| > People aren't going to call red wine grown from the place champagne. Correct, because red wines produced in Champagne are called something else. To get to your point though, red wines from Bourgogne are most certainly referred to as "burgundy" and depending on whom you ask, it's always pinot noir (but some will argue Gamay is included). I've noticed that many chefs refer to any good Pinot as a burgundy when dunking it in their stews, and while that's probably okay most of the time when cooking, that generalization is discarding more than just a little nuance for drinkin' wine. A pinot noir grape grown in Oregon can be vastly different than one from France and I will usual skip on the former. > It's like saying you can't call them brazil nuts unless they were grown in Brazil. You're attempting to compare an entire culture, craft, and industry of wine to nuts that fall off trees. With things like wine, cheese, and cured meats, there are certainly regional characteristics and traditional techniques that make a product distinct. This designation is to protect consumers and businesses and hurts no one except imposters? Since that's all too high brow, another more pertinent example may be how everyone from Kentucky knows the limestone in the water makes its whiskey the best in the would. While the US has some laws defining qualities of whiskey, it unfortunately doesn't lay down rules on "terroir". Corn mash isn't quite as expressive as wine grapes, so I can understand the skepticism but many folks swear that the old barns where bourbon whiskey is aged add their own touch.... not so sure about that one. https://blog.heavenhilldistillery.com/detail.php?post_name=e...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/5.143 |