Tomorrow on NPR’s Science Friday the show they’ll be airing is called “The Evolution of Beer,” but really it’s yeast they’ll be talking about. Here’s the description of the show:

In the world of beer, ales are separated from lagers by their yeast. Lager yeast collects on the bottom of the fermenting vessel and ferments sugars into alcohol at lower temperatures that ale yeast, which operates at higher temperatures at the top of the fermentation vat. In new research published this week in the journal Genome Research, scientists examined the genetic sequences of 17 unique lager yeast strains from breweries in Europe and North America, tracing variations in the genetic code of those yeasts back through time. The researchers found that a key hybridization step, in which genetic information from two different yeasts combined and rearranged to yield a new ‘lager yeast’ organism, may have actually happened twice. The researchers found two different family groupings in the lager yeasts they studied, with one lineage associated primarily with Carlsberg breweries in Denmark and breweries in what is now Czechoslovakia, and the other family grouping connected mainly to breweries in the Netherlands, including Heineken. In this segment, we’ll talk with one of the authors of the study about genetics and beer, and about the genes behind lager beer styles such as Pilsners, Märzen, Dortmunders, and Bocks.

Also, according to a report on the study on New Scientist, “Lagers belong to two main families: the Saaz group such as Carlsberg, brewed in Denmark; and the Frohberg lagers that include Heineken and Oranjeboom from the Netherlands.” To discover this, the team examined seventeen yeast strains from around the word and used from 1883 to 1976.

Also from New Scientist:

It has long been thought that Saccharomyces pastorianus, the yeast used in lager production, formed only once from the hybridisation of S. cerevisiae and S. bayanus. Instead, the team discovered that it happened at least twice in two separate locations in Europe, giving rise to the two different lager families. The hybrid, which makes lager instead of ale, probably evolved in Bavarian beer-brewing cellars during the 16th century.

The team also found that Saaz yeasts have a single copy of each parent yeast’s genome, whereas the Frohberg yeasts have an extra copy from S. cerevisiae. They believe this difference affects the flavour of the lager, as well as how quickly the yeasts can ferment the hops.

Sounds like that should be a pretty interesting show. From looking at their schedule, it looks like the whole Friday will be devoted to genes, with the beer only part of the day’s topics. Check your local NPR radio station for when it will air in your part of the world. In the Bay Area, KQED (88.5) will air it at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow.

This might sound like a frivolous question, but I’m deadly serious about asking it. It’s something that’s been on my mind off and on for years, at least since web browsers first started appearing and breweries starting putting up web pages. I understand that drinking alcohol is prohibited if you’re under the age of consent — 21 here, but lower almost everywhere else that it’s not illegal — but is reading about something illegal likewise illegal?

I know there are plenty of books that people have censored and continue to censor because they believe that young people reading them might be corrupted by the ideas expressed in such books. I also generally believe such people to be backward doofuses, no matter how well-intentioned they pretend to be. But here in cyberspace, the ether that has no geography, things seem a little trickier. Anyone can access any website, any time. And that tends to worry people convinced that ideas are dangerous and that impressionable minds should only be exposed to things their parents deem to be safe. I know I’m over-simplifying, but overall the notion that ideas can corrupt I find highly specious. If an idea can’t hold up to a child’s scrutiny, maybe it’s not such a great idea after all. Kids tend to have very natural, well-defined bullshit detectors.

But censorship in the protection of childrens’ virtue is one of America’s most peculiar cherished institutions. We may not have burned books — though we did stupidly ignite some Beatles records once upon a time — but we certainly have done almost as much harm by trying to ban them. I tend to believe that ideas that challenge the status quo or people’s dogmatic beliefs are not only important to a functioning society but downright necessary. A society that can’t question its own values becomes a form of dictatorship. But when the censorship is self-inflicted by ordinary people trying to foist their own set of morals on everyone else, that’s far more dangerous than a government ruled by a single tyrant. A dictator can be overthrown and the will of the people restored, but when we do it voluntarily, that’s harder to fight. It’s the difference between Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World. In the latter’s vision of a dystopian future, they censored one another voluntarily, believing it was for their own good. I find that view much closer to how our modern world functions, where private citizens devote their time to protesting other peoples’ morals “for their own good,” so convinced are they that what they believe must be correct. This is why I find neo-prohibitionists so frightening. They exude ignorance and moral superiority, believing forcing other people to believe whatever they believe and wanting to force us to behave as they do is all simply for our own good. They seem to believe a difference of opinion is not something to be tolerated, but squashed. The ends do justify the means, in their minds.

