Monday, July 2, 2012
How to Make a Salad
Came across this video from Jamie Oliver's Google+ feed and thought I would share it, because I think his salads are amazing and he gives great tips for keeping it simple.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
I Told You So
I would like to put the diet soda issue to bed once and for all, though I know there is not a chance of that. Every time I decide to enjoy a diet soda it seems some health nazi is waiting in the shadows to pounce on me and lecture me on how bad it is for me and how it will make me fat. I usually reply, firstly, that I am already fat and, secondly, fuck off. That typically ends the conversation.
But, well meaning friends will usually not allow that to suffice and I then have to point out that moderate consumption of diet soda is in no way unsafe for my health. And, further, that no study has ever proven that drinking diet soda CAUSES weight gain. The studies that they have read about only suggest that people who prefer to drink diet coke have a problem with over eating. In addition, the studies that suggest that aspartame may be harmful were conducted on mice who were given rather large amounts of the substance. Give a mouse too much water and that will kill him too.
Now, NPR has a story about a study which suggests what I have always said, that people tend to see diet soda as an opportunity to cram even more calories by way of crap food into their faces. The study looked, not just at weight gain and diet coke consumption, but at amount and quality of foods that participants ate. And surprise! The people with the most sensible diets had the least weight gain.
For me the matter is resolved and I will continue to enjoy the odd glass of diet soda as guilt free as ever.
But, well meaning friends will usually not allow that to suffice and I then have to point out that moderate consumption of diet soda is in no way unsafe for my health. And, further, that no study has ever proven that drinking diet soda CAUSES weight gain. The studies that they have read about only suggest that people who prefer to drink diet coke have a problem with over eating. In addition, the studies that suggest that aspartame may be harmful were conducted on mice who were given rather large amounts of the substance. Give a mouse too much water and that will kill him too.
Now, NPR has a story about a study which suggests what I have always said, that people tend to see diet soda as an opportunity to cram even more calories by way of crap food into their faces. The study looked, not just at weight gain and diet coke consumption, but at amount and quality of foods that participants ate. And surprise! The people with the most sensible diets had the least weight gain.
For me the matter is resolved and I will continue to enjoy the odd glass of diet soda as guilt free as ever.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Decanter World Wine Awards 2012 Results
The Decanter World Wine Awards 2012 Results are in and local Ontario wineries have a lot of hardware to show off. Click the link and see who has won what.
'via Blog this'
'via Blog this'
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Future of Food - Pt 1 The Challenge
Let's take a trip into the future. You can stay right there on your couch or chair. We aren't going far, only a scant 50 years or so. In fact, we can start just 3 years from now and see what food challenges we might expect to face. How about, greater economic pressure on poor regions to meet the rising cost of staple foods such as rice, wheat and corn. As early as this time, experts expect a doubling in the food demand due to increased populations. It was not so long ago that the population estimate was at 6 billion, it is now over 7 billion; 77,000 net population growth per day! This will see a 40% increase in food costs for the wealthiest countries and will see 40 million more humans thrown into starvation in just 3 years, according to The Future of Food documentary.
Unrest in the Arab world is likely to continue as food costs climb and the economy remains stagnant. The Arab spring was partially a response to the rising cost of staples after the ill conceived idea of diverting more corn and grain to ethanol production and spiking the prices in hopes of a market bubble (oh! how Wall Street loves a bubble). With an additional 40 million humans, mostly in poorer regions, thrust into potential starvation, the expectation of stability in the Arab and Sub-Saharan regions, as well as Asia, seems foolhardy.
Despite the housing market collapse in the US and parts of Canada and Europe, urbanization of land continues, and will continue, to grow as housing demands try to keep pace with population growth. Most of this growth will occur in countries already struggling to house and feed their population. As those countries run out of land they will inevitably look to migrate to areas with plenty of land and Canada, the US and parts of South America will see dramatic increases in both legal and illegal immigration. Not only will their be a greater demand for food, there will be less land in which to grow it on.
But, 2015 will only be a warm up for the issues to come as we climb toward a world population of 10 billion (that's 10, 000,000,000). Over the next 50 years humans will have to produce as much food as they have produced in their entire agricultural history. According to Dr R.K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, most regions can expect to see volatile changes over the next 50 years. Including: 4 times more drought conditions in Kenya, added impact on the already stressed Maasai Mara region and its inhabitants who struggle to find water in the dry season. We will see continued desertification of Africa and Asia and will start to see increased desertification in the southern United States, Mexico and Australia. Coastal regions will begin to divert huge sums of money to shoring up their coasts to prevent erosion and flooding of the worlds most inhabited cities - e.g. Tokyo, New York, London - due to rising sea levels. All of this will place a great deal of pressure on the fresh water supplies around the world and will make water the new oil, but it will be a resource that the countries who have it will need to fight to keep; you can't simply look for alternatives to water like you can for oil and gas.
Water shortages around the globe are causing governments to take extreme measures to find sources. Traditionally, peoples in the driest regions of the globe used wells to tap into the large resource of ground water; but increased demand for water has meant digging wells deeper and deeper resulting in water that is saltier and of inferior quality for humans and plants. Farms use an enormous amount of water to produce our food, whether it is grain, vegetable or meat, much of that water is wasted in many ways. As the temperature around the globe rises, the hottest and driest areas can see upwards of 60% evaporation of water used for irrigation. Additionally, as these drier, poorer regions try to increase their economies through agricultural trade, much of that water leaves their land for good, locked in the produce that is shipped to more arable countries.
One of the predictions of climate change and global warming is an increase in the number of as well as the intensity of severe weather events. Thus, we can expect to see volatility in the grain markets, markets which contribute the largest portion of calories to the human diet, as weather instability keeps farmers guessing as to what grains to cultivate year to year. Each grain type thrives in different conditions and withers in other conditions. Add to this the expected and inevitable climb in oil prices and food prices - which rely heavily on oil for everything from cultivation to harvest to packaging to delivery - and experts predict that in 50 years more wars will be fought over food then any other reason.
Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba received cheap, subsidized oil for use in agriculture and delivery of products to Soviet friendly nations. Since then, oil supplies are 50% lower and new ways of farming have had to be found. Cuba, and similar countries looking to stave off starvation, have had to resort to more biodiverse forms of food production to feed its people. This may seem like a positive on the surface, but the result is greater stripping of the forests to make room for more farm land resulting in increased greenhouse gases, greater soil erosion and disruption to the natural water cycle. Multiply this by the millions of acres that will be affected when oil supplies reach a critically low level and the world will be in a desperate state.
In addition to rising environmental costs a model like that in Cuba would require a greater number of farm workers thus contributing to further price increases and potential human rights abuses as farmers struggle to keep food costs down at the expense of those labourers. Finding a happy medium between labour and technology would mean converting farm equipment to biofuels. But, here too, we find as many problems as answers: more grain being diverted from the food chain would put greater cost pressure on the food system. In India, a 10% increase in grain costs would result in 40 million more thrown into poverty.
Already, a large number of Indians have been displaced to meet the demands of its biofuels program. The jatropha plant was hailed as a miracle plant for the biofuels industry due to its high percentage of oil content and energy levels. Yet, this plant can be used for nothing but biofuels and in India this has caused many of the poorest inhabitants to be displaced and left to find alternative food sources in a country already struggling to feed its people. As vehicles take more grain from the hungry poor, food instability will lead to insecurity for the west. With the constant demand for alternative fuels and the desire of the poorest regions to find resources to sell to energy hungry developed nations, conflicts between the haves and have-nots in developing countries will inevitably spill over to those developed nations.
Despite the growing number of hungry in places like India, they and China and Brazil, are actually getting wealthier as a whole. With this wealth has come a growing middle class and the demand for a more western diet consisting of more meat proteins. The developed world already consumes 80 kg of meat products per person per year. India, which is running out of arable land, is home to 10% of the world's cattle and demand is rising. In China, in 50 years, meat consumption will have doubled what it is today and it has already doubled what it was only 20 years ago. The production of these meat products, poultry, lamb, pork and beef requires more land and grain to be diverted for feed, more water for irrigation and more oil for transport. The diets of the wealthiest nations are placing even more extreme pressure on the food supply system not to mention an increase in methane gas, a very large contributor to greenhouse gases. With the demand for meat increasing (and especially for grass fed beef), we are seeing a depletion of the world's rain forests as land is cleared to make room for more pastures.
So, seafood seems to be the answer, right? Why not? Good meat protein with full amino acid source, heart healthy omega 3 from cold water fish, and no diverting of land. Great. Except that the greatest number of people in the world already eat fish and by 2048, many experts predict, the worlds fish stocks will have collapsed. For many reasons, our oceans are already coming under intense pressures and traditional fishing cultures are disappearing faster than honest politicians. Traditional fishing regions like Newfoundland, Grimsby England, Asia, Europe and the Gulf of Mexico have all seen their fishing industries fall under strict fishing moratoriums. In the UK, fisherman are catching half of what they caught in 1920 and it is estimated that 80% of the UK fish stocks have vanished. The same can be said for European waters. But this has not stopped the large European fishing fleets who have turned to purchasing fishing rights off countries such as Senegal, which ended over a dispute about the amount of fish taken. The poorest countries don't even get the courtesy of an agreement as large fishing vessels just lower their nets knowing the government is in no way prepared to enforce its boundary rights. Experts feel that in order to save the fish stocks for future generations, fishing needs to be banned in 1/3 of all the world's oceans.
The disparity between the developed countries, emerging economies and the perpetually poorer nations is no more obvious than in our present day food model. China, Saudi Arabia, Qattar and other money rich and land poor nations, in order to meet their food demands, look toward the poor nations of Africa and South America for cheap land. Today, Kenya produces more food than its population could eat, however, most Kenyan's can not afford the food grown in their own country and subsist on cheap grain from the west which fails to meet their nutritional requirements. New Zealand produces nine times more food than its population can eat and exports 25% of its lamb to the UK for cheaper than the UK could produce it themselves, and while New Zealanders are not starving, pressure will be put on their food supplies once other markets turn to them for supply.
The most successful farmers around the world can expect to see only a tenth of the money westerners pay for food in a grocery store. Industrial nations are importing 40-50% of their food at prices cheaper than they could grow the same produce at home. The cost of food in Europe and North America is artificially low and unsustainable and as land in poorer nations becomes scarcer food prices will inevitably rise. The demand for land in poor regions has caused even more poor to be displaced from their traditional lands, where they could at least eke out a subsistence, to urban areas where their skills are no longer in demand. Many of these displaced persons will go hungry and homeless.
