Labeling Question

[jburlowski]

I was fortunate to receive as a Xmas present a bottle of rye from the George Washington distillery at Mt. Vernon. It is labeled as "straight rye whiskey". Since the distillery began (modern) operations in 2009, the whiskey is clearly less than four years old. Thus, as a straight, an age statement is required.

However, none appears on the label. The only statement of age is on the hang tag which is attached to the neck of the bottle with the typical elastic string. It states: "aged more than two years in oak barrels, to give it a mellow flavor..."

A quick reading of the regs says that the AS "Must generally appear parallel to the base of the container" and "Must appear separate and apart from any other descriptive or explanatory information".

So does this wording and particularly it's placement on the hang tag (which can easily become separated from the bottle) conform with the letter and spirit of the regs?

[B.B. Babington]

somebody likes you. the 2 yr is high $$. Virginia ABC lists two offerings, a "rye" with little age and no age statement and a "straight rye" with 2yr age statement.

Virginia ABC seems to be happy with the way it's labeled. At least so far.

And Virginia ABC is NOT happy with the way they were depicted in the moonshiners episodes and are demanding disclaimers be placed on the program. Apparently the producers misled Virginia ABC on how the show would present the material.

[Lazer]

I think it probably does violate the letter and the spirit of the law. That's the beauty of an over-sized federal gov't, they can't bother with enforcing all of their laws. How does the gov't profit from enforcing this law? Just my opinion.

[White Dog]

I think it probably does violate the letter and the spirit of the law. That's the beauty of an over-sized federal gov't, they can't bother with enforcing all of their laws. How does the gov't profit from enforcing this law? Just my opinion.

It appears that all kinds of things have been slipping by the feds lately, so this one doesn't surprise me. The current David Nicholson DSP-KY-16, for example.

Not trying to get all PRNC, but the government doesn't "profit" when it ensures that other foods meet the proper health standards.

[clingman71]

It appears that all kinds of things have been slipping by the feds lately, so this one doesn't surprise me. The current David Nicholson DSP-KY-16, for example.

Not trying to get all PRNC, but the government doesn't "profit" when it ensures that other foods meet the proper health standards.

I get a little pissed every time I see those Nicholson labels.

[White Dog]

I get a little pissed every time I see those Nicholson labels.

Same here, brother. Extra labels or not, it's just bad ethics.

[Josh]

The Nicholson thing is bad, no doubt. But IMO what's worse than using outdated labels is the kind of stuff John is talking about. Mislabeling something as straight, a very specific legal term, when it's not is a bald-faced lie. George's old place is not the only micro doing it either. I strongly suspect that Grand Traverse Distillery is doing the same thing, using the word straight without an age statement when the product is under 4 y/o.

[Lazer]

Not trying to get all PRNC, but the government doesn't "profit" when it ensures that other foods meet the proper health standards.

What's PRNC? does that mean nanny state?

[White Dog]

What's PRNC? does that mean nanny state?

Actually, it's the Jono/Farmboy/Edo Nanny State.

[bgageus]

My reading of the rule is that it must be 2 years old to be called "straight".
Correction:
I read the post wrong I thought it was about labeling it straight, not the posting of the age statement.