But back to the internet. Anyone, young or old, can look up how to build a bomb, smoke marijuana, do cocaine or any number of dangerous and illegal acts. Tobacco, insofar as it’s also illegal for minors, is very accessible on the web. Go to any popular tobacco company, like Phillip Morris or R.J. Reynolds and you can waltz right on to their website. But with alcohol, it’s another story. Most larger beer companies have a splash page where you have to certify that you’re over 21. Why? There’s no beer coming out of the computer using a USB tap, there’s nothing illegal you can obtain at a brewery’s website. All you can do is read about the brewery and their beer. So why is that more dangerous than reading about cigarettes, drugs or bomb-making, all of which — and who knows how many more I can’t think of — can be accessed without first confirming that you’re an adult? I’ve written over and over again about how important I believe alcohol education is to fostering more reasonable behavior among young adults, but if they’re presumably not even allowed to read about alcohol, then that’s yet one more way in which educating people is maliciously thwarted. Can I be the only one that finds that infuriating? Why should we restrict young people from even reading about alcohol? Why is reading about beer considered so dangerous that it alone is singled out for special treatment. As usual, my favorite comedian, Bill Hicks, has some salient thoughts on this subject:

“I’ve been traveling. I’ve been noticing an anti-intellectualism sweeping our world, I find quite frightening. I was in Nashville, Tennessee last year, after the show I went to a Waffle House, I’m not proud of it, I was hungry. And I’m alone, I’m eating and I’m reading a book, right? Waitress walks over to me, “Tch tch tch tch. Hey, what you readin’ for?” Is that like the weirdest fucking question you’ve ever heard? Not what am I reading, but what am I reading for. Well, goddammit, you stumped me. Why do I read? Well… hmmm… I guess I read for a lot of reasons, and the main one, is so I don’t end up … being a fucking waffle waitress.

But then… this trucker in the next booth gets up, stands over me, and goes, “Well, looks like we got ourselves a reader.” What the fuck’s going on here? It’s not like I walked into a clan rally in a Boy George outfit, goddammit, it’s a book! Am I stepping out of some intellectual closet? I read. There, I said it. I feel better.”

What’s more than a little frightening about his rant is that it was done over ten years ago (Hicks died in 1994) and the anti-intellectualism he refers to seems even more acute today than ever. Pop culture is rapidly becoming a celebration of dumb and dumber. Anything witty, intelligent or thoughtful is branded elitist, and will never last on primetime. Idiocracy may not have been as good a film as Office Space, but Mike Judge was just as prescient with the movie’s take on the direction our culture is headed. For further evidence, read Morris Berman’s The Twilight of American Culture, in which he argues persuasively that we’re entering a new dark ages.

Think I’m alarmist? Take a look at these recent statistics concerning the state of reading in this country. “58% of the US adult population never reads another book after high school and 42% of college graduates never read another book. 80% of US families did not buy or read a book last year, 70% of US adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years, 57% of new books are not read to completion.” Before I had kids, I read an average of 2-3 books every week, including audiobooks I listened to in the car. That I’m so far in the minority is quite scary. How do we as a society address complex problems when reading a book is beyond our ken? If knowledge is power, no wonder we’re so helpless. Is it any surprise then that so many people still believe Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and Barack Obama is a practicing Muslim.

