Bested!  Is the World's Fine-Wine Community Above & Beyond Morality?

World's Highest Priced Wine:? The Cricova winery collection from Moldova, with the two largest wine cellars in the world ( Milestii Mici is the largest), contains a Jewish desert wine produced in Jerusalem in 1902. According to rumor, $1,000,000 was offered for this wine. Cricova is  known for hiding Jews in wine barrels during the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.  Clearly, such value is not just a function of the usual sensory attributes of taste and tannins and arguably, the most expensive may not be the best. Even the best may no longer be the best.

 

The fine-wine community produces, evaluates, appreciates, and consumes the world's best wines, according to criteria of excellence evolved over evolutionary time. These criteria need radical reframing for the non-evolutionary conditions we confront in 2015. 

Evolution moves slowly, weeding out the less fit and promoting the genes of the more fit. When global conditions change more rapidly than Evolution can keep up with, humans need to use their brains to re-evaluate what's working and what's not.

Morality and ethics deal with values and judgments of behavior: good, bad, indifferent, and everything in-between. Because values vary by individual, group, context, place,  time, and events, judgments of what is good or bad vary accordingly. For any one individual or group, judgments of good or bad may emerge from competing values, profound conflicts of interests, and major compromises. As a rule, if it works, it's good--albeit whether just good enough or really good. Often, alternatives are considered in the assessment of what is good enough and what works may embody difficult compromises.

   
Quality Reconceptualized  to include Ecology

In the past, wines have been rated by wine experts according to mostly sensory values, such as taste color and body,  fidelity to varietal, uniqueness, tannins, color, body, complexity, etc. Rating by experts  for the world's best wines range from 90 to 100 and are considered the best wines available, regardless of cost. or other considerations.

As a rule, fine wines are chosen by individual consumers according to the historical quality of the winery's wines (e.g., on their waitlist,  tastings events, or online newsletters); from reports by their preferred raters; often from local distributors, and more randomly from various critiques from raters and consumers to be found on the Internet. Price is a factor for most but frequently, not the deciding factor in final choices. Environmental profiles have tended to have negative price value.

A few fine-wine producers report on their environmental management practices but in general, the better the wine, the less likely there is for here to be substantial information using metrics-based data for the winery's environmental practices. Noblesse Oblige is an ethic that still belongs to those who produce and enjoy the best: with privilege comes responsibility. Unlike the stewardship of medieval times, when the obligation was to take care of one's land and inhabitants, the obligation of producers today is to help consumers world-wide develop life-cycle thinking. You can share the fish you catch or you can teach others how to fish.

Stewardship is the concept and Best Management  refers to the set of practices promoted in this website. Stewardship shared by producers and consumers is our framework.While not everyone can be classified as a producer, no one is exempt from consuming. The logical conclusion is that the most important category of individuals for preserving vibrant ecosystems is not the producer, historically the one most responsible, but that of consumers.  What we choose to buy and consume drives the world's economies and future.
  

Test Case

 Our  test case is this:
Given a choice between two Cabernet Sauvignons (or any other) rated between 90 and 100 by the world's best raters, how can a consumer who would like to assume stewardship responsibility for the environment know which winery produces wines using methods most likely to promote vibrant ecosystems into the imaginable future? Our underlying assumption in that if everything else is equal, most consumers will choose wine produced according to those ecological practices considered by scientists to do no harm to the environment and in the ideal situation, from a winery actively engaged in conservation, restoration, water capture and recycling, low or no chemical inputs, biodiversity and community engagement and education.


In the next posts the websites of wineries producing wines rated from 90-100 by Wine Spectator and Robert Parker are examined for their published information about environmental management goals,  practices, progress, and challenges.Because our focus is the fine-wine community, and because resources allow this population to choose wines from everywhere at a huge range of prices, we look at environmental profiles  from wineries world-wide with the overarching filter of having produced a wine rated 90 to 100.

Fixing the Water Fix-its

"The state has prepared a plan for water supply not only district wise but also village wise. We have also directed the administration to reserve 10 per cent additional water for animals. It is for the first time in the history of the state that fodder camps are operational in the month of August.” - See more at Indian Express

World-wide, the major targets of publicly acclaimed Governmental water fix-it-or residential programs are the individual water users. World-wide, the biggest users and abusers are industry and agriculture, supported by lobbyists who have clout mechanisms to manipulate ongoing regulatory attempts.  To simplify and illuminate, our focus is on the California Central and South Coast wineries as agricultural exemplars of the complex of agricultural water use. It is not simple, but it is the most basic issue of our time.

Residential water users account for about 20 % of California water use, with the rest accounted to agriculture and industry. Agricultural water users have yet to be subjected to regulation.  The State has offered gentle admonitions to develop to develop, over the next few years, plans and better manage  groundwater and surface water use.

What's Wrong with this Picture?

"September 14, 2015 03:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time

SACRAMENTO, Calif .-- ( BUSINESS WIRE ) - Save Our ​​Water  - California's official Statewide conservation education program - Launched today its "Fix It For Good" public education campaign at a demonstration event replacement turf put on by the California Department of General Services at the State Capitol. The campaign urges Californians to "Fix It For Good" by making permanent changes to save water by rethinking have yards, toilets and fixtures Water Efficient going with new and fixing leaks. " Business Wire

While conservation efforts  of the major residential users of water should be congratulated  residential water users account for only 20% of California water use. About 80% of water use is attributable to agriculture and industry.

The residential consumer has learned to give up green natural grass lawns and water-greedy plants, to flush discreetly, take short showers, and effectively has substantially reduced residential water use across California. But residential use accounts for less than 20% of total water use for California. So what is happening with the rest?  Where are the water reports by farmers on their water management progress publicly available for scrutiny? Who is laudable and who is not? Who and what are actually being regulated? What will be the penalties for violations as the new regulatory water environment emerges? hen will this happen? Who is the oversight?

Caveat Emptor : if media reports are governmentally based, pay attention to the big picture. Is this a focus-defocus Political manouevre? Are the major water users 'non-transparent' Activities to the average still stakeholder? Is everyone except Agriculture sacrificing ??

Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. has mandated all Californians to reduce water use by 25 percent and to prevent water and waste. I have only to walk into my bathroom to monitor one activity and see that  I am actively conserving water by not flushing.What is happening with California's major water user--agriculture? where is the accountability, community engagement,  and transparency?

 Residential California water users are conserving. Engaging in the water dialogue is also part of this picture.  Assuming Agricultural users in the Central Valley of California and elsewhere are Californians, I look though Governmental websites to find publications about water conservation efforts into  by California farmers. What progress is being made in ongoing efforts of Central Valley Agricultural businesses to reduce and eliminate over-consumption ,subsidence, nitrogen pollution of soil and water, and depletion of groundwater. Where can I go to find out? Who has and who has not modified water use of water and soil with stewardship goals? Where are the publicly available draft proposals by California and commentable agricultural enterprises for protecting groundwater?