Angostura bourbon?

[barturtle]

I thought KSBW had to be aged in Ky for at least the first two years....if not longer, to be called KSBW. Are you referring to being just called bourbon?

I think you're right about the KSBW thing...but nobody has yet shown me the actual text of that law yet, so I can't verify...if anyone knows where this law exists, please let me know where to look or give me a link.

But yeah, I was just talking about Bourbon.

[craigthom]

I haven't found it yet, and here's the TTB LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF DISTILLED SPIRITS, which includes the definitions of terms such as "bourbon" and "straight whiskey" and "cognac". I don't find the word "Kentucky" in the document.

[cowdery]

You won't find Kentucky in the document because it isn't there. What the document says is that place of origin labeling has to be true. A bourbon can only be Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey if it is aged in Kentucky for two years because, as I already said, it becomes straight bourbon on its second birthday.

Once it is something, it can't revert to an earlier form. I think that's the part people have trouble understanding. Once it's bourbon, it's bourbon. You can't make it un-bourbon. No matter what you do to it, the bourbon is still bourbon, and straight bourbon is the same way. No matter what you do to it, it remains straight bourbon.

If it becomes straight bourbon in Kentucky then it's Kentucky straight bourbon no matter what you do to it thereafter. There's no specific law that says those specific words because there doesn't need to be. The law leaves no other possible outcome.

Even if you mix it with something else, the bourbon in there is still bourbon. It then becomes bourbon and something else. If you throw a bunch of sugar into it it becomes a bourbon liqueur, not a bourbon whiskey, but the bourbon is still bourbon. What part of this am I not explaining correctly?

[craigthom]

Yes, Chuck, but it's a bourbon as soon as it is poured into the barrel. If it's made in Kentucky, then it's a Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey.

If the barrel is put on a truck and taken to Indiana or some other state, then on it's second birthday it is a Straight Bourbon Whiskey.

There's nothing in those regulations that say it loses it's Kentucky origin by moving to another state.

I have been told at a distillery that it's a year and a day to get the "Kentucky" name. A lot of what we are told at distilleries is, well, part of the myth, so that's not proof.

It's not in the TTB naming regulation. I am sure somewhere there is an official document that determines how "Kentucky" can be used on a bourbon bottle. I have also been told at a distillery that "Kentucky" is the only state name that can be used as part of the name of a bourbon. If that's true, then it's got to be written somewhere. I suspect both of these are in the same place.

[cowdery]

Yes, Chuck, but it's a bourbon as soon as it is poured into the barrel. If it's made in Kentucky, then it's a Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey.

Not quite. It's bourbon only after aging. Although the regs are silent as to how long it must age, TTB accepts three months as the minimum.

If the barrel is put on a truck and taken to Indiana or some other state, then on it's second birthday it is a Straight Bourbon Whiskey.

If they did that, then they would have a choice. They could either call it Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey or Straight Bourbon Whiskey, but not Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey.

There's nothing in those regulations that say it loses it's Kentucky origin by moving to another state.

There's nothing in those regulations that says anything about it, except that the origin labeling must be truthful.

I have been told at a distillery that it's a year and a day to get the "Kentucky" name. A lot of what we are told at distilleries is, well, part of the myth, so that's not proof.

It's a common belief, but it's not true.

It's not in the TTB naming regulation. I am sure somewhere there is an official document that determines how "Kentucky" can be used on a bourbon bottle.

And, yet, there is not.

I have also been told at a distillery that "Kentucky" is the only state name that can be used as part of the name of a bourbon. If that's true, then it's got to be written somewhere. I suspect both of these are in the same place.

Jim Rutledge, among others, has said that in his presentations. I asked Jim to give me a source. He did some checking, got back to me and said, "what do you know, it's not true. I'll stop saying it."

Who do you think controls what can be said on labels? TTB. Kentucky has no way to control how someone uses the state's name. Maybe within the state it can, but it has no jurisdiction outside the state. It can sue if it thinks someone is using the state's name in an improper way, but that would be a tough case to win. TTB has regs, which you can read, but it also has policies and practices, which you cannot. As best I can determine, and I have done considerable research on the subject, the policy and practice is as I have already described.

[craigthom]

If they did that, then they would have a choice. They could either call it Kentucky Bourbon Whiskey or Straight Bourbon Whiskey, but not Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey.

So you've said, but why? It's still made in Kentucky, and it's still straight bourbon whiskey. It's origin doesn't change as the barrels move. There's nothing in the English language that says adjectives must be used cumulatively.

[mozilla]

So, let me see if I can lay this out strait:

Out of the still: Bourbon Distillate

After (how long): Kentucky Bourbon

After 2 years: Kentucky Straight Bourbon

After KSB: It can be sent anywhere to age further and still be KSB

[cowdery]

So you've said, but why? It's still made in Kentucky, and it's still straight bourbon whiskey. It's origin doesn't change as the barrels move. There's nothing in the English language that says adjectives must be used cumulatively.

No, but there is TTB practice, and TTB practice is consistent with my explanation. Presumably they accept the actual producer's certification, i.e., if HH says the whiskey is KSBW, TTB accepts that. If somebody who doesn't have a distillery in Kentucky and who doesn't have documentation that they bought the whiskey from a Kentucky producer wants to put "Kentucky" on the label, TTB will question it. I hate to put it this way, but my way makes sense. Your way doesn't. You will see, on the bottom shelf, commodity brands just labeled "bourbon whiskey," yet they don't have an age statement so they must be four years old, so why aren't they labeled "straight bourbon whiskey," and since the whiskey more likely than not came from a Kentucky distillery, why isn't it labeled "Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey"? Each situation is different, but those producers know what the TTB requires (as policy, not published regulation) and don't want to jump that hurdle.