But land and water shortages are only a part of the problem. Take the case of the Cavendish Banana. This banana represents about 90% of all species of bananas grown in the world. In the western industrial nations we eat about 25 pounds of them per person per year and know no other type of banana. Prior to the Cavendish western culture ate the Gros Michel banana which was considered of superior taste and quality. But, the Gros Michel was wiped out by 1960 due to a disease that is now attacking the world supply of Cavendish banana. This lack of diversity is important when you realize that in parts of Africa people eat upwards of 1000 pounds of banana per person per year. It is why in Africa and Asia there are a wider variety of bananas. As the banana companies look to maintain their markets in western nations, they will inevitably take from the supply of the poor. In western cultures there are several foods which are now susceptible to disease due to a lack of diversity. It is suggested the Cavendish Banana may disappear completely within 15-20 years and, just as we never tasted the banana our grandparents ate, our grandchildren will never taste the one we eat today. I will revisit the case of the Cavendish banana in future posts.
Water shortages, energy shortages, land shortages, dwindling resources, expanding population, redistribution of wealth and the ever present threat of disease make for a gloomy picture of the future. We live in a technological age which at times seems more concerned with contributing to the problems rather than finding solutions. Emerging economies seem more concerned with expanding their wealth and wealthy countries seem concerned with holding on to what they have while the poor simply want to make it through another day. With all the resources and increased wealth developed in the last 50 years, it seems less and less is trickling down to the poor and the next 50 years don't look to be any more promising for them. Our world clock suggests we are on our way toward 10 billion, but does our future suggest otherwise? If global temperatures continue to climb, will the equatorial region of the planet, where most people live, even be habitable in 50 years? If those people have to move to countries with arable lands, how much land will be left for agriculture? How much more of the forest canopy will disappear and how will that affect our climate and food sources?
That concludes our little trip into the future which I hope demonstrates some of the challenges that face humanity as we seek to feed 10 billion people in a changing climate with dwindling resources. I'm sure after reading this many of you over 50 might feel the need to turn to your children and grandchildren and say "I'm sorry", and really, go ahead. But, keep in mind that living on a spinning rock that is floating around a star in the outer regions of an unspectacular galaxy in a far off part of an enormous universe has never been an easy thing to do. Life here has always had challenges and has never been easy. With some good planning, research, hard work, cooperation and a drastic reduction in pure greed that has been the defining characteristic of the last two generations perhaps the future can hold some promise. But what road should we take?
Unrest in the Arab world is likely to continue as food costs climb and the economy remains stagnant. The Arab spring was partially a response to the rising cost of staples after the ill conceived idea of diverting more corn and grain to ethanol production and spiking the prices in hopes of a market bubble (oh! how Wall Street loves a bubble). With an additional 40 million humans, mostly in poorer regions, thrust into potential starvation, the expectation of stability in the Arab and Sub-Saharan regions, as well as Asia, seems foolhardy.
Despite the housing market collapse in the US and parts of Canada and Europe, urbanization of land continues, and will continue, to grow as housing demands try to keep pace with population growth. Most of this growth will occur in countries already struggling to house and feed their population. As those countries run out of land they will inevitably look to migrate to areas with plenty of land and Canada, the US and parts of South America will see dramatic increases in both legal and illegal immigration. Not only will their be a greater demand for food, there will be less land in which to grow it on.
But, 2015 will only be a warm up for the issues to come as we climb toward a world population of 10 billion (that's 10, 000,000,000). Over the next 50 years humans will have to produce as much food as they have produced in their entire agricultural history. According to Dr R.K. Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, most regions can expect to see volatile changes over the next 50 years. Including: 4 times more drought conditions in Kenya, added impact on the already stressed Maasai Mara region and its inhabitants who struggle to find water in the dry season. We will see continued desertification of Africa and Asia and will start to see increased desertification in the southern United States, Mexico and Australia. Coastal regions will begin to divert huge sums of money to shoring up their coasts to prevent erosion and flooding of the worlds most inhabited cities - e.g. Tokyo, New York, London - due to rising sea levels. All of this will place a great deal of pressure on the fresh water supplies around the world and will make water the new oil, but it will be a resource that the countries who have it will need to fight to keep; you can't simply look for alternatives to water like you can for oil and gas.
Water shortages around the globe are causing governments to take extreme measures to find sources. Traditionally, peoples in the driest regions of the globe used wells to tap into the large resource of ground water; but increased demand for water has meant digging wells deeper and deeper resulting in water that is saltier and of inferior quality for humans and plants. Farms use an enormous amount of water to produce our food, whether it is grain, vegetable or meat, much of that water is wasted in many ways. As the temperature around the globe rises, the hottest and driest areas can see upwards of 60% evaporation of water used for irrigation. Additionally, as these drier, poorer regions try to increase their economies through agricultural trade, much of that water leaves their land for good, locked in the produce that is shipped to more arable countries.
One of the predictions of climate change and global warming is an increase in the number of as well as the intensity of severe weather events. Thus, we can expect to see volatility in the grain markets, markets which contribute the largest portion of calories to the human diet, as weather instability keeps farmers guessing as to what grains to cultivate year to year. Each grain type thrives in different conditions and withers in other conditions. Add to this the expected and inevitable climb in oil prices and food prices - which rely heavily on oil for everything from cultivation to harvest to packaging to delivery - and experts predict that in 50 years more wars will be fought over food then any other reason.
Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba received cheap, subsidized oil for use in agriculture and delivery of products to Soviet friendly nations. Since then, oil supplies are 50% lower and new ways of farming have had to be found. Cuba, and similar countries looking to stave off starvation, have had to resort to more biodiverse forms of food production to feed its people. This may seem like a positive on the surface, but the result is greater stripping of the forests to make room for more farm land resulting in increased greenhouse gases, greater soil erosion and disruption to the natural water cycle. Multiply this by the millions of acres that will be affected when oil supplies reach a critically low level and the world will be in a desperate state.
In addition to rising environmental costs a model like that in Cuba would require a greater number of farm workers thus contributing to further price increases and potential human rights abuses as farmers struggle to keep food costs down at the expense of those labourers. Finding a happy medium between labour and technology would mean converting farm equipment to biofuels. But, here too, we find as many problems as answers: more grain being diverted from the food chain would put greater cost pressure on the food system. In India, a 10% increase in grain costs would result in 40 million more thrown into poverty.
Already, a large number of Indians have been displaced to meet the demands of its biofuels program. The jatropha plant was hailed as a miracle plant for the biofuels industry due to its high percentage of oil content and energy levels. Yet, this plant can be used for nothing but biofuels and in India this has caused many of the poorest inhabitants to be displaced and left to find alternative food sources in a country already struggling to feed its people. As vehicles take more grain from the hungry poor, food instability will lead to insecurity for the west. With the constant demand for alternative fuels and the desire of the poorest regions to find resources to sell to energy hungry developed nations, conflicts between the haves and have-nots in developing countries will inevitably spill over to those developed nations.
Despite the growing number of hungry in places like India, they and China and Brazil, are actually getting wealthier as a whole. With this wealth has come a growing middle class and the demand for a more western diet consisting of more meat proteins. The developed world already consumes 80 kg of meat products per person per year. India, which is running out of arable land, is home to 10% of the world's cattle and demand is rising. In China, in 50 years, meat consumption will have doubled what it is today and it has already doubled what it was only 20 years ago. The production of these meat products, poultry, lamb, pork and beef requires more land and grain to be diverted for feed, more water for irrigation and more oil for transport. The diets of the wealthiest nations are placing even more extreme pressure on the food supply system not to mention an increase in methane gas, a very large contributor to greenhouse gases. With the demand for meat increasing (and especially for grass fed beef), we are seeing a depletion of the world's rain forests as land is cleared to make room for more pastures.
So, seafood seems to be the answer, right? Why not? Good meat protein with full amino acid source, heart healthy omega 3 from cold water fish, and no diverting of land. Great. Except that the greatest number of people in the world already eat fish and by 2048, many experts predict, the worlds fish stocks will have collapsed. For many reasons, our oceans are already coming under intense pressures and traditional fishing cultures are disappearing faster than honest politicians. Traditional fishing regions like Newfoundland, Grimsby England, Asia, Europe and the Gulf of Mexico have all seen their fishing industries fall under strict fishing moratoriums. In the UK, fisherman are catching half of what they caught in 1920 and it is estimated that 80% of the UK fish stocks have vanished. The same can be said for European waters. But this has not stopped the large European fishing fleets who have turned to purchasing fishing rights off countries such as Senegal, which ended over a dispute about the amount of fish taken. The poorest countries don't even get the courtesy of an agreement as large fishing vessels just lower their nets knowing the government is in no way prepared to enforce its boundary rights. Experts feel that in order to save the fish stocks for future generations, fishing needs to be banned in 1/3 of all the world's oceans.
The disparity between the developed countries, emerging economies and the perpetually poorer nations is no more obvious than in our present day food model. China, Saudi Arabia, Qattar and other money rich and land poor nations, in order to meet their food demands, look toward the poor nations of Africa and South America for cheap land. Today, Kenya produces more food than its population could eat, however, most Kenyan's can not afford the food grown in their own country and subsist on cheap grain from the west which fails to meet their nutritional requirements. New Zealand produces nine times more food than its population can eat and exports 25% of its lamb to the UK for cheaper than the UK could produce it themselves, and while New Zealanders are not starving, pressure will be put on their food supplies once other markets turn to them for supply.
The most successful farmers around the world can expect to see only a tenth of the money westerners pay for food in a grocery store. Industrial nations are importing 40-50% of their food at prices cheaper than they could grow the same produce at home. The cost of food in Europe and North America is artificially low and unsustainable and as land in poorer nations becomes scarcer food prices will inevitably rise. The demand for land in poor regions has caused even more poor to be displaced from their traditional lands, where they could at least eke out a subsistence, to urban areas where their skills are no longer in demand. Many of these displaced persons will go hungry and homeless.
But land and water shortages are only a part of the problem. Take the case of the Cavendish Banana. This banana represents about 90% of all species of bananas grown in the world. In the western industrial nations we eat about 25 pounds of them per person per year and know no other type of banana. Prior to the Cavendish western culture ate the Gros Michel banana which was considered of superior taste and quality. But, the Gros Michel was wiped out by 1960 due to a disease that is now attacking the world supply of Cavendish banana. This lack of diversity is important when you realize that in parts of Africa people eat upwards of 1000 pounds of banana per person per year. It is why in Africa and Asia there are a wider variety of bananas. As the banana companies look to maintain their markets in western nations, they will inevitably take from the supply of the poor. In western cultures there are several foods which are now susceptible to disease due to a lack of diversity. It is suggested the Cavendish Banana may disappear completely within 15-20 years and, just as we never tasted the banana our grandparents ate, our grandchildren will never taste the one we eat today. I will revisit the case of the Cavendish banana in future posts.
