Skip to main content

A BUSKLAW Newsletter Aside: Apparently having nothing better to do, the Feds prohibit the micro-consumption of ocean-aged wine...

The folks at the U.S. Treasury Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (ATTB) have a lot of time on their hands. Otherwise, what would account for their draconian efforts to prevent Mira Winery, a reputable Napa Valley vintner, from exploring the aging effects of seawater on a small sample of their wine production? 

As Mira's President, Jim Dyke, describes in "The Wine-Dark Sea of Regulation" in today's Wall Street Journal, Mira decided to see if "intentionally submerging wine bottles for months at a time could speed the aging process and enhance flavor." So, they submerged 28 bottles of their 2009 Cabernet Sauvignon in steel cages 60 feet under the waves in Charleston Harbor, where "there exists a promising blend of temperature, pressure, and darkness, with the additional variable of constant motion."  To protect the wine, the top of each bottle was coated with a high-grade wax sealant. 

Mira retrieved the submerged wine after three months and proceeded to compare it in tastings around the country it with normally-stored wine from the same vintage and production lot. And the tasters concluded that the submerged wine showed uncharacteristically round tannins - the sign of a mature wine.  

Mira repeated the test with a few more cases and conducted more tastings. Then, in late 2014, the ATTB decided that the submerged wine could not be legally sold, shipped, or consumed, because in their opinion, wine aged in the ocean must be adulterated within the meaning of the U.S. Federal Food and Drug Act. The wine, you see, was "held under unsanitary conditions." No matter that Charleston Harbor is a renowned fishing attraction; apparently, the fish swimming about the submerged wine are perfectly fine to ingest, but somehow the wine is not! 

And there is not one shred of evidence that Mira's "drowned" wine was adulterated in any way. Mira's own laboratory tests and observations revealed that it was not contaminated. None who sampled the wine became ill. And the FDA did not deign to test any of the submerged bottles. 

The ATTB and the FDA have no business engaging in these prohibitory efforts in the absence that Mira's ocean-aged wine was in fact adulterated. And our tax dollars should not go to fund these irrational regulatory initiatives.

The federal government should instead encourage Mira's attempts to understand the ocean-aging effects on wine so that, as Mr. Dyke states, "we can try to simulate them on dry land. We don't envision expanding into vast underwater wine storage..."

I applaud Mira's efforts in seeking legal recourse against the ATTB and the FDA to end these regulatory actions run amuck.    

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The BUSKLAW May Newsletter: Another Trump NDA Bites the Dust!

  In my August 2020 newsletter, we discussed lessons from the New York Supreme Court's rejection of the Trump family NDA. Drafting lesson #1 is the need to specifically describe the information covered by the NDA rather than vague references.  Unfortunately for Trump, this lesson wasn't learned, as evidenced by a recent New York U.S. District Court decision in the case of  J essica Denson v Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.   Plaintiff Denson was employed as a national phone bank administrator for the 2016 Trump campaign. Before she was hired, she signed the standard Trump employment contract containing broad non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions. Confidential Information was defined as: ...all information (whether or not embodied in any media) of a private, proprietary or confidential nature or that Mr. Trump insists remain private or confidential, including, but not limited to, any information with respect to the personal life, political affairs, and/o...

The BUSKLAW April Newsletter: On the Foolish Tension Between Lawyers and Business Folks

From my colleague Mark Grossman   comes this joke (just in time for April Fool's Day): A man in a hot air balloon is lost. He reduces the balloon's height and spots a man below. He shouts, "Excuse me, can you tell me where I am?" The man below says: "Yes, you're in a hot air balloon hovering at 30 feet." " You must be a lawyer," says the balloonist. "I am," replies the man. "How did you know?" "Well," says the balloonist, "everything you have told me is technically correct, but useless." The man below says, "You must work in business." "I do," replies the balloonist, "but how did you know?" "Well," says the lawyer, "you don't know where you are, or where you're going, but you expect me to be able to help. You're in the same position you were before we met, but now it's my fault." ______________________________________...

The BUSKLAW Halloween 2022 Post: Stephen King's Asides on Poor Writing in Fairy Tale

  Having just read  Stephen King's Fairy Tale in time for Halloween, it's appropriate to examine his asides on poor writing included in the book. (BTW, Fairy Tale is a good read with King's typical well-executed character development, plot, and a great finish to the story. But you have like the whole Grimm fairy tale genre before you read his take on it.)  Stephen King doesn't tolerate anything less than crisp prose. When the story's hero, Charlie Reade, tries to read a book about the origins of fantasy and its place in the world matrix ("what a mouthful"), he can only scan it because: It was everything I hated about what I thought of as "hoity-toity" academic writing, full of five-dollar words and tortured syntax. Maybe that's intellectual laziness on my part, but maybe not. Later on, Charlie tries to focus on a particular chapter in the "origins of fantasy" book about the story of Jack and the Beanstalk but is put off by "t...