Undoubtedly, the best way to keep people ignorant and susceptible to superstition and propaganda, is to keep information away from them. The less people know, the more they can be manipulated and the easier they can be controlled. That’s the basis of early propaganda studies that were first tested on the American population before and during World War I. The pioneer of the field, Edward Bernays, successfully used the techniques he developed in the Ministry of Information, an ominous sounding branch of our government that manipulated support for going to war and squelched dissent on the grounds of national security. His basic principles are still being used today for the same purposes, and have also expanded into virtually every aspect of our lives.

So why is it a big deal that you have to click an extra box so you can visit a beer website, especially when anyone could simply say they were an adult to gain access? I think it has to do with the perception this extra step sends, which is that alcohol is so dangerous that even reading about it is illegal. It’s not, of course, but the intolerant neo-prohibitionists have created such a chill on our civil liberties and freedoms that huge companies are loathe to cross them and so voluntarily censor themselves to avoid their churlish wrath. That in doing so they might possibly keep information out of the hands of adolescents who need it the most, thereby adding to the problem of underage drinking, is typical of the mis-guided nature of the anti-alcohol movement. Because when reading is outlawed, only outlaws have beer books.
 

Here’s a perfect illustration of why we desperately need alcohol education for our nation’s youth. I’m sure that neo-prohibitionists will read this story and view it as a vindication of their draconian policies of abstinence and keeping the minimum drinking age the highest in the civilized world.

Yesterday in Boulder, Colorado, a dozen college students from the University of Colorado gathered at a local residence with cheap beer and other alcoholic beverages to wile away the late summer weekend. They put up a sign on a pole facing a busy thoroughfare that read “You honk, WE DRINK.” Cars passing the group honked en masse, causing police to show up because of complaints about the noise. Their response was interesting. As one member of the group, Lauren Boyd, described what the police said, they told us. “I like your style, just be more quiet.” They were also told they were on the “edge of legality” because of their proximity to the sidewalk. The group was instructed to back up and quiet down. They complied, changing their sign from “You Honk” to “Give Us the Finger.”

The brouhaha continued another five hours with passersby flipping them off with glee the entire time. The police did not return because, in their words, “they were on private property and of legal drinking age, [so] the party was allowed to continue — sign and all.” Surprisingly enough, I’m probably in agreement with the neo-prohibitionists that this is not a responsible way to use alcohol. We part company, I suspect, on why. To me it points out the need for education about alcohol before young adults are set loose in the world, often for the first time in college. If children were allowed to sample alcohol under the supervision of their parents in the home (which in most places is illegal), with other responsible adults (ditto) or were allowed to begin legally drinking earlier, by the time they were living on their own, the taboo associated with suddenly being free would be far less likely to lead to this type of binge drinking.

Boulder is also, ironically, the home of the Brewers Association, a trade group that looks after the interests of the nation’s small brewers. For this somewhat embarrassing display of youthful exuberance to have occurred in their backyard makes it doubly clear that the current policy regarding youth and alcohol is not only not working, but is more than likely exacerbating the problem by using a foolhardy all or nothing approach and ignoring the value of education. Once kids reach college age knowing absolutely nothing about the effects of alcohol it’s easy to explain such binge behavior because they’ve never seen responsible drinking and are completely unfamiliar with it, thanks in large part to the efforts of the anti-alcohol elements of our society. A little knowledge might go a long way to raising more responsible children into adulthood but as long as that’s not permitted, we’ll continue to have college binge drinking. And not coincidentally, neo-prohibitionists will continue to have something to point to in furtherance of their agenda of keeping the minimum drinking age at 21, ignoring the likely cause that it’s their own efforts that continue to make binging a problem.

vs.

Charlie Bamforth, who’s the Anheuser-Busch Endowed Professor of Brewing Science at U.C. Davis (and was my teacher when I took the brewing short course there) has a new book out, Grape vs. Grain. This at least Bamforth’s eighth book, though many have been quite technical in nature. This one is more reader friendly, and addresses the debate over which beverage is more deserving of respect.