I assure you that I have searched high and low for all of the mythical regulations we've all heard about and they don't exist.

It's an unwritten but still enforced rule. You're not Kentucky straight unless you became straight in Kentucky. If you were born in Kentucky but became straight outside of Kentucky you can be Kentucky or straight, but not both.

One reason you're not going to see a memorandum about this is because nobody is trying it.

And you're not going to see Vermont Straight Bourbon Whiskey, not because there's a rule against it, but for the same reason. The only state whose name has cachet in the bourbon world in Kentucky, which started to use it when Illinois became a big producer. Nobody said Illinois couldn't put its name on the label, but who would want to? There's no Illinois Fried Chicken either, but that doesn't mean there's a law against it.

I don't know how these myths get started nor do I understand why they're so hard to kill.

[Rob K]

This may be what you want: Title 27 - 5 - C: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

PART 5—LABELING AND ADVERTISING OF DISTILLED SPIRITS

Subpart C—Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits

[NYtaster]

I don't know anywhere near what many on this board know about Bourbon, in the end I just know what I like, in the end that's all that matters as a consumer.

On the other hand I have plenty of experience with Govt. regulators and their "interpretation" of the rules. There are many instances where the end result is a combination of regulations, common practice, traditional interpretation and individual bias on the part of an examiner. As long as none of the above are contrary to another and the practice in question is commonly accepted then the letter of the law is just the starting point.

As Chuck pointed out, if Kentucky (the state govt.) found that there were a company out there saying KSBW and there were no evidence AND it was an inferior product or a Kentucky based distillery was complaining then a suit might be in order. Otherwise, what's in a name, if its good we drink it and if its not then we don't and it won't last on the market anyway.

Remember too many lawyers spoil the pot, or something like that.

[cowdery]

Two things.

First, someone who will lie to you about something will lie to you about anything. I don't care how good their product tastes. Oh, I might drink it, but I still hold it against a producer if I think they're lying to me. People say, "heck, all marketing is is lies," but that insults me as a lifetime marketing professional.

Second, everything NYtaster says is true, but there is one more factor. The competition. The TTB may not aggressively police some of their own more obscure rules, because they know that if a product in violation starts to succeed in the marketplace, someone will tell them about the infraction.

I did some checking while in Kentucky over the weekend and the understanding of the people in the industry is that bourbon has to be made in Kentucky and aged there until its second birthday to be called Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey.

One reason for giving the officers who approve labels some discretion is so they can prevent people from pulling "tricks" like saying it was "made" in Kentucky and is "straight," ergo KSBW, even though it was aged out of the state. Even though it's not written down, the officer can say "nice try" and deny approval.

One thing you learn in law school is that the rhetorical legal tricks that seem to turn the tables in countless formuliac movies don't work in real life.

[Attila]

Thanks to everyone who has provided information on this thread. Great reading!

[craigthom]

I was driving through Owensboro today so I ran by the distillery. A clad warehouse (G, I think) had a good bit of the siding ripped off and new wood framing underneath. I saw a couple of people working on the roof of one of the brick warehouses.

The smokestacks are gone. I read somewhere that they were damaged by Ike and were removed last month.

The security guard said they expect to be operating in the Spring, for what that's worth.

I had mutton barbecue last night for the first time. It wasn't bad for non-Georgia non-pork barbecue.

[TomH]

A recent AP article (which also quotes SB's own Chuck Cowdery) says that production is about a year away

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/12/19/ap5845886.html

Tom

[shoshani]

I'm going to slide here in the slimmest of connections, because I am curious about Angostura's distilled spirits, but rye more than bourbon. Jim Murray has made a career out of lamenting the fact that the rye whiskey distilled by Seagram at Lawrenceburg, IN was never made available as a straight. Does anyone know if Angostura has any plans to bottle it, or even if they have the mashbill to make it?

[cowdery]

I haven't had any success yet getting any information directly from Angostura. I think the journalists who have may be just going there and knocking on the door. I do know that all the people the previous owners had been doing business with got calls from the new owners (Angostura) indicating that they wanted to continue to do business with them, under the same terms.

In addition to the distillery there is a bottling plant there and the sale also included a corn wholesaler, making them the only whiskey company that owns its own corn supplier.

As for the straight rye made there, without going into all of the details, it seems more likely than not that both the Templeton Rye and High West Rye are, in fact, the straight rye made at Lawrenceburg, IN.

Again without going into all of the details, it seems more likely than not that Angostura will not be marketing anything to consumers anytime soon, and maybe not ever. They appear to be positioning themselves as a commodity producer and provider of custom distilling and other producer-to-producer services.

[mozilla]

I guarentee that Wathens will be the Angostura bourbon.

[cowdery]

I guarentee that Wathens will be the Angostura bourbon.

Yet the logical answer to a question is frequently not the actual answer. I remain to be convinced that there will even be an "Angostura bourbon" as such.

[mozilla]

Well, I recieved my information directly from Charlie. He said that he would be using some of the new distillate for his label...instead of having to go through HH.

I expect that Charlie would reserve the right to change his mind...but the last thing I heard was he would use their juice.

[cowdery]

Charlie absolutely does speak for Charlie, but he only speaks for Charlie. What he told you is a long way from Wathens being the Angostura bourbon. Lose "the" and the statement is fine.