine Dryer style of sparkling wine Made by the tank method Made by the traditional method Targeted at the Russian market Targeted at the UK market

Abrau Dyurso (or Abrau Durso) was founded on 25 November 1870 as a royal winery to produce wine for Tsar Alexander II. The land was first found by agronomist Feodor Geiduk in a small, rugged valley less than 20 kilometres northwest of Novorossiysk in the Krasnodar region. But the royal plans were only brought to fruition more than twenty one years later, in 1896, when Prince Lev Sergeievitch Golitsyn (or Leo Galitzine) was appointed Surveyor of Imperial Vineyards. Prince Leo Galitzine is the true godfather of modern Russian winemaking, and his passion was the catalyst for the royal interest for wine production. It is he who brought a team of skilled winegrowers and winemakers from France to make sparkling wine for the royal household. In 1899, the estate was already producing 60,000 bottles of sparkling wine, and the following year, Galitzine’s wines would receive international recognition. At the Paris “Exposition Universelle” of 1900, Novyi Svet (or Novy Svet, or New World), the wine produced at the eponymous pioneering winery in Sudakh on the Crimean peninsula, defeated all the French entries to claim the coveted “Grand Prix de Champagne”. As a reward for this outstanding performance, the “Champagne” trademark was immediately granted for perpetuity to Russia’s imperial government (a historical fact still given as a justification by Russian sparkling winemakers for still abusing the “Champagne” trademark on labels). Abrau Durso can therefore boast to be Russia’s oldest “Champagne House”. As for the Novy Svet estate, it seems to have kept its edge, for recently, 5 of the best Russian sparkling wines competed against 5 Champagne Grandes Marques in a blind tasting organised the sommelier Nikolaï Lesenkov. All top winning wines were Champagnes but one, Novy Svet Brut NV, which came first. Prince Leo Galitzine, born in 1845, will be spared the heartache of seeing the face of his creation dramatically altered altogether with that of Russia’s political scene, for he was buried at Novy Svet in 1913. Who knows what heights Russian sparkling wines could have reached in terms of quality, had the Bolsheviks not brought havoc to the industry. Indeed, with the Russian Revolution of 1917 the French specialists fled Russia, bringing an end to Abrau- Durso’s prosperity, if only for a short time. Stalin was particularly fond of the Russian wine industry hence it rebounded somewhat in the mid 20 th century. In order to break away from the exclusive and elitist or bourgeois image of Champagne, Stalin would bring “Russian Champagne” to the masses as one of his political statements. Abrau Durso was made one among many vinsovkhoz (state wine farms) in the 1920s and the “Sovetskoye Shampanskoye” brand (“Soviet Champagne” or “Champagne for the People”) would eventually come into being in the early 1940s. This was sparkling wine, but it wasn’t made by the traditional method, neither was it made from classic Champagne grape varieties. It was a cheap version quickly made from imported base wine by a continuous method derived from the tank method developed to industrial scale by chemist Anton Frolov-Bagreyev in 1936. In that context, Abrau Durso started to prosper again, but since Prince Leo Galitzine had established a school to train young Russian winemakers, Abrau Durso’s winemaking tradition had managed to survive and the estate’s better quality wines were so reputed that Abrau Durso eventually became the exclusive wine supplier to the Kremlin.

At the end of the 20 th century, Mikhail Gorbatchov decided that Russians were getting too fond of vodka and initiated a series of domestic reforms aimed at reducing alcohol consumption and production. That, combined to the collapse of the Soviet Union and privatisation of the land, meant that former government vineyards were being put to different use, and more than half of Russia’s vine area was pulled up.

Abrau Durso, in parallel with the rest of the Industry, declined towards the end of the 20 th century, and by 2004, the estate had survived the collapse of the USSR but was in a sorry state. Its salvation was to come from the unlikely Boris Titov, ex trader in petrochemicals. The Solvalub group (or SVL), self- proclaimed “fixers of broken assets” with Boris’s son Pavel as managing director, eventually acquired a controlling stake in the government co-owned “State Unitary Enterprise Abrau Durso” and turned it into a large complex. 200 hectares of new vineyards were planted (bringing the total acreage to around 560 hectares) largely with white varieties (mostly Aligote, Pinot Blanc, Sauvignon Blanc, and Chardonnay). A breeding nursery for grafting and propagation was built. $20 millions were spent on revamping the winery itself, bringing it back to the cutting edge of Russian wine production, and the French oenologist Hervé Justin was hired. Pavel Titov unashamedly confesses: “we had zero experience in the wine industry and weren’t really looking. It just so happened that one of our businesses was in the same region and that the famous winery was for sale”. SVL Having turned around the fortunes of Abrau-Durso, the company subsequently bought Château d’Avize, a derelict property in Champagne, plus, in July 2011, a 60 hectare estate in the town of Gelendzhik, Krasnodar, which will form the basis of Abrau-Durso’s still wine production.

Five out of ten deaths in Russia are alcohol related, a sad fact that prompted Russian President Dmitri Medvedev to declare that “winemaking should be developed and contribute to the eradication of alcoholism, for countries where this sector is strong have no problems with alcoholic abuse. Problems with alcoholic abuse stem from other drinks”. Such governmental support combined with the 2007 ban on Georgia and Moldova wine import, stringent wine import licensing laws and heavy wine import duties contributed to the most favourable conjuncture for Abrau-Durso to thrive, let alone that the brand’s resurgence seems to be proving a hit with the Russians as over 16 million bottles of its budget sparkling wine by the Charmat method were sold in the Russian market. Apparently, President Vladimir Putin is a fan of the top wines. Since the UK market is the key premium market in Europe, Abrau Durso’s premium range is the first Russian sparkling wine to reach the UK (to the exception of the “Sovetskoye”, “Gold Collection” and “Apriori” brands that the now bankrupt alcohol manufacturing giant Istok failed to establish in 2007). Since the introduction of Abrau Durso on the UK market in July 2011, reputed restaurants like Sketch, for instance, have been selling the Russian wine as their house bubbly.