Name dispute stalls new Napa AVA

Coombsville or Tulocay? Feds don’t like either one

By BILL KISLIUK
Register Editor

Federal wine regulators have rejected a request to designate east Napa as the Tulocay viticultural area, saying the name does not have enough general recognition or support among local vintners.

Thursday’s decision ices one local request for a new American Viticultural Area, while vintners in Calistoga await a different decision from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, known as TTB, regarding a bitterly-fought proposal for a Calistoga AVA designation.

TTB’s written decision on Tulocay noted that several vintners in the area preferred the name Coombsville or Coombsville District for any AVA describing the rugged region east of the city of Napa. It also noted that the name Tulocay is in little use, other than as the name of a creek, the name of the cemetery on Coombsville Road and the name of a winery whose owner warned TTB of “inestimable economic damage” to his operation if the AVA were to be granted.

Aaron Pott, a winery consultant and former winemaker at Quintessa, sought the Tulocay designation. He said the name Tulocay recognizes the Native American heritage of the area and would be a more distinguished-sounding word to go on a wine label than Coombsville. He said the proposed designation had broad support among local vintners and he was “a little depressed” after hearing of TTB’s decision.

“Tulocay doesn’t sound as redneck as the name Coombsville,” said Pott. “Someone will have to resubmit an (AVA) application now, and if Coombsville goes through, people will know we’re redneck.”

Napa County already has more than a dozen so-called “sub-apps,” or specific viticultural areas within the federally-recognized Napa Valley appellation. Among them are Carneros, Rutherford, Yountville, Oakville, Diamond Mountain, Howell Mountain and the most recent to be recognized, Oak Knoll.

The TTB decision noted that the Napa Valley Vintners, a trade association of more than 300 local wineries, favored the Tulocay designation. But it said of the 20 comments it received on the proposal for a Tulocay AVA, only eight favored a Tulocay name while 12 favored Coombsville or the Coombsville District.

Supporters of Tulocay submitted maps and documents from the middle of the 19th century referring to the area as Tulocay Rancho or Rancho Tulocay.

Opponents provided information on Nathan Coombs, a founder of the city of Napa for whom Coombs Street and Coombsville Road are named.

Tom Farella, winemaker at Farella-Park Vineyards on Third Avenue in Coombsville, opposed the Tulocay designation. He noted in a letter to the TTB that recent articles in the wine press refer to the area as Coombsville. “The petitioners chose to ignore this obvious choice because they didn’t like the sound of it,” he wrote.

Farella also said it would hurt Bill Cadman’s Tulocay Winery, which was established in 1975 but sources most of its grapes from elsewhere.

While under federal rules Cadman would be able to keep the name Tulocay Winery, a 2004 California Supreme Court decision essentially would force him to ditch the name unless he began to source 85 percent or more of his grapes from the area.

The concern over a brand’s current use of a proposed AVA name is at the heart of the controversy in Calistoga. Two wineries, Calistoga Cellars and Calistoga Estates, use the name without sourcing the majority of their grapes from Calistoga. The dispute in Calistoga has been a high-profile affair, with both sides lobbying Congress and regulators and Rep. Mike Thompson, D- St. Helena, contemplating legislation to protect the Calistoga name should TTB decide to grandfather in one or both of the wineries who use the name without using the grapes.

On Friday, Farella said, “TTB made the right decision” on Tulocay.

He said a key consideration for granting an AVA is whether the name is known locally, regionally or nationally. “As beautiful a word as Tulocay is,” said Farella, “it doesn’t have a whit to do with winemaking other than Bill Cadman’s winery.”

Farella said it is likely that vintners and growers in the area will formally seek a Coombsville designation — something that has not been done — but that it is uncertain what the next steps will be.

Napa Valley Register Copyright © 2009