From the book publisher’s website: Why is wine considered more sophisticated even though the production of beer is much more technologically complex? Why is wine touted for its health benefits when beer has more nutritive value? Why does wine conjure up images of staid dinner parties while beer denotes screaming young partiers? Charles Bamforth explores several paradoxes involving these beverages, paying special attention to the culture surrounding each. He argues that beer can be just as grown-up and worldly as wine and be part of a healthy, mature lifestyle. Both beer and wine have histories spanning thousands of years. This is the first book to compare them from the perspectives of history, technology, nature of the market for each, quality attributes, types and styles, and the effect that they have on human health and nutrition. Last night, I attended an event at Anchor Brewing in San Francisco to promote the book. A few dozen people enjoyed Anchor’s hospitality, a few beers and some snacks. Bamforth gave a short talk and answered questions. My favorite quote: “Wine is a fine beverage, but beer is better.”

Charlie favors traditional styles and tends to prefer more technically savvy brewing. He hammers home the idea of “consistent excellence” as the highest goal for brewers and doesn’t much care for beer made with non-traditional ingredients. His background is as a researcher first and then as quality control at Bass for many years before moving to the states to teach at U.C. Davis, so I’ve never found that too surprising. He’s been a great advocate for beer and gives numerous talks around the world, informing his audiences about beer’s healthfulness and the reasons it’s at least the equal — if not more complex and impressive — than wine. The new book, Grape vs. Grain, is his latest project in that on-going mission.

Charlie Bamforth with John Dannerbeck from Anchor Brewing.

The Beer Judge Certification Program, or BJCP, released today the new 2008 style guidelines, the first revision since 2004. The new guidelines are available in a variety of formats. There’s also a one-page pdf that gives a short summary of the changes.

In case you didn’t know, the BJCP certifies judges for homebrew and commercial competitions, administers tests, and performs many other worthwhile functions in the beer world. If you’ve ever wanted to be a beer judge or just learn more about beer styles, they’re a very good place to start.

Most rye beers that I’m aware of use only around 10-20% rye with the rest being the more traditional barley. I’ve always liked that little something that rye adds to the beer and was in heaven over ten years ago during that year or so when it seemed like almost everybody was making a rye beer. These days, rye beers are a bit more on the rare side, though there’s still a few hundred being made in North America.

There is also a German style of beer, Roggenbier, which uses at anywhere from 25-65% rye malt, depending on whose account you accept. The German Institute says “half barley malt and equal portions of wheat and rye malts” are used while the BJCP guidelines say “Malted rye typically constitutes 50% or greater of the grist (some versions have 60-65% rye). Remainder of grist can include pale malt, Munich malt, wheat malt, crystal malt and/or small amounts of debittered dark malts for color adjustment.” Nothing against the BJCP, but I’m more inclined to to accept the version of the German Beer Institute since it’s an association of German breweries and related institutions.

So those are the common rye beers, what about using 100% rye? Well, probably the first and foremost reason you never hear about all-rye beers is that it is so difficult to brew with. Rye has no husks, like barley does, and that means it’s extremely difficult to sparge (which is spraying hot water on the spent grain) as without the husks it turns to a thick porridge or concrete.

There was a Irish brewer, Dwan Tipperary Brewing, who closed a few years back, who made a beer called All Rye Beer or All Rye Paddy at least once. But there’s no information as to whether it really used 100% rye malt, apart from that suggestive name. I’ve also come across an account of a homebrewer making an all-rye beer. MoreBeer’s forum also has a topic dedicated to why this is a difficult task.

So perhaps I should change the title to the world’s only currently made commercial example of a 100% rye beer, but it doesn’t sound very sexy that way, now does it? At any rate, Bear Republic Brewing in Healdsburg, California on Friday, debuted what they believe to be the world’s first 100% rye beer. I was on hand to try some of the first keg of their new Easy Ryeder and talk with the brewers about it.

But let’s talk about the beer itself first. It had a dull copper color, slightly hazy, with a decent tan head. The nose was a little restrained, with some bready aromas, a touch of hops and, naturally, some rye character. But it was surprisingly smooth, mild and very drinkable, an easy ryeder indeed. I was surprised to learn it was 5% abv because it seemed