Water shortages, energy shortages, land shortages, dwindling resources, expanding population, redistribution of wealth and the ever present threat of disease make for a gloomy picture of the future. We live in a technological age which at times seems more concerned with contributing to the problems rather than finding solutions. Emerging economies seem more concerned with expanding their wealth and wealthy countries seem concerned with holding on to what they have while the poor simply want to make it through another day. With all the resources and increased wealth developed in the last 50 years, it seems less and less is trickling down to the poor and the next 50 years don't look to be any more promising for them. Our world clock suggests we are on our way toward 10 billion, but does our future suggest otherwise? If global temperatures continue to climb, will the equatorial region of the planet, where most people live, even be habitable in 50 years? If those people have to move to countries with arable lands, how much land will be left for agriculture? How much more of the forest canopy will disappear and how will that affect our climate and food sources?
That concludes our little trip into the future which I hope demonstrates some of the challenges that face humanity as we seek to feed 10 billion people in a changing climate with dwindling resources. I'm sure after reading this many of you over 50 might feel the need to turn to your children and grandchildren and say "I'm sorry", and really, go ahead. But, keep in mind that living on a spinning rock that is floating around a star in the outer regions of an unspectacular galaxy in a far off part of an enormous universe has never been an easy thing to do. Life here has always had challenges and has never been easy. With some good planning, research, hard work, cooperation and a drastic reduction in pure greed that has been the defining characteristic of the last two generations perhaps the future can hold some promise. But what road should we take?
Saturday, June 16, 2012
The Future of Food - Introduction
What seems like a long time ago, I accepted the challenge of writing about organic versus modern farmed foods and whether, or not, organic was "better". I had no idea what I was getting myself into. I started by reading a book on the subject (Tomorrow's Table by Pamela C. Ronald and R.W. Adamchak). The Authors are a married couple, Ronald is a Professor of Plant Biology at UC Davis and Adamchak manages the campus' organic farm. This book led me to source after source on the subject, some very good sources and some very bad. After picking my way through the maze of often times conflicting information, I settled on a few sources that seemed to offer balanced and rational views on the subject.
So, for the purposes of this blog, which is not a scholarly paper nor a claimed authority of any kind, I will list here my sources for the information that will appear in future posts in this series. By doing so, I hope you will all track down these sources and read, listen and watch them yourself so that you can hold me accountable for my opinions and decide for yourself what methods seem to offer the best solutions for the problems facing humanity in the future.
This series of posts will be broken into 4 sections: Part 1 The Challenge; Part 2 The Organic Response; Part 3 The Case For Science; and Part 4 Protecting the Future. If I feel any particular section is getting too long I will break it into sub-sections. I sincerely thought that this issue would simply be a matter of finding out which foods were the most nutritious, finding some taste test results to determine what people preferred and moving on; boy was I wrong. I think as you read you will come to realize, as I did, there are no easy answers when it comes to food, and it is especially hard to know who to trust when it comes to information about what we eat. Hopefully, we will all find the questions we need to ask suppliers in order to provide the best nutrition for our families while maintaining the environment for future generations.
Sources for future posts:
Tomorrow's Table P.C. Ronald and R.W. Adamchak, Oxford University Press March 2008
The Open University- Genetic Modified Foods, The Issues (Multi-Media Podcast available free iTunes)
Yale School of Forestry- Food and Sustainable Agriculture (Lecture Series available free iTunes)
Oregon State University- Food for Thought (Lecture Series available free iTunes)
The Future of Food (Two part documentary available here)
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Dangour, A., Lock, K., Hayter, A., Aikenhead, A., Allen, E., & Uauy, R. (2010). Nutrition-related health effects of organic foods: a systematic reviewAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 92 (1), 203-210 DOI:10.3945/ajcn.2010.29269
Mader, P. (2002). Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic FarmingScience, 296 (5573), 1694-1697 DOI: 10.1126/science.1071148
http://www.foodwithlegs.com/organic-food-taste-test/
http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/content/101/6/290.full
http://www.pewenvironment.org/
So, for the purposes of this blog, which is not a scholarly paper nor a claimed authority of any kind, I will list here my sources for the information that will appear in future posts in this series. By doing so, I hope you will all track down these sources and read, listen and watch them yourself so that you can hold me accountable for my opinions and decide for yourself what methods seem to offer the best solutions for the problems facing humanity in the future.
This series of posts will be broken into 4 sections: Part 1 The Challenge; Part 2 The Organic Response; Part 3 The Case For Science; and Part 4 Protecting the Future. If I feel any particular section is getting too long I will break it into sub-sections. I sincerely thought that this issue would simply be a matter of finding out which foods were the most nutritious, finding some taste test results to determine what people preferred and moving on; boy was I wrong. I think as you read you will come to realize, as I did, there are no easy answers when it comes to food, and it is especially hard to know who to trust when it comes to information about what we eat. Hopefully, we will all find the questions we need to ask suppliers in order to provide the best nutrition for our families while maintaining the environment for future generations.
Sources for future posts:
Tomorrow's Table P.C. Ronald and R.W. Adamchak, Oxford University Press March 2008
The Open University- Genetic Modified Foods, The Issues (Multi-Media Podcast available free iTunes)
Yale School of Forestry- Food and Sustainable Agriculture (Lecture Series available free iTunes)
Oregon State University- Food for Thought (Lecture Series available free iTunes)
The Future of Food (Two part documentary available here)
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Dangour, A., Lock, K., Hayter, A., Aikenhead, A., Allen, E., & Uauy, R. (2010). Nutrition-related health effects of organic foods: a systematic reviewAmerican Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 92 (1), 203-210 DOI:10.3945/ajcn.2010.29269
Mader, P. (2002). Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic FarmingScience, 296 (5573), 1694-1697 DOI: 10.1126/science.1071148
http://www.foodwithlegs.com/organic-food-taste-test/
http://jrsm.rsmjournals.com/content/101/6/290.full
http://www.pewenvironment.org/
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Would You Like To Upsize That Question?
Stumbled across this wonderful website and thought it would be good to share it here. I think McDonalds deserves a lot of credit for doing this and hope that they give honest answers to all the questions that are asked and don't try burying some of the uncomfortable ones. I also think that many people will be surprised at the answers. I have no ethical issues with McDonalds and their food. They are in business to make money; they do so by providing a pretty decent value for your money. However, I don't spend a lot of money at McDonalds because I just don't think the food tastes that great. I will, on the other hand, admit to the odd Big Mac craving and a love their milkshakes.
So, if you have ever wanted to ask McDonalds about their food, company or service, head over and ask away.
So, if you have ever wanted to ask McDonalds about their food, company or service, head over and ask away.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
Trendy, Shmendy It's All Food To Me.
Larry Olmsted, of Forbes, has a new rant in which he examines what he considers America's 8 Worst Food Trends. For the most part I agree with Olmsted, but I differ in his response to some. Specifically, I don't think I am as snobby as he.
Let's start with food trucks. Generally, I agree, they are mostly nothing new and offer nothing you could not get at a bricks and mortar kind of place. Also, they do tend to steal customers from rent paying establishments. And, yes, they are hipster trendy. But, so what? Sometimes I don't want to sit and eat and just want something I can hold in my hand and eat while I walk or enjoy some quiet outdoor area. Many of the foods that trucks serve are not as convenient to take out in restaurants simply because it is hard to do eat in and take out well simultaneously. Also, I differ on the issue of what Olmsted calls the "wanna-be chefs". Again, so what if they are? Many trucks are run by people who are trained in culinary arts, have owned or worked in restaurants and wanted a change, or are following a passion in hopes of making the money needed to open a bricks and mortar establishment. Like any free enterprise, either the product is worth paying for or it isn't. If it isn't, they won't be around for long.
House cured meats: if it contains spices and fat then I want to try it. Period. One of the best things about being an adventurous eater is that I never know what I will get in any given meal. Some are not that great, but that just makes the good that much more enjoyable. But, what really bothers me about his views here, is the implication that there is only one standard for cured meats and it's his (or some agreed-upon-by-food-critics-standard). Either way, I usually resent being told what to like and not like by so called experts with 15 years experience. Really, just 15? Dude, I've been stuffing my fat ass with great food for most of my 51 years! And while I may not have travelled the world and eaten in all the fanciest "look-at-me" places, I have been exposed to some great cooks from various cultures all pushing out their own cured meats, preserved foods and even homemade wines. I would have missed out on a lot of great food if my standards were set that high.
The rest of the article I agree wholeheartedly with, but especially Olmsted's view on TV Cooking Competitions, or any reality cooking show for that matter. But, you all know my stand on that by now.
'via Blog this'
Let's start with food trucks. Generally, I agree, they are mostly nothing new and offer nothing you could not get at a bricks and mortar kind of place. Also, they do tend to steal customers from rent paying establishments. And, yes, they are hipster trendy. But, so what? Sometimes I don't want to sit and eat and just want something I can hold in my hand and eat while I walk or enjoy some quiet outdoor area. Many of the foods that trucks serve are not as convenient to take out in restaurants simply because it is hard to do eat in and take out well simultaneously. Also, I differ on the issue of what Olmsted calls the "wanna-be chefs". Again, so what if they are? Many trucks are run by people who are trained in culinary arts, have owned or worked in restaurants and wanted a change, or are following a passion in hopes of making the money needed to open a bricks and mortar establishment. Like any free enterprise, either the product is worth paying for or it isn't. If it isn't, they won't be around for long.
House cured meats: if it contains spices and fat then I want to try it. Period. One of the best things about being an adventurous eater is that I never know what I will get in any given meal. Some are not that great, but that just makes the good that much more enjoyable. But, what really bothers me about his views here, is the implication that there is only one standard for cured meats and it's his (or some agreed-upon-by-food-critics-standard). Either way, I usually resent being told what to like and not like by so called experts with 15 years experience. Really, just 15? Dude, I've been stuffing my fat ass with great food for most of my 51 years! And while I may not have travelled the world and eaten in all the fanciest "look-at-me" places, I have been exposed to some great cooks from various cultures all pushing out their own cured meats, preserved foods and even homemade wines. I would have missed out on a lot of great food if my standards were set that high.
The rest of the article I agree wholeheartedly with, but especially Olmsted's view on TV Cooking Competitions, or any reality cooking show for that matter. But, you all know my stand on that by now.
'via Blog this'
Saturday, June 2, 2012
What Wine Goes With Mammoth?
So perhaps the Alkaline Diet wasn't for you and you are still looking for that perfect diet. Well, perhaps this NPR piece on the Paleo Diet will steer you in the right direction. This restrictive diet has all the right pseudo-science backing it up and has even managed to align itself with Darwinian Evolution to keep those pesky skeptical scientists off their backs.
