Review 236. Mezcal casks: embrace or dread?

In case you never noticed: the rules regulating what can be seen as ‘Scotch whisky’ are pretty tight. The SWA (Scotch Whisky Association), an organisation looking to unite the different  players in the industry, act as spokesman has also taken it upon themselves to be the watchdog on all laws and regulations regarding scotch. And it doesn’t muck about as it has taken legal action on players in Scotland and abroad who they feel are tempering with Scotch whisky. Be it by bending the rules just a wee bit too much or by what they feel is making unjustified claims to or use of things being an essential and integral part of Scotch, like the use of the word Glen by a non-Scotch distillery.  As such, having someone to play the role of champion/advocate/defender/… can only be encouraged. It pretty much guarantees that certain standards are met and maintained while doing ‘the dirty work’ in pursuing those who think they can get away with bending or ignoring  the rules a bit, be it in Scotland or anywhere else across the globe. Not only do they keep an eye on things to make sure the standards as to what qualifies as Scotch whisky are upheld and no copycats get a chance to pass off their stuff as Scotch, they take it a step further even. While they don’t make the rules and laws as such (as in: passing bills in parliament) they are the obvious go-to partner/lobbygroup whenever ‘legal stuff’ comes into play.

There’s a simple yet very important sentence written somewhere in the regulations that not just says that all Scotch whisky must be made in Scotland, but also something down the lines of ‘the only type of whisky  which may be produced in Scotland, is Scotch whisky’. This may seem like stating the bloody obvious, but in fact it issues a strong and strict warning to every producer in Scotland that they themselves shouldn’t be getting any funny ideas by producing  anything other than what is regarded as Scotch whisky. I’m not sure it prohibits whisky distilleries producing other stuff than whisky, but it does mean that if they produce something and change literally the slightest detail somewhere during the entire production process that that is not in line with the regulations as to what is Scotch, they simply can’t call it whisky. I’ll give you an example: if a distillery does everything by the book – from the grain and the malting down to washing, fermenting, distilling and maturation – but, for the sake of experiment, puts part of the new make from a batch into anything other than an oak cask (and not just any oak casks, more on that soon), not even the tiniest drop of that cask can ever be used into what goes into a bottle with the label ‘Scotch whisky’ on it. They can’t even call whatever has been maturing in that cask (let’s say it was a cask made  from a chestnut tree – leeway which Irish distilleries DO have, for instance) ‘whisky’, rather something like ‘spirit drink’ or something.

It wasn’t until fairly recent that Scotch distilleries had a fairly limited choice of oak casks at their disposal to mature their new make into whisky. Until a few years back, only what were deemed ‘traditional’ oak casks were allowed for the maturation of spirit. Of course such a term is up for debate and then some, but it was understood that it applied to casks that were ‘common practice’ in Scotch whisky, meaning those  casks which always have been used. Essentially what that means is that casks  previously containing bourbon, sherry, rum, wine or beer were OK. Everything else: less so. Virgin oak found itself somewhere in a bit of a twilight zone as it was generally  deemed undesirable as it would negatively impact flavour (or so it was believed), and while it wasn’t strictly defined what those ‘non-traditional casks’ could be, it was probably best no to try and push your luck if you didn’t want to take the risk of the SWA telling you off, meaning that all that lovely and probably quite expensive fruity stuff that you ‘ve been maturing in, say,  a Belgian Kriek Lambiek (pronounced ‘creek lambeec’ - a beer made using sour cherries) cask wouldn’t be allowed to see the light of day. Luckily with the amended rules re casks, it is now (slightly) more clear which casks are allowed to mature spirit into whisk. Basically it comes down to:

All casks that previously held wine, beer/ale or spirit are OK, but not if those casks previously held

·        Wine, beer/ale or spirit produced from, or made with, stone fruit (so don’t hold your breath to see a scotch whisky appear matured in plum brandy casks. Or the aforementioned Lambiek)

·        Beer/ale which has had fruit, flavouring or sweetening added after fermentation (again ruling out quite a few Belgian beers as it’s quite common to add spices to them with the purpose of adding flavour)

·        Spirit which has had fruit, flavouring or sweetening added after distillation (essentially excluding artificially sweetened rums)

This also rules out stuff like cider casks (as cider is neither beer, wine nor spirit) but also casks must always have been part of the (and here we go again) ‘traditional process for the alcoholic beverage concerned. And as if that wasn’t vague enough, the regulations also stipulate that all casks used ‘must still result in a spirit which has the taste, aroma and colour generally found in Scotch whisky.’  In the recent past, a few producers thought they could get all innovative and release a scotch whisky that had been matured in a gin cask. Whether that’s a good idea in its own right I’ll leave for you to decide, but it was at this point that the SWA waved a red flag, arguing maturation isn’t a traditional process when making gin and therefore shouldn’t be allowed when maturing Scotch. And as vague as that rule is (and they’re well aware it’s vague), they strongly recommend you  to follow the ‘in case of doubt, please contact your nearest SWA representative’ rule of thumb.

