Originally posted at Saffron Rouge

Seems vegetarian girls and guys are hot all of a sudden. I bet there are more then mentioned here, so post ‘em if you know of them.

tags: celebs, enviromentalist, famous, vegan, vegetarian

Originally posted at Vinography: A Wine Blog
2005 Storrs Winery Petite Sirah, Santa Cruz Mountains

I don’t know who said it, but in the last few years I’ve heard it uttered that the Santa Cruz Mountains AVA is quite possibly the most underrated wine growing region in California. I’m not sure if I’m confident or encyclopedic enough in my knowledge of California wine to affirm that statement, but in my experience there’s definitely something to that claim.

The winegrowers and winemakers of the Santa Cruz mountains suffer from the same obscurity that a lot of winemakers in other AVAs do throughout the state, simply by virtue of not being in Napa or Sonoma. I also privately think that having the name of the lazy beach town in the name of the region causes some people to dismiss the whole idea of growing good grapes so close to a bunch of flip-flop-wearing surf bums.

In reality, the Santa Cruz Mountains appellation is a large and diverse winegrowing area that spans three counties. Despite its geographical coverage, however, it is sparsely populated with vineyards and wineries — containing only about 50 wineries and only about 1500 acres of vineyards under cultivation.

Whatever its association (imagined or real) with the laid-back town that shares its name, growing wine in the appellation is not a particularly easy task. The mostly hillside vineyards are anchored in shallow soils, and subject to quite a few extremes of weather, depending on where they are situated, from chilly fog to blazing sun, and everything in between. Of course, many grapes do well under the stress such climactic conditions provide, and the regions generally cooler aspect makes for generally very nice ripe fruit without the sugar spikes (and correspondingly higher alcohol levels) that warmer regions must grapple with.

One of my long-standing favorite producers in the Santa Cruz Mountains is Storrs Winery. They are one of my favorites not because they make wines that I or others score off the charts, but simply because they consistently make great tasting, authentic wines at humbly reasonably prices.

Storrs is a small family outfit that has historically made wine from fruit sourced all over the Santa Cruz Mountains and Central Coast. Owned and operated by Stephen Storrs and his wife Pamela Bianchini-Storrs, the label started small, but got off with a bang: winning gold medals at the SF Wine Competition for their very first vintage in 1988. The UC-Davis-trained couple he with a degree in Viticulture and she with a degree in Enology (winemaking) make small quantities of high-quality wine with great care.

Recently the Storrs have planted their own estate vineyards, which will gradually replace their fruit purchased on contract.

This wine is made from fruit grown on the slopes of Mount Madonna, which rises up to the west of Gilroy. The vineyards are on the Pacific-facing side of the mountain and benefit from the cool maritime influence. Surface temperatures rarely get above 80 degrees during the summer, making for slow maturation of the sun-loving Petite Sirah grape. The vineyard sits on an ancient riverbed of gravelly soil, and generally yields less than two tons of fruit per acre. The grapes are picked by hand, totally destemmed, and fermented at relatively low temperatures in small lots without crushing, and with lots of hand punchdowns (mixing of the juice and berries). This all has the deliberate effect of managing the tannin levels of this beastly, tannic grape. The wine is aged in a combination of French and American oak for about 14 months before bottling.

Tasting Notes:
Dark, inky garnet in the glass, this wine has a nose of black and blue fruits with distinct notes of cassis and wet earth. In the mouth it is remarkably smooth, and relatively light-bodied (emphasis on relatively) given the variety, with cool flavors of blackberry, black cherry, and mixed spices, and beautifully restrained tannins that support a long finish.

Food Pairing:
Despite the generally accepted friendliness between red wine and chocolate, there aren’t a lot of wines that I think really do go well with chocolate, but this is one of them. I’d drink the remains of my glass with a chocolate pot-du-creme any day.

Overall Score: somewhere between 8.5 and 9

How Much?: $23

This wine may be tricky to find for sale online.

Originally posted at Vinography: A Wine Blog
What’s In a Name? The AVA Creation Process 2.0

I don’t think I’ve ever had so many e-mails asking me to specifically write about a certain topic here on Vinography. In the past few weeks I’ve gotten a raft of requests to address the issue that we may refer to in the future as Calistogate 2007.

Regular readers may remember the news that the government indefinitely suspended the process by which new AVA’s (American Viticultural Areas) were created. They did this because of a quagmire surrounding the imminent approval of a new AVA in the Napa Valley covering the Calistoga area. The idea being that Calistoga would become the 15th distinct sub-region of the Napa Valley for growing grapes, joining the better known names such as Rutherford, Stag’s Leap, and St. Helena.