But, of course, there are no real scientific studies to back them up and their claims that paleolithic hunter gathers never suffered from obesity and disease fall apart under the simplest of enquiries. For instance, the fact they didn't live much past 35-40 years suggests they didn't live long enough to actually develop most diseases; the lack of a sedentary lifestyle (all that hunting and gathering, you know) meant they were physically more fit; going long stretches on very little calories due to failed hunts, drought conditions and competition from other species meant little chance of excess food; and, of course, not ever recording their health in journals might also account for the lack of evidence of their diseases. This one quote stood out the most for me:
There's this tendency to want to find the normal human diet, Nesse says. But every single diet you pick as had advantage of some sort. Humans have lived in all kinds of places and we have adapted to all kinds of diets.
So, if you really want to live the paleo lifestyle, get out and forage for your food, hunt some animals with your bare hands and really enjoy all the lifestyle has to offer. And, that includes the occasional misidentified poisonous mushroom or berry. This lower life expectancy would actually have some beneficial impact on the ecology by regulating human population. And it is for this reason that the Paleo Diet is receiving the Liver Rounds Seal of Approval.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Spring Time In Ontario
Chili Lime Roasted Pork with Baby Yukon Gold Potatoes and Fiddle Heads in Garlic, Shallot and Lemon. Paired with a glass of Angel's Gate Riesling
Why Don't I Just Eat an Alkaline Battery?
From the "where does this shit come from" files I give you the Acid Alkaline Diet, a diet which promises to slim you down and protect you from all forms of disease while simultaneously elevating your energy levels. Finally, the miracle cure to everything that humanity has long waited for; the only problem, of course, is that it is bullshit!
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Talk of Foie Gras Ban Galls Me
The State of Confusion California, has a ban on foie gras set to become law on July 1st of this year. Restaurants currently selling foie gras will have had 7 years to find an alternative menu item. There has been a lot of talk about the subject and where there is talk there is inevitably misinformation. Regardless what your initial feeling is about foie gras, take a couple of minutes and see for yourself here, here, here and here, whether you think the practice is cruel or not.
All animals that are raised by humans as food will inevitably die, that is just a simple fact. We are obliged to provide those animals, I believe, with as respectful and stress free an existence as possible. Respect includes reducing the waste from those animals by using every edible portion of each animal we kill and finding uses for the inedible portions where possible. I personally feel that the duck farmers that produce foie gras have, are and will continue to do just that. I don't like liver and giblets, sweet breads and organs, but I do like foie gras and I see its production as nothing more than taking advantage of the duck's genetic trait. For me there is no ethical issue. I have more concern for the treatment of cattle, pork and chicken on most farms. And, if you have ever witnessed animals at an abattoir you would realize the last moments of their lives are not so comfortable, either. Add to that the treatment of chickens in the entire production process and you can certainly find far more deserving sectors of agriculture for a ban.
But, maybe you are not convinced by the links and you still think that foie gras is not ethical for you. That's fine: convince me. Define what is ethical. If you are a vegan, congratulations, but let me remind you that agricultural practices of humans are the single biggest contributor to global warming, desertification, loss of top soil and water shortages; not to mention damage to ecosystems from over use of synthetic AND organic fertilizers and reduction of habitat for wild species. None of which, in my opinion, is very ethical on face value. But, you believe your life style is doing some good and this allows you to sleep better. Fair enough. And, I respect that.
The State of California did pass a law banning the shark fin trade, that I happen to agree with. "Oh, hold on Dennis," I hear you cry! "What hypocrisy is this?" well, the difference is that shark finning is having an ecological impact that goes beyond whether or not I think it is ethical to eat shark (for the record I would be ok with farmed shark where no threat of extinction exists). My guide for all matters seafood is the Seafood Watch program from Monterey Bay Aquarium. There are some alternatives suggested by Seafood Watch, but unfortunately, the really prized fins come from the more endangered species and are usually harvested in the most wasteful manner using only the fins. That is why I am opposed. I respect the culture that wants to keep this traditional item in its cuisine, though I would respect it more if it found a more sustainable, respectful and humane way to do so.
But, regardless of whether I agree with you or not, there are some limits to what I am prepared to do to convince you, or others, of my stance. One limit is to avoid criminal behaviour including publishing your personal details on line for the world to see. Or, having my supporters contact you to harass or threaten you. But, mostly, I will respect the privacy of your family and especially your children. Some in the California legislature are less principled.
All animals that are raised by humans as food will inevitably die, that is just a simple fact. We are obliged to provide those animals, I believe, with as respectful and stress free an existence as possible. Respect includes reducing the waste from those animals by using every edible portion of each animal we kill and finding uses for the inedible portions where possible. I personally feel that the duck farmers that produce foie gras have, are and will continue to do just that. I don't like liver and giblets, sweet breads and organs, but I do like foie gras and I see its production as nothing more than taking advantage of the duck's genetic trait. For me there is no ethical issue. I have more concern for the treatment of cattle, pork and chicken on most farms. And, if you have ever witnessed animals at an abattoir you would realize the last moments of their lives are not so comfortable, either. Add to that the treatment of chickens in the entire production process and you can certainly find far more deserving sectors of agriculture for a ban.
But, maybe you are not convinced by the links and you still think that foie gras is not ethical for you. That's fine: convince me. Define what is ethical. If you are a vegan, congratulations, but let me remind you that agricultural practices of humans are the single biggest contributor to global warming, desertification, loss of top soil and water shortages; not to mention damage to ecosystems from over use of synthetic AND organic fertilizers and reduction of habitat for wild species. None of which, in my opinion, is very ethical on face value. But, you believe your life style is doing some good and this allows you to sleep better. Fair enough. And, I respect that.
The State of California did pass a law banning the shark fin trade, that I happen to agree with. "Oh, hold on Dennis," I hear you cry! "What hypocrisy is this?" well, the difference is that shark finning is having an ecological impact that goes beyond whether or not I think it is ethical to eat shark (for the record I would be ok with farmed shark where no threat of extinction exists). My guide for all matters seafood is the Seafood Watch program from Monterey Bay Aquarium. There are some alternatives suggested by Seafood Watch, but unfortunately, the really prized fins come from the more endangered species and are usually harvested in the most wasteful manner using only the fins. That is why I am opposed. I respect the culture that wants to keep this traditional item in its cuisine, though I would respect it more if it found a more sustainable, respectful and humane way to do so.
But, regardless of whether I agree with you or not, there are some limits to what I am prepared to do to convince you, or others, of my stance. One limit is to avoid criminal behaviour including publishing your personal details on line for the world to see. Or, having my supporters contact you to harass or threaten you. But, mostly, I will respect the privacy of your family and especially your children. Some in the California legislature are less principled.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
The William
Asked, today, what would be my ideal stove top; my answer was:
Of course, it is strictly a concept now but I would love to see this developed, or at least some of its concepts.
Of course, it is strictly a concept now but I would love to see this developed, or at least some of its concepts.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
How Do You Detect All Those Notes With Your Nose So High In The Air?
Last week, the biggest story on wine blogs and forums was this story about Costco's wine buyer, Annette Alvarez-Peters. Most of the tone of commentary was similar to Eater's, with no-one really defending Alvarez-Peters. But, I watched the video and thought: "so what?"
Well, the what appears to be in the details of Ms. Alvarez-Peters' background. You see, she is not one of them. She is not a Cordon Bleu trained chef or Sommelier; or from a wine making family with roots in the industry; or from a small boutique retailer. She does not speak of nuances and notes and tannins like the other wine experts. She doesn't know, or at least they assume she doesn't know, what goes with foie gras or Mahi Mahi or white truffles. My God! She probably couldn't even tell you the difference between American Oak and French, that bitch! No, Alvarez-Peters has the audacity to be trained in retail purchasing. And worse, bulk retail purchasing. I mean, they only mark up their products 15 percent. Quick, somebody tweet David Chang!
Oh no, she is not part of the wine industry - and I do not speak here of the grape growers and wine makers but, rather, the whole industry of "experts": restauranteurs and retailers who have made a fortune on the backs of those who make wine. This is a group of people who believe that they are endowed with genetically superior palates and only through years of training and suffering for their art have they been able to detect the subtle differences between appellations. Who am kidding? They can even detect differences between one clos and another, one year and another, probably even when a winery changes bottle suppliers. Yes, unless you have memorized every wine ever made, every chateau, every region, every varietal, every vintage, every wine maker, you will never be able to decide for yourself whether something is "delicious" or not and will always need the guidance of the wine Jedi.
I watched the video and thought to myself, for I dare not think these things out loud, that I like Alvarez-Peters! I admire that she has worked her way up through the company to be in charge of what might be the most prestigious part of Costco's business. I liked her reply when she was called the most powerful buyer in the industry: " I am an employee of Costco" which is the point. Her job is to find products that she believes will be most appreciated by her company's customers, not to perpetuate a myth or save a floundering winery. And, she is right when she says: "in the end it is just a beverage". Why is this so offensive a statement? Oh right, because you are supposed to have a magical, transcendental experience with wine. Right, I forgot. It's like drinking wine should be the same kind of miracle as when Jesus turned water into wine - which, of course, it is: in that neither ever happened.
But, snobbery aside, there is one other thing that bothers me about the criticism of Alvarez-Peters and that is the assumption that she could not have taken enough training to be able to know as much as she needs to about wine to purchase it (by the way, she has). In other words, unless you have taken all the proper classes and attended all the right schools and interned at all the right restaurants and wineries, you have no business speaking about food or, especially wine. A friend of mine is a professional photographer who laments that every computer geek with Photoshop and a digital camera thinks he is a professional photographer. That, of course, does not make them professionals, but a lack of professional credentials does not mean they can't take an excellent picture, even one that is considered art. A professional credential just gives you the assurance that this person should have some knowledge about what they are doing and should offer some guarantee to protect your purchase. As we all know, no such assurances exist in any profession. For Costco, the credentials that Alvarez-Peters brings as a retail buyer are of greater importance than her wine expertise (which can be learned) and wine experts probably do not make the best retail buyers (which also can be learned).
I have never taken a cooking course in my life other than two weeks of home-economics in grades seven and eight. I like my food and others have told me they like my food. I have never taken a nutrition course, yet I know the supposed basic principles of proper nutrition even if I refuse to follow them. I know how almost every kitchen gadget in the world works, my knife skills I would pit against many professional cooks, I design my own recipes and alter others. I can substitute ingredients, estimate weights and measures, and tell when something needs more seasoning or time cooking. Would I hire me as a professional cook? No, my plating sucks and I don't know enough about how professional kitchens function. But, I can tell the difference between good food and bad, good wine and bad, and a good time and bad. I think, with my life experiences, I could run a produce department, butcher shop or other food/beverage retail business. But, I wouldn't expect to be hired by anyone directly to the position of president. Alvarez-Peters has done no less in her career, from my perspective.