Ardnamurchan mezcal cask release (2017-2025), matured in bourbon barrels, finished in  mezcal casks, NC, UCF,  55% ABV. 4968 bottles, app. €70-€75 / £65-£70

While mezcal (and tequila) casks are, as far as I know, not really considered traditional in the Scotch whisky industry, they didn’t (couldn’t?) prohibit the use of them either, and as a consequence we (possibly begrudgingly) see them pop up from time to time.

Now, I quite like mezcal. In fact there are a few I’ve tasted that were absolutely brilliant. And if you like smoky, savoury, somewhat dirty yet slightly sweet and fruity whisky, chances are you’ll love the stuff too. Traditionally, mezcal doesn’t tend to be matured but is bottled and consumed as a new make spirit, although there’s quite a bit of aged or seasoned mezcal about. Unaged stuff is called ‘joven’ (or Silver, when talking about tequila), while ‘reposado’ refers to mezcal that’s been ‘rested’ in casks  for 2 to 9 months, and Añejado meaning it’s seen the inside of a cask for at least one year. The bit that’s important when it comes to flavour coming from the spirit, is the age of the agave plant. They usually take anywhere between 7  and 15 years to become fully grown, and mezcal – proper mezcal at least- tends to be made from plants usually between 8 and 12 up to 15 years of age, when they’ve developed their ‘piña’, or heart, which is the part that gets harvested and used to make the distillate. The smoky character comes from the roasting of the piñas  in underground ‘ovens’ (usually anywhere between 3 to 5 days), before being crushed, mashed and fermented prior to distillation. Sidenote: there are over 120 different agave subspecies, but usually 30 or so can be used to make mezcal. Now if you’re well into your mezcal and know your Del Maguey from your El Jolgorio, please forgive me over simplifying things as I am still very much a mezcal noob. So, what’s this one about then?

Nose

Ooh, smoky! Not peaty as such, not earthy either, but something campfire like. Underneath there’s a sweet-slightly creamy element. Vanilla and honey, and possibly a touch of linseed. Throughout all of those lies a grainy element.

Palate

Still a fair bit of smoke. Right behind that, the stone oven-mezcal element really makes itself known and also everything you’d associate with it, with mainly a savoury, chewy texture and flavour reminiscent of olives. What I’m failing to pick up, however, is that signatory Ardna effervescence – fizzy touch. I’ve added a bit of water and what it brought was mainly a peppery-hot note, while dialling up the mezcal character.

Finish

Long, clinging, olives, some smoke and then increasingly drying. The last echo is pure mezcal.

Final thoughts

As said, I’m kind of sweet on mezcal, provided it’s the ‘proper stuff’. But do the two mix well together?  I feel I speak not just for myself here, but mezcal cask finishes are really a case of hit or miss. While they are two formidable, flavoursome spirits in their own right, combining their forces to make whisky can get a bit tricky, as you’ll probably need something that’s quite robust to begin with if you want to contain it into a vessel that previously held some of Mexico’s finest poison. This one delivers in my opinion, but I can see why this one would not be to everyone’s liking. All in all, the Ardnamurchan character handles this well, as the cask doesn’t take over and runs away with it, but also (and based on this one sample generously  provided to me by Joe Delvaux – many thanks buddy!) I can’t help but feel this is a spirit in two minds. Up to an extent spirit and cask integrated well with each other, but then again not entirely, as it does taste a bit like taking ½ measure of Ardna and ½ measure of mezcal and pouring them in the same glass. Am I enjoying this, though? Absolutely! ’ll even go one further and state that this release adds something you couldn’t find previously in other Ardnamurchan releases. Is it also the best Ardnamurchan I ever tried? While I think it’s good, the answer here is nope. So while this one scores a goal for the case of mezcal cask finishes, I feel that the jury is still very much out there. Let me conclude by saying what Joe also told me: this likely will not change your opinion on whether or not mezcal casks are a good idea. And that’s probably just as it should be, as discussing what’s in the glass is very much part of what makes this so much fun.