New York Bourbon

[LeNell]

Got a little distillery that's eager to put out New York's first bourbon since Prohibition. Anybody have any idea of any distilleries making bourbon in New York pre or post Prohibition? Or maybe some ideas of how to search out any info beyond a basic Google search?

Pretty exciting little project to be working with.

[cowdery]

Got a little distillery that's eager to put out New York's first bourbon since Prohibition. Anybody have any idea of any distilleries making bourbon in New York pre or post Prohibition? Or maybe some ideas of how to search out any info beyond a basic Google search?

Pretty exciting little project to be working with.

I would be very surprised if there was ever a New York distillery that made bourbon. Rye whiskey, yes, but not bourbon. Before Prohibition, rye was more popular than bourbon, especially in the East, and that is what the Eastern distillers made. After Prohibition, few if any New York distilleries came back, at least not as whiskey producers.

I'm not positive, but I believe the original (that is, original American) Smirnoff distillery was in New York. It was a distillery that had been converted to produce grain neutral spirits (GNS) during the war and rather than converting back into a whiskey producer, it (and others) wanted to see if they could create a market for GNS, hence the big push for vodka in the post-war era, which began in and was most successful in New York. A lot of gin was produced in NY using the same reasoning.

New York also had warmly embraced Scotch and Cognac during Prohibition. Irish, for obvious reasons, was also big. That, and the fact that New York was always more of a cocktail town than a straight spirits town, all would have mitigated against anyone in New York (city or state) actually making straight bourbon.

So, maybe the opportunity is a little different, to be the first New York distillery to make bourbon ever.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Have I understood this right that there´s a brand new Bourbon on its way, i.e. one that is produced by themselves and not the usual, well, you know.

If so, this is great news indeed!

[cowdery]

The following fact may temper your enthusiasm. Over the years, I have been contacted by many people proposing to start a new distillery and produce bourbon. Know how many have actually done it?

Zero.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Well, I live in hope! :grin:

But, yeah, I agree that it sounds a bit never-never land.

I still fantasize about a bourbon distilled and aged in Alaska. I wonder how a species like that would turn out?

[Gillman]

There is on the market in New York a brand of bourbon called Old Williamsburg (I think is the name). Lenell's carries this brand so she is aware of it. It is distributed by a company in Minnesota (I think the same people that put out that Phillips Union whiskey some time back). The labelling refers to some kind of heritage in Brooklyn. This may be all-marketing relating or possibly not, but I mention it because this is a bourbon meant clearly to appeal to a home-town market. It comes in two proofs and is not expensive.

Gary

[Virus_Of_Life]

...but I mention it because this is a bourbon meant clearly to appeal to a home-town market. It comes in two proofs and is not expensive.

Gary

Just an FYI, it is also available in Southern California so it must not be too limited or anything...

[ProofPositive]

I still fantasize about a bourbon distilled and aged in Alaska. I wonder how a species like that would turn out?

I would think it would not be cut with much water. Sounds like a great idea....but, would not one where you are located be about the same as Alaska climatically speaking? Dude, you could start one right there.....Swedish Bourbon! I bet it would be an instant sensation in Europe.

[Hedmans Brorsa]

Swedish Bourbon! I bet it would be an instant sensation in Europe.

Who knows? :grin:

Problem is, I cannot call it Bourbon so I would have to think up a whole new marketing strategy.

[Veevee]

Who would stop you from calling it bourbon (besides yourself).

Call it Kentucky bourbon-style whiskey, if you don't want to fib.

[cowdery]

Who would stop you from calling it bourbon (besides yourself).

Call it Kentucky bourbon-style whiskey, if you don't want to fib.

Short answer: The government of Sweden would stop him.

The United States has "distinctive products" agreements with several entities, including Canada and Mexico (as part of NAFTA), and the European Union, of which Sweden is a member. As part of these international treaty obligations, the United States has agreed not to allow, for example, "scotch" made in Sri Lanka (i.e., anyplace other than Scotland) to be sold in the United States and labeled "scotch." Likewise, the EU countries will not allow any product labeled "bourbon" that is not bourbon under US law (i.e., not made in the USA) to be sold in their countries. Whether or not the law would be offended by a label that says "Bourbon-Style Swedish Whiskey," or something similar, would have to be tested.

[barturtle]

I think it would be best from a marketing standpoint to call it sour-mash whiskey. Using that term would, in the minds of the public, place it head-to-head with Jack Daniels. I don't think sour-mash would be a protected term and is most commonly associated with american whiskies.

Besides, almost any decent effort could have flavors better than JD:puke:

[cowdery]

"Sour mash" is not a protected term, although it probably would be subject to basic truth-in-advertising requirements, i.e., the whiskey would actually have to be made using the sour mash process.

I don't know why "sour mash" became such a hook, probably because of Jack Daniel's.

[ratcheer]

I remember "sour mash" being used as an attracting term before I remember Jack Daniel's becoming so popular. What I mean is, many bourbon brands used it as a chief descriptive term on their labels and advertising, as if it meant the product was extra special. Terms such as "Genuine Sour Mash Whiskey" were prominent on many different brands.

This recollection is from the mid-60's to mid 70's.

Tim