By far, the tag line that got the most headlines from the video was "surely it's different from toilet paper?" "Why?" she responds. One comment I read stated: "I have never heard such a stupid statement, even from a corporate zipperhead. Does any restaurant say that it is just a plate of food? Or a car company say it is just transportation." Well, no! And no wine maker is saying it either. Alvarez-Peters is a retailer of wine. If she sold Toyotas and suddenly had to sell yellow school buses, I am sure she would approach it from the perspective of "they're just motorized transportation." Which is the sign of all good salespersons. It is not a retailer's responsibility to design a product's marketing plan. If it were, manufacturers would not employ marketing departments. A retailer has the task of knowing how their customers respond to the products they offer and ensuring they are presented accordingly. Everyone with a Costco membership, myself included, understands that, because we have seen some items sold in one location not sold in others.
At the end of the day, Alvarez-Peters is paid to look out for the best interests of Costco and its members. If the wine establishment doesn't like their approach they can stop selling them wine, stop inviting them to tastings, stop purchasing them at their stores, etc. I have many hobbies and wine is just one of them. I live in a part of the world where wine sales and prices are strictly controlled by the state, along with all alcohol. In fact, other than the producers, the state is the only authorized retailer of alcohol. The LCBO receives much of the same criticism that Costco receives in the U.S. This does not keep me from seeking out independent producers in Ontario and, in fact, has encouraged me to find yet another hobby: touring Ontario wine regions.
I don't buy the argument that Costco's format is an independent killer. With a little creativity on the part of the Ontario government, Costco, and the independent Ontario wineries, Costco could help put more of their wine on the tables of Ontario wine drinkers. This might not be a good thing for smaller independent retailers (though not a concern in Ontario for alcohol, anyway) but, where does it say in the laws of capitalism, that I am indebted to those retailers and must pay to support their accustomed lifestyle? Not many of them feel badly that the industry I work in is dying, in fact their association has made it clear they don't care much about the lifestyle to which I have become accustomed. I can only wish that Costco were allowed to sell wine in Ontario, my declining purchasing power is making this a hobby that I may not be able to support, and I can not see how that is good for any industry in this economy.
Well, the what appears to be in the details of Ms. Alvarez-Peters' background. You see, she is not one of them. She is not a Cordon Bleu trained chef or Sommelier; or from a wine making family with roots in the industry; or from a small boutique retailer. She does not speak of nuances and notes and tannins like the other wine experts. She doesn't know, or at least they assume she doesn't know, what goes with foie gras or Mahi Mahi or white truffles. My God! She probably couldn't even tell you the difference between American Oak and French, that bitch! No, Alvarez-Peters has the audacity to be trained in retail purchasing. And worse, bulk retail purchasing. I mean, they only mark up their products 15 percent. Quick, somebody tweet David Chang!
Oh no, she is not part of the wine industry - and I do not speak here of the grape growers and wine makers but, rather, the whole industry of "experts": restauranteurs and retailers who have made a fortune on the backs of those who make wine. This is a group of people who believe that they are endowed with genetically superior palates and only through years of training and suffering for their art have they been able to detect the subtle differences between appellations. Who am kidding? They can even detect differences between one clos and another, one year and another, probably even when a winery changes bottle suppliers. Yes, unless you have memorized every wine ever made, every chateau, every region, every varietal, every vintage, every wine maker, you will never be able to decide for yourself whether something is "delicious" or not and will always need the guidance of the wine Jedi.
I watched the video and thought to myself, for I dare not think these things out loud, that I like Alvarez-Peters! I admire that she has worked her way up through the company to be in charge of what might be the most prestigious part of Costco's business. I liked her reply when she was called the most powerful buyer in the industry: " I am an employee of Costco" which is the point. Her job is to find products that she believes will be most appreciated by her company's customers, not to perpetuate a myth or save a floundering winery. And, she is right when she says: "in the end it is just a beverage". Why is this so offensive a statement? Oh right, because you are supposed to have a magical, transcendental experience with wine. Right, I forgot. It's like drinking wine should be the same kind of miracle as when Jesus turned water into wine - which, of course, it is: in that neither ever happened.
But, snobbery aside, there is one other thing that bothers me about the criticism of Alvarez-Peters and that is the assumption that she could not have taken enough training to be able to know as much as she needs to about wine to purchase it (by the way, she has). In other words, unless you have taken all the proper classes and attended all the right schools and interned at all the right restaurants and wineries, you have no business speaking about food or, especially wine. A friend of mine is a professional photographer who laments that every computer geek with Photoshop and a digital camera thinks he is a professional photographer. That, of course, does not make them professionals, but a lack of professional credentials does not mean they can't take an excellent picture, even one that is considered art. A professional credential just gives you the assurance that this person should have some knowledge about what they are doing and should offer some guarantee to protect your purchase. As we all know, no such assurances exist in any profession. For Costco, the credentials that Alvarez-Peters brings as a retail buyer are of greater importance than her wine expertise (which can be learned) and wine experts probably do not make the best retail buyers (which also can be learned).
I have never taken a cooking course in my life other than two weeks of home-economics in grades seven and eight. I like my food and others have told me they like my food. I have never taken a nutrition course, yet I know the supposed basic principles of proper nutrition even if I refuse to follow them. I know how almost every kitchen gadget in the world works, my knife skills I would pit against many professional cooks, I design my own recipes and alter others. I can substitute ingredients, estimate weights and measures, and tell when something needs more seasoning or time cooking. Would I hire me as a professional cook? No, my plating sucks and I don't know enough about how professional kitchens function. But, I can tell the difference between good food and bad, good wine and bad, and a good time and bad. I think, with my life experiences, I could run a produce department, butcher shop or other food/beverage retail business. But, I wouldn't expect to be hired by anyone directly to the position of president. Alvarez-Peters has done no less in her career, from my perspective.
By far, the tag line that got the most headlines from the video was "surely it's different from toilet paper?" "Why?" she responds. One comment I read stated: "I have never heard such a stupid statement, even from a corporate zipperhead. Does any restaurant say that it is just a plate of food? Or a car company say it is just transportation." Well, no! And no wine maker is saying it either. Alvarez-Peters is a retailer of wine. If she sold Toyotas and suddenly had to sell yellow school buses, I am sure she would approach it from the perspective of "they're just motorized transportation." Which is the sign of all good salespersons. It is not a retailer's responsibility to design a product's marketing plan. If it were, manufacturers would not employ marketing departments. A retailer has the task of knowing how their customers respond to the products they offer and ensuring they are presented accordingly. Everyone with a Costco membership, myself included, understands that, because we have seen some items sold in one location not sold in others.
At the end of the day, Alvarez-Peters is paid to look out for the best interests of Costco and its members. If the wine establishment doesn't like their approach they can stop selling them wine, stop inviting them to tastings, stop purchasing them at their stores, etc. I have many hobbies and wine is just one of them. I live in a part of the world where wine sales and prices are strictly controlled by the state, along with all alcohol. In fact, other than the producers, the state is the only authorized retailer of alcohol. The LCBO receives much of the same criticism that Costco receives in the U.S. This does not keep me from seeking out independent producers in Ontario and, in fact, has encouraged me to find yet another hobby: touring Ontario wine regions.
I don't buy the argument that Costco's format is an independent killer. With a little creativity on the part of the Ontario government, Costco, and the independent Ontario wineries, Costco could help put more of their wine on the tables of Ontario wine drinkers. This might not be a good thing for smaller independent retailers (though not a concern in Ontario for alcohol, anyway) but, where does it say in the laws of capitalism, that I am indebted to those retailers and must pay to support their accustomed lifestyle? Not many of them feel badly that the industry I work in is dying, in fact their association has made it clear they don't care much about the lifestyle to which I have become accustomed. I can only wish that Costco were allowed to sell wine in Ontario, my declining purchasing power is making this a hobby that I may not be able to support, and I can not see how that is good for any industry in this economy.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
I Don't Always Drink Water, But When I Do It's From A Tap
If you buy bottled water while living in most of Canada's large urban areas, you are a) possibly harming yourself b) damaging the environment and c) wasting your money.
Watch this video for all the proof you need.
Watch this video for all the proof you need.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Beamsville Versus Burgundy Round 1
There is a new fad in the wine industry, a quirky little cousin of the organic movement known as "biodynamic" and every wine producing region in the world seems to be boasting a new biodynamic winery every year. Ontario is no exception. As you might have learned from reading my post about my visit to the Beamsville Bench a few weeks ago, I really enjoyed my visit to the Tawse Winery, a biodynamic producer. I spoke of my admiration for their passion and dedication as well as the quality of the wines produced there. But, do I think the quality of the wines has anything to do with the idiosyncrasies of the biodynamic movement?
Jancis Robinson has written that she believes the biodynamic movement "just makes for better tasting wines". If that is true, then certainly anyone would find a biodynamic wine better regardless of their experience with wine in general. What I mean, of course, is that if two wines are served to a group of people, one biodynamic and one non, the biodynamic should be clearly favoured, should it not?
A couple of weeks ago I pitted two wines against each other in a tasting. One of these wines was a biodynamic wine from Tawse Winery, a 2009 Sketches Chardonnay. The second wine was a Burgundy sustainably produced Chablis, 2009 Domaine Louis Moreau Chablis 1er Cru Vaulignot. The people tasting were the usual group of friends some with a greater wine appreciation than others, but none with any expertise claimed or imagined. They certainly would not have a prejudice toward one form of farming over another. No mention was made before the tasting of one of the wines being a biodynamic wine.
To my thinking, if a biodynamic wine is superior because of its method of farming it should be favoured by people who like wine regardless of experience or the wine simply does not live up to the marketing hype. Furthermore, if the wine is not the clear winner and you maintain that these methods result in the best examples of wines from any region, you must then concede that your region is not as suitable for wine making. Or, you have to admit that there is far more involved in making wine than the position of the planets or the burying of a bovine head for a specified period of time during a specific phase of the moon. And, let me nip in the bud this next argument, if only experts can tell the difference, you must concede that your methods hold no relevance to the average consumer and labelling is irrelevant.
So, who was the clear winner? Eight people were asked to pick their favourite wine and what region they thought the wine came from. Two people picked the Tawse as coming from Niagara and one person guessed the Chablis as coming from France. As for preference, 3 people declared a preference for the biodynamic wine and 5 preferred the sustainably grown product.
Ok, this is not the most scientific test in the world, but I bet I could run the tasting a thousand times with different people and get the same statistically insignificant result. There is no discernible difference in taste from biodynamic processes, in my opinion. If the claims of superiority were true, I would have expected, even in this small sampling, to have seen some indication that people preferred the Tawse Chardonnay. Almost everything about these two wines was the same: vintage, bottle size, price, amount of oak and soil type. The only clear difference, aside from the influence of the wine maker, was the approach toward vineyard management. This clearly was not enough to overcome the winemaker's expert touch.
Does this mean I no longer love Tawse? No. I think they make great wine and I think they will get better at it; I just don't think that their biodynamic approach will have anything to do with it. While we were tasting wine at Tawse we were told that, during harvesting, workers were instructed to discard any bunches of grapes that had any unripened fruit. Not just the unripened berries, but the whole bunch was to be discarded. This kind of attention to quality is what will make or break Tawse and, regardless of whether or not the "moon is in the seventh house, or jupiter is aligned with mars".
I plan to write more about organic and sustainable farming in future posts, in the mean time you can read this blog to give you an idea of the criticisms of biodynamic farming.
Jancis Robinson has written that she believes the biodynamic movement "just makes for better tasting wines". If that is true, then certainly anyone would find a biodynamic wine better regardless of their experience with wine in general. What I mean, of course, is that if two wines are served to a group of people, one biodynamic and one non, the biodynamic should be clearly favoured, should it not?
A couple of weeks ago I pitted two wines against each other in a tasting. One of these wines was a biodynamic wine from Tawse Winery, a 2009 Sketches Chardonnay. The second wine was a Burgundy sustainably produced Chablis, 2009 Domaine Louis Moreau Chablis 1er Cru Vaulignot. The people tasting were the usual group of friends some with a greater wine appreciation than others, but none with any expertise claimed or imagined. They certainly would not have a prejudice toward one form of farming over another. No mention was made before the tasting of one of the wines being a biodynamic wine.
To my thinking, if a biodynamic wine is superior because of its method of farming it should be favoured by people who like wine regardless of experience or the wine simply does not live up to the marketing hype. Furthermore, if the wine is not the clear winner and you maintain that these methods result in the best examples of wines from any region, you must then concede that your region is not as suitable for wine making. Or, you have to admit that there is far more involved in making wine than the position of the planets or the burying of a bovine head for a specified period of time during a specific phase of the moon. And, let me nip in the bud this next argument, if only experts can tell the difference, you must concede that your methods hold no relevance to the average consumer and labelling is irrelevant.
So, who was the clear winner? Eight people were asked to pick their favourite wine and what region they thought the wine came from. Two people picked the Tawse as coming from Niagara and one person guessed the Chablis as coming from France. As for preference, 3 people declared a preference for the biodynamic wine and 5 preferred the sustainably grown product.
Ok, this is not the most scientific test in the world, but I bet I could run the tasting a thousand times with different people and get the same statistically insignificant result. There is no discernible difference in taste from biodynamic processes, in my opinion. If the claims of superiority were true, I would have expected, even in this small sampling, to have seen some indication that people preferred the Tawse Chardonnay. Almost everything about these two wines was the same: vintage, bottle size, price, amount of oak and soil type. The only clear difference, aside from the influence of the wine maker, was the approach toward vineyard management. This clearly was not enough to overcome the winemaker's expert touch.
Does this mean I no longer love Tawse? No. I think they make great wine and I think they will get better at it; I just don't think that their biodynamic approach will have anything to do with it. While we were tasting wine at Tawse we were told that, during harvesting, workers were instructed to discard any bunches of grapes that had any unripened fruit. Not just the unripened berries, but the whole bunch was to be discarded. This kind of attention to quality is what will make or break Tawse and, regardless of whether or not the "moon is in the seventh house, or jupiter is aligned with mars".
I plan to write more about organic and sustainable farming in future posts, in the mean time you can read this blog to give you an idea of the criticisms of biodynamic farming.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
So, How About This Weather, Eh?
Not so long ago, I wrote about the challenging harvest that New Zealand and Australia were facing this season for their 2012 Vintage and highlighted how this impacts the price of wine. We learned that climate and weather are impacting the process and, consequently, the price.
We in Ontario are not immune to these climate caused pressures and the Niagara region is especially affected by warmer seasonal average temperatures. The Toronto Star has a very good article on the challenges facing the wineries from 2011/12's unusually warm winter and how this will affect the final product.
I have two thoughts on the subject, first: keep an eye out for early reviews of this year's Ice Wine from Niagara, especially the most renowned producers. Ice Wine from Niagara has a worldwide reputation and is always in high demand. Ice Wine is an excellent wine to cellar for a very long time. If the small amounts are as good as the article suggests, this could be one of Niagara's better vintages and a good opportunity to enhance a fine collection. Look for wines from Daniel Lenko, Royal de Maria, Inniskillen, Thomas and Vaughn, Magnotta, Pilliteri, Chateau de Charmes, Coyote Run and Creekside. Be prepared to pay a little more than usual, but keep in mind: with ice wine a little goes a long way.
Secondly, I think that Niagara's best year might still be ahead. Global warming is certainly changing the seasonal highs and lows for the region, but this winter came on the heels of two record breaking cold and snowy winters and we should probably expect that, for the next few winters anyway, perhaps a longer fall (resulting in riper fruit with more sugar) and then some cold temperatures at night late in December or early January (ideal harvesting conditions). I do not think that it is inconceivable to expect a "perfect" winter at some time considering the way in which our climate has behaved.
In the 90's I spent a lot of time writing Emergency Preparedness Plans and researching some of the threats clients should prepare for. One such threat was global warming and the predictions of that theory that I familiarized myself with back then are rapidly coming to fruition ( get it, fruition, because it's a blog about wine) Anyway, one prediction was the increase in numbers and severity of severe weather events such as hurricanes, tornadoes and blizzards. As well, the expectation was to see unusual warm weather in historically colder regions and cold and snow in traditionally warm areas. We saw some of all that this past year with snow in Arizona, temperatures in the 20's(celcius) mid winter in the North East, large killer tornadoes in the midwest out of season, and the weather bomb in Australia/New Zealand, not to mention the bizarre weather of Europe this past year.
For the immediate future, farmers of all stripes will be facing challenges to produce a quality product in sufficient quantity, but for the wine producers, these challenges might be more profitable, in the short term at least, and the Niagara region might be well placed to be the most profitable.
A hat tip to Sarah for the link to the Star article.
We in Ontario are not immune to these climate caused pressures and the Niagara region is especially affected by warmer seasonal average temperatures. The Toronto Star has a very good article on the challenges facing the wineries from 2011/12's unusually warm winter and how this will affect the final product.
I have two thoughts on the subject, first: keep an eye out for early reviews of this year's Ice Wine from Niagara, especially the most renowned producers. Ice Wine from Niagara has a worldwide reputation and is always in high demand. Ice Wine is an excellent wine to cellar for a very long time. If the small amounts are as good as the article suggests, this could be one of Niagara's better vintages and a good opportunity to enhance a fine collection. Look for wines from Daniel Lenko, Royal de Maria, Inniskillen, Thomas and Vaughn, Magnotta, Pilliteri, Chateau de Charmes, Coyote Run and Creekside. Be prepared to pay a little more than usual, but keep in mind: with ice wine a little goes a long way.
Secondly, I think that Niagara's best year might still be ahead. Global warming is certainly changing the seasonal highs and lows for the region, but this winter came on the heels of two record breaking cold and snowy winters and we should probably expect that, for the next few winters anyway, perhaps a longer fall (resulting in riper fruit with more sugar) and then some cold temperatures at night late in December or early January (ideal harvesting conditions). I do not think that it is inconceivable to expect a "perfect" winter at some time considering the way in which our climate has behaved.
In the 90's I spent a lot of time writing Emergency Preparedness Plans and researching some of the threats clients should prepare for. One such threat was global warming and the predictions of that theory that I familiarized myself with back then are rapidly coming to fruition ( get it, fruition, because it's a blog about wine) Anyway, one prediction was the increase in numbers and severity of severe weather events such as hurricanes, tornadoes and blizzards. As well, the expectation was to see unusual warm weather in historically colder regions and cold and snow in traditionally warm areas. We saw some of all that this past year with snow in Arizona, temperatures in the 20's(celcius) mid winter in the North East, large killer tornadoes in the midwest out of season, and the weather bomb in Australia/New Zealand, not to mention the bizarre weather of Europe this past year.
For the immediate future, farmers of all stripes will be facing challenges to produce a quality product in sufficient quantity, but for the wine producers, these challenges might be more profitable, in the short term at least, and the Niagara region might be well placed to be the most profitable.
A hat tip to Sarah for the link to the Star article.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
Where's the (Kobe) Beef?
Larry Olmstead has a fascinating 3 part series in Forbes that looks at the authenticity of Kobe beef and its availability outside of Japan. It is enlightening and I urge you to read all three parts to get a true understanding about how labeling works. While he is examining the U.S. labeling laws, much of what he says regarding Kobe Beef does apply to Canada, as well: if you think you have eaten Kobe Beef here, you are probably mistaken, for all the same reasons. I have had, what was labeled as, Kobe hot dogs and, after reading the article, now realize that they probably were most definitely not Kobe.
Olmstead discusses the international labeling treaties and the fact that the U.S. has never signed on to those treaties (just as they have not signed on to many international treaties). Olmstead makes the case that it is hypocrisy on the part of the U.S. when they have strong armed many nations, including Canada, to adopt draconian and creativity-stemming intellectual property laws to protect the recording, motion picture and publishing industries that are monopolized by the U.S. (it is interesting that the U.S. has still not passed their own legislation on this issue) Olmstead writes:
Canadians seem to be too generous to those who have poisoned our food and water supplies over the years - many believe the Koebels got off relatively easy in Walkerton, let alone the government, Maple Leaf Meats has done ok since the listeria outbreak and the beef industry here never really suffered in the domestic market as a result of mad cow outbreak. It seems that the more our food supply is condensed in the hands of a few multinationals the less testing and enforcement our government is willing to invest. It is time we all demanded stricter labeling regulations, more thorough inspections and the attitude of "caveat venditor" (a notion I would argue is as much a part of the libertarian's patron saint Adam Smith's teachings) should be the rallying cry of concerned consumers everywhere. In the meantime, a healthy skepticism toward marketing claims, be they big business or small, would go a long way in preventing others from stuffing their pockets with your hard earned money. The next time I see a retailer selling Kobe Beef I know I will be having an interesting conversation with them. I will simply ask to see the serial number provided with each cut of meat sold from Kobe Japan and watch with delight as they squirm a little.