The process of approving a new AVA is a bit like getting elected to public office. The results do not always reflect which candidate is best for the job. The concept of an AVA, like that of any appellation, is founded in the idea that it represents a region whose environmental characteristics, and their influence on the wine produced in the area, are distinct from those around it. This is straightforward enough. Where things get tricky is the fact that AVAs are like hybrid car engines. Once someone has one, everyone wants one, because if you’ve got one, you can sell more wine.

The dirty little secret about AVAs is that they make wineries more money. On the flip side, however, the truth about AVAs is that in some cases they truly do describe a significant regional character to their wines.

The world, as it turns out, is not black and white.

Which brings us back to Calistogate 2007. The Calistoga AVA approval process hit a little snag earlier in the year when the government realized that it would have to deal with the fact that there was a winery named Calistoga Cellars that didn’t actually make wine from Calistoga. This issue of brand names conflicting with geographical designations is a thorny one, and it apparently was so controversial that it brought the revision of the laws around these designations to a screeching halt earlier in the year. Especially since such things tend to make many people’s blood boil in the wine industry. Place names are very sacred cows.

The Tobacco Trade Bureau, or TTB, which oversees this process as part of the US Department of Treasury recently released its new and improved proposals for how to handle the issue represented by Calistoga Cellars, as well as all future such conflicts. Not surprisingly, as is always the case when Government has to decide something, there are a lot of unhappy people out there. Perhaps none more so than the Napa Valley Vintners association, whose members were chiefly responsible for the petition to create the Calistoga AVA in the first place, and who do not count Calistoga Cellars among their members.

The government’s solution is a typical hedge. Folks that have been using a name for several decades are grandfathered in without the need to change the name of their winery just because there is a new geographical designation that exists of the same name. More recently established wineries are allowed to use the name, provided they offer a statement on their label that “sufficiently dispels the impression that the geographic area suggested by the brand name is indicative of the origin of the wine.”

Jason Haas of Tablas Creek Vineyards spent some time on his blog recently describing why he thinks this is an issue. Essentially it leaves open the possibility for someone to create a wine called “Rutherford Gold*” with a tiny little statement somewhere on the label that reads “oh, by the way, this wine ain’t really made in Rutherford.” Which is sort of sneaky and not really a good idea.

In the true governmental tradition, however, it’s not really the main issue addressed by the legislation that presents the greatest problem. In the case of the recent TTB proposal, there is some additional language that is far more worrying, which would completely change the way that AVAs work in America.

This language suggests that in cases where an AVA is completely contained by another one (think Paso Robles inside the Central Coast, or the Russian River Valley inside Sonoma County) wine made in the inner AVA would not be able to carry the name of the outer AVA.

Which means, as far as I understand it, that you could have a Stag’s Leap Cabernet that wasn’t allowed to be labeled as coming from the Napa Valley.

Which is just plain stupid, and about what you’d expect from Washington politicians these days.

It’s hard sometimes to know what to think about all this naming of appellations, and the fierce protectionism of geographical origins. I tend to have a certain amount of ambivalence about the whole thing. Is Calistoga Cellars really hurting anyone? On the other hand, it’s a good thing for consumers to know where their wine comes from, and to not have a false impression of its origin drive their purchase decision.

I can’t help feeling like the whole problem with this issue is that the government is involved in the first place. Why can’t we set up a body of independent, non-partisan, tee-totaling scientists who can spend all their time figuring out which regions of the world really are distinct from a climate and geologic perspective and draw the lines according to empirical data? I guess that’s like hoping we could agree on whether or not to teach evolution in our schools.

I encourage you to read more on this subject from Tom Wark at Fermentation.

There’s this veggie Vietnamese place near my house that makes the best “chicken” drumsticks. Leslie and I have been wanting to make our own and we finally came up with a decent version.

“Chicken” nuggets w/ sweet potato frittes

“Chicken” Nuggets

Soy chunks
Powder egg replacer
Flour for dipping
Panko breadcrumbs
Oil for frying
Salt and pepper to taste

Depending on the amount of soy chunks you have, make enough egg replacer to cover all pieces.
After coating the soy chunks in egg replacer, dip in flour and then in the breadcrumbs.
When the oil is hot, drop coated soy chunks in and fry till golden brown.
Place pieces on paper to cool and salt to taste. Seeve warm with dipping sauce of your choice.

Sweet potato frittes

2 medium sized sweet potatoes
Oil for frying
Salt and pepper to taste

Slice sweet potatoes into long thin strips.
When oil is hot, drop small batches in and fry till golden, approx. 4-5 mintues. Remove from oil, drain on paper and let cool until ready to serve.
Right before serving, heat oil again and drop small batches in. Fry for an additional 2-3 minutes. Remove and drain on paper.
Serve with paprika ketchup or your favorite dipping sauce.

sweet potato fries

tags: fake meat, frittes, sweet potato, vegan

Just got finished upgrading to 1.1.2 and then jailbreaking for all those cool apps!

Found a decent online step by step, so here it is

Good luck and have fun.

iphone

tags: hack, iphone