Olmstead discusses the international labeling treaties and the fact that the U.S. has never signed on to those treaties (just as they have not signed on to many international treaties). Olmstead makes the case that it is hypocrisy on the part of the U.S. when they have strong armed many nations, including Canada, to adopt draconian and creativity-stemming intellectual property laws to protect the recording, motion picture and publishing industries that are monopolized by the U.S. (it is interesting that the U.S. has still not passed their own legislation on this issue) Olmstead writes:
This is not an oversight, as in, “hey, we forgot to regulate the labeling of Kobe beef.” This is part of a pattern of deliberate actions going back well over a century on the part of the Federal government to actively ignore foreign trademarks and intellectual property claims in order to support domestic industries. It has very much been done on purpose, and continues to be done on purpose, at the expense of the American consumer (and foreign producers). It is also stunningly hypocritical, and flies directly in the face of the government’s deep pocketed attempts to combat piracy in the arenas of music, film, technology, and software.Many of the treaties discussed in the article have been ratified by Canada and products such as Champagne are protected here - if a sparkling wine is labeled Champagne it must come from the French appellation of Champagne. But, not all products are protected in Canada, either, and we do a pretty good job on hypocrisy ourselves, at times. Olmstead's point that allowing companies here to make money off the efforts of more hard working producers as unfair to those producers AND to the consumers is a valid criticism of governments that refuse to enact safeguards. And, in Canada, the problem is about to become much worse as the government has announced plans to stop investigating some claims, cutting of inspectors and a general malaise toward consumer protection. More and more, consumers in Canada and the U.S. are being left to their own devices in a libertarian controlled market that uses the refrain "caveat emptor" as some kind of defense for fraud.
Canadians seem to be too generous to those who have poisoned our food and water supplies over the years - many believe the Koebels got off relatively easy in Walkerton, let alone the government, Maple Leaf Meats has done ok since the listeria outbreak and the beef industry here never really suffered in the domestic market as a result of mad cow outbreak. It seems that the more our food supply is condensed in the hands of a few multinationals the less testing and enforcement our government is willing to invest. It is time we all demanded stricter labeling regulations, more thorough inspections and the attitude of "caveat venditor" (a notion I would argue is as much a part of the libertarian's patron saint Adam Smith's teachings) should be the rallying cry of concerned consumers everywhere. In the meantime, a healthy skepticism toward marketing claims, be they big business or small, would go a long way in preventing others from stuffing their pockets with your hard earned money. The next time I see a retailer selling Kobe Beef I know I will be having an interesting conversation with them. I will simply ask to see the serial number provided with each cut of meat sold from Kobe Japan and watch with delight as they squirm a little.
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Three Posties Walk Into A Tasting Bar...
...again and again and again and again. And we all stayed sobre, for the most part.
On Thursday I and two friends (Iain and Sarah) took a road trip to the Beamsville and Twenty Mile Benches of the Niagara Region to check out some of the wine Ontario has to offer that is not readily available in LCBO stores. I had identified 6 wineries of interest that I was hoping to have the time to visit and knew that some would still be on reduced winter hours, so I was sure to be flexible about the tour. Having never been on a Niagara tour I had no idea what to expect but, it was a beautiful day, sunny and mild, and so we embarked on our adventure in a positive mood.
We left Markham shortly after 10 am and arrived at our first winery, Rosewood Estates, shortly before 11:30 am. Rosewood is a fairly new winery having opened to the public in 2008 but, they are already attracting attention for their wines and for their unique offerings in honey products including a very nice Mead. We were welcomed warmly by the staff and offered a 3 flight tasting of our choice of wines. We chose to sample their 2008 Riesling, 2008 Pinot Noir and a 2007 Mead Blanc. Both the Riesling and Pinot Noir were typical of what the Beamsville Bench has to offer with the Riesling being crisp, tart and very approachable. It would be nice as an aperitif or with shrimp or light seafood. The Pinot Noir was quite fruit forward with a balance of acidity and sweetness and the oak was noticeable but not overpowering the berry fruits typical of the grape. I had never tasted Mead before and was pleasantly surprised at its clean taste and surprising acidity. I was expecting something much more sugar loaded and richer and this was a wine I would gladly drink with sharp aged cheddar but also slightly spicy asian food. I picked up a Pinot Noir, Reserve Chardonnay and a Sussreserve Riesling all from 2009. Tastings at Rosewood were $3 per person which was waved as we purchased some of their product.
Our next stop on the list was a winery that I had read much about, that has been garnering rave reviews for their wines, and which Beppi Crosariol had recommended as one of his top 8 wineries to visit in the region. Now, we have all been told that if we have nothing good to say we should say nothing at all. Well, I have something good to say so I am also going to have something not so good to say about this winery later. Hidden Bench is quite possibly one of the best wineries in Ontario right now. Fairly new, they are currently targeting the premium market and this is reflected in their prices which range between $24-$55, all well worth the money (pricing is done annually and will change from vintage to vintage to reflect the quality of each year) and the fact that they often sell out of their wines shortly after the release dates (one in spring, one in fall). Many of their offerings are excellent choices for cellaring and have a balance and finish that just seems more refined on the palate than their neighbours at Rosewood. The Chardonnay is especially nice with lemon and apple flavours, acidity and sweetness, and oak all in fine balance. But before you enjoy the wonderful wines at Hidden Bench, you will first be struck by the beauty of the property and the wonderful patio with a magnificent stone fireplace built into the outside wall of the building. The tasting room is equally impressive inside this renovated 150 year old farm house. For $10 we tasted 3 of their wines, a Riesling, Chardonnay and red Meritage that was a blend of Merlot/Cabernet Franc/Cabernet Sauvignon/Malbec. I purchased two of their wines, a 2008 Riesling and 2009 Pinot Noir. You could not ask for better examples of what the Beamsville Bench is capable of in wine production.
The third stop on our trip was also recommended by Beppi Crosariol and is the biodynamic winery of Tawse. All three of us fell in love with this winery the moment we drove through their impressive gates and up the winding drive to their state-of-the-art, gravity fed, wine making facility. This sustainably focused winery has been named Canadian Winery of the Year for 2010 and 2011 and it shows. We arrived without an appointment and were met by, perhaps, the friendliest person you will ever meet: Rheal. Despite the fact we had not booked a tour and despite the fact that there was no one available to give us one, Rheal took it upon himself to give us a quick look into one of the barrel caves dug into the side of the hill the winery is built on. Seeing all those barrels stacked up and experiencing the smell of red wine and oak was intoxicating even before the tasting began. Rheal could not have been a better host and was so much fun to talk to about the winery, the vineyard, the winemaking process and the final product. His passion for his work and his employer was infectious and we spent quite a while at this particular winery. Tastings were supposed to be $3 for a flight of 3 wines but, Rheal managed to sneak in 5 leading us through what he felt best exemplified the wineries best work. It was an amazing visit and the tasting fee was waived as we all bought some product. I purchased a Pinot Noir, a Rosé and a Chardonnay which I have since used in a tasting (stay tuned for results). Regrettably, we had to say goodbye to our new best friend and made our way into Jordan Station to purchase cheese and find a nice place to lunch.
The Upper Canada Cheese Company is owned by the same people who own Hidden Bench Winery and we had decided to stop in long before we knew this after seeing it advertised in a travel guide picked up at Rosewood. This quaint little cheese shop with its own creamery, is an excellent stop and once inside we were immediately accosted by someone equally as friendly and enthusiastic as Rheal. Five cheeses were laid out for tasting and all were excellent. We enquired about a nice place for lunch, got directions, bought some groceries and made our way to look for the restaurant.
Zooma Zooma Cafe in Jordan looks, from the outside, like a century old cottage not too dissimilar to, though much smaller than, Auberge de Pommier. From the inside, the two could not be more unalike. Bohemian is the key word and the bright red painted walls with eclectic decor gives one pause to reconsider the choice. But the food and service soon make you forget about the 1960's era formica topped table you are seated at and you settle in to enjoy very good food at extremely fair prices. Entrees were an average of $9 and they serve pizza, sandwiches,salads and local wine. A side of fries with smokey ketchup could be had for $3. The three of us split a bill of $51 dollars which included two tea and a glass of Daniel Lenko wine. Not a bad lunch to help re-energize for more wine tasting.
The next stop was not planned, but since we had become a little lethargic from cheese and lunch, we took the easy way out and visited Cave Spring Cellars conveniently located across the street from Zooma Zooma. The tastings continued at Cave Spring as we tried the Sauvignon Blanc and Chenin Blanc at $1-$2 per wine tasted. This fee was also waved upon purchase of wines from their store. Unfortunately, tours of the facility are required to be pre-booked and the tasting room was relatively busy compared to other wineries and there was only the one staff member on duty. We piled into Iain's truck and headed toward our fifth and final stop of the day.
Flat Rock Cellars was not one of my picks, it was suggested by Iain, and is an example of why you should stay flexible when visiting Niagara. Flat Rock also has a state of the art, gravity fed, low environmental impacting, modern facility and the staff could not be more proud of it if they owned it themselves. Sarah's favourite person from the tour (Kyle - equal in passion about wine to Rheal) led us in tastings of some of Flat Rocks finest offerings. First up, a 2010 Twisted, a blend of the regions best known whites: Chardonnay, Riesling and Gewurtztraminer. This is a stellar wine that would be a great summer patio wine and would be great with potato salad and bbq fare. We also tried the Pinot Noir and the Pinot Noir Rosé which were also quite approachable wines that would be great for patios and bbq's. I did purchase a bottle of the Pinot Noir and was surprised that, despite having spent the least amount of money at this stop and having been given a quick-look tour of the processing area, the tasting fee of $5 was also waived. I know at least two of us will be back soon to this winery, and one of us for the wine.
Having been my first trip to Niagara for the wineries I was not sure what to expect but I soon found out, that for wine lovers, this is a great way to spend a day and pick up some wines that are not carried in the local LCBO. The people of Beamsville and Jordan are great ambassadors for the province: warm, welcoming, helpful and passionate about their region's biggest industry. All but one of the wineries waved the tasting fee despite the fact that we did not all buy the minimum for waving. All of the people, except one, greeted us with warm smiles and a sense of humour. All, but one, were interested to know where we came from and what our experience with wine was. All of them will, except one, see me again visiting their wineries.
The one exception is Hidden Bench, who I believe had the best wines but, gave us the worst experience. Nobody appreciates more than I do all the hard work that goes into to making the products and producing the food that I put on my table and on the tables of my friends. I am well aware that we were travelling outside the usual tour season and small wineries have a lot to do to prepare for the upcoming season but, there is a simple solution to ensuring you are not bothered when you don't want to be: hang a CLOSED sign up. Many of the wineries I hoped to visit did just that and I will not hold it against them. If you are too busy or unprepared to handle a small group in the middle of the week in a month like April, do yourself a favour and stay closed till the weekend. But, may I make one suggestion to you Hidden Bench? Perhaps, just perhaps, you could provide more than one glass to be shared among three people? If you (and I don't know your name, ma'am) had not been the source of such amusement to us the rest of the day, and if the others in the region had not been so much your antithesis, my opinion of Niagara could have been as sour as the face you presented our entire visit.
But, we did not let that one low light ruin our day, and I can not emphasize enough how much I feel everyone in the province should make a point of touring the Beamsville Bench and Jordan Station. Get out there now and enjoy some of the best wines in the world, because you are not likely to see them in the LCBO any time soon. I guarantee your new favourite wine is just waiting for you to discover it, and the friendly people of the region are waiting to introduce you. Cheers!
On Thursday I and two friends (Iain and Sarah) took a road trip to the Beamsville and Twenty Mile Benches of the Niagara Region to check out some of the wine Ontario has to offer that is not readily available in LCBO stores. I had identified 6 wineries of interest that I was hoping to have the time to visit and knew that some would still be on reduced winter hours, so I was sure to be flexible about the tour. Having never been on a Niagara tour I had no idea what to expect but, it was a beautiful day, sunny and mild, and so we embarked on our adventure in a positive mood.
We left Markham shortly after 10 am and arrived at our first winery, Rosewood Estates, shortly before 11:30 am. Rosewood is a fairly new winery having opened to the public in 2008 but, they are already attracting attention for their wines and for their unique offerings in honey products including a very nice Mead. We were welcomed warmly by the staff and offered a 3 flight tasting of our choice of wines. We chose to sample their 2008 Riesling, 2008 Pinot Noir and a 2007 Mead Blanc. Both the Riesling and Pinot Noir were typical of what the Beamsville Bench has to offer with the Riesling being crisp, tart and very approachable. It would be nice as an aperitif or with shrimp or light seafood. The Pinot Noir was quite fruit forward with a balance of acidity and sweetness and the oak was noticeable but not overpowering the berry fruits typical of the grape. I had never tasted Mead before and was pleasantly surprised at its clean taste and surprising acidity. I was expecting something much more sugar loaded and richer and this was a wine I would gladly drink with sharp aged cheddar but also slightly spicy asian food. I picked up a Pinot Noir, Reserve Chardonnay and a Sussreserve Riesling all from 2009. Tastings at Rosewood were $3 per person which was waved as we purchased some of their product.
Our next stop on the list was a winery that I had read much about, that has been garnering rave reviews for their wines, and which Beppi Crosariol had recommended as one of his top 8 wineries to visit in the region. Now, we have all been told that if we have nothing good to say we should say nothing at all. Well, I have something good to say so I am also going to have something not so good to say about this winery later. Hidden Bench is quite possibly one of the best wineries in Ontario right now. Fairly new, they are currently targeting the premium market and this is reflected in their prices which range between $24-$55, all well worth the money (pricing is done annually and will change from vintage to vintage to reflect the quality of each year) and the fact that they often sell out of their wines shortly after the release dates (one in spring, one in fall). Many of their offerings are excellent choices for cellaring and have a balance and finish that just seems more refined on the palate than their neighbours at Rosewood. The Chardonnay is especially nice with lemon and apple flavours, acidity and sweetness, and oak all in fine balance. But before you enjoy the wonderful wines at Hidden Bench, you will first be struck by the beauty of the property and the wonderful patio with a magnificent stone fireplace built into the outside wall of the building. The tasting room is equally impressive inside this renovated 150 year old farm house. For $10 we tasted 3 of their wines, a Riesling, Chardonnay and red Meritage that was a blend of Merlot/Cabernet Franc/Cabernet Sauvignon/Malbec. I purchased two of their wines, a 2008 Riesling and 2009 Pinot Noir. You could not ask for better examples of what the Beamsville Bench is capable of in wine production.
The third stop on our trip was also recommended by Beppi Crosariol and is the biodynamic winery of Tawse. All three of us fell in love with this winery the moment we drove through their impressive gates and up the winding drive to their state-of-the-art, gravity fed, wine making facility. This sustainably focused winery has been named Canadian Winery of the Year for 2010 and 2011 and it shows. We arrived without an appointment and were met by, perhaps, the friendliest person you will ever meet: Rheal. Despite the fact we had not booked a tour and despite the fact that there was no one available to give us one, Rheal took it upon himself to give us a quick look into one of the barrel caves dug into the side of the hill the winery is built on. Seeing all those barrels stacked up and experiencing the smell of red wine and oak was intoxicating even before the tasting began. Rheal could not have been a better host and was so much fun to talk to about the winery, the vineyard, the winemaking process and the final product. His passion for his work and his employer was infectious and we spent quite a while at this particular winery. Tastings were supposed to be $3 for a flight of 3 wines but, Rheal managed to sneak in 5 leading us through what he felt best exemplified the wineries best work. It was an amazing visit and the tasting fee was waived as we all bought some product. I purchased a Pinot Noir, a Rosé and a Chardonnay which I have since used in a tasting (stay tuned for results). Regrettably, we had to say goodbye to our new best friend and made our way into Jordan Station to purchase cheese and find a nice place to lunch.
The Upper Canada Cheese Company is owned by the same people who own Hidden Bench Winery and we had decided to stop in long before we knew this after seeing it advertised in a travel guide picked up at Rosewood. This quaint little cheese shop with its own creamery, is an excellent stop and once inside we were immediately accosted by someone equally as friendly and enthusiastic as Rheal. Five cheeses were laid out for tasting and all were excellent. We enquired about a nice place for lunch, got directions, bought some groceries and made our way to look for the restaurant.
Zooma Zooma Cafe in Jordan looks, from the outside, like a century old cottage not too dissimilar to, though much smaller than, Auberge de Pommier. From the inside, the two could not be more unalike. Bohemian is the key word and the bright red painted walls with eclectic decor gives one pause to reconsider the choice. But the food and service soon make you forget about the 1960's era formica topped table you are seated at and you settle in to enjoy very good food at extremely fair prices. Entrees were an average of $9 and they serve pizza, sandwiches,salads and local wine. A side of fries with smokey ketchup could be had for $3. The three of us split a bill of $51 dollars which included two tea and a glass of Daniel Lenko wine. Not a bad lunch to help re-energize for more wine tasting.
The next stop was not planned, but since we had become a little lethargic from cheese and lunch, we took the easy way out and visited Cave Spring Cellars conveniently located across the street from Zooma Zooma. The tastings continued at Cave Spring as we tried the Sauvignon Blanc and Chenin Blanc at $1-$2 per wine tasted. This fee was also waved upon purchase of wines from their store. Unfortunately, tours of the facility are required to be pre-booked and the tasting room was relatively busy compared to other wineries and there was only the one staff member on duty. We piled into Iain's truck and headed toward our fifth and final stop of the day.
Flat Rock Cellars was not one of my picks, it was suggested by Iain, and is an example of why you should stay flexible when visiting Niagara. Flat Rock also has a state of the art, gravity fed, low environmental impacting, modern facility and the staff could not be more proud of it if they owned it themselves. Sarah's favourite person from the tour (Kyle - equal in passion about wine to Rheal) led us in tastings of some of Flat Rocks finest offerings. First up, a 2010 Twisted, a blend of the regions best known whites: Chardonnay, Riesling and Gewurtztraminer. This is a stellar wine that would be a great summer patio wine and would be great with potato salad and bbq fare. We also tried the Pinot Noir and the Pinot Noir Rosé which were also quite approachable wines that would be great for patios and bbq's. I did purchase a bottle of the Pinot Noir and was surprised that, despite having spent the least amount of money at this stop and having been given a quick-look tour of the processing area, the tasting fee of $5 was also waived. I know at least two of us will be back soon to this winery, and one of us for the wine.
Having been my first trip to Niagara for the wineries I was not sure what to expect but I soon found out, that for wine lovers, this is a great way to spend a day and pick up some wines that are not carried in the local LCBO. The people of Beamsville and Jordan are great ambassadors for the province: warm, welcoming, helpful and passionate about their region's biggest industry. All but one of the wineries waved the tasting fee despite the fact that we did not all buy the minimum for waving. All of the people, except one, greeted us with warm smiles and a sense of humour. All, but one, were interested to know where we came from and what our experience with wine was. All of them will, except one, see me again visiting their wineries.
The one exception is Hidden Bench, who I believe had the best wines but, gave us the worst experience. Nobody appreciates more than I do all the hard work that goes into to making the products and producing the food that I put on my table and on the tables of my friends. I am well aware that we were travelling outside the usual tour season and small wineries have a lot to do to prepare for the upcoming season but, there is a simple solution to ensuring you are not bothered when you don't want to be: hang a CLOSED sign up. Many of the wineries I hoped to visit did just that and I will not hold it against them. If you are too busy or unprepared to handle a small group in the middle of the week in a month like April, do yourself a favour and stay closed till the weekend. But, may I make one suggestion to you Hidden Bench? Perhaps, just perhaps, you could provide more than one glass to be shared among three people? If you (and I don't know your name, ma'am) had not been the source of such amusement to us the rest of the day, and if the others in the region had not been so much your antithesis, my opinion of Niagara could have been as sour as the face you presented our entire visit.
But, we did not let that one low light ruin our day, and I can not emphasize enough how much I feel everyone in the province should make a point of touring the Beamsville Bench and Jordan Station. Get out there now and enjoy some of the best wines in the world, because you are not likely to see them in the LCBO any time soon. I guarantee your new favourite wine is just waiting for you to discover it, and the friendly people of the region are waiting to introduce you. Cheers!
Friday, April 13, 2012
Welcome Back
Well, it has been a long winter, even though not a harsh one, and Spring is here relatively early. I did not write much during the winter months but, all that will change as I hope to get back to my regular schedule of at least one post a week.
Even without regular postings my blog has been receiving about 10 hits a day all from unique visitors and many from as far away as Australia and, of course, my fan base in Russia (no I don't know why). Hits per day spike when there are new postings and in less than 9 months of blogging I have had almost 5000 page hits for 116 posts.
I have been doing a lot of reading over the winter and have much material for future posts. I have also acquired some new Ontario wines that I will be using in tastings and I think these wines will surprise a lot of people and demonstrate Ontario's wine quality.
The only hope I have for the coming season is more commenting. Comments are even open to anonymous commenting to protect the meek, and my rules for commenting are pretty simple: don't be a bigot or a bully and you can say pretty much anything you want. So, if you have been a regular reader, consider posting a comment to encourage the conversation.
Even without regular postings my blog has been receiving about 10 hits a day all from unique visitors and many from as far away as Australia and, of course, my fan base in Russia (no I don't know why). Hits per day spike when there are new postings and in less than 9 months of blogging I have had almost 5000 page hits for 116 posts.
I have been doing a lot of reading over the winter and have much material for future posts. I have also acquired some new Ontario wines that I will be using in tastings and I think these wines will surprise a lot of people and demonstrate Ontario's wine quality.
The only hope I have for the coming season is more commenting. Comments are even open to anonymous commenting to protect the meek, and my rules for commenting are pretty simple: don't be a bigot or a bully and you can say pretty much anything you want. So, if you have been a regular reader, consider posting a comment to encourage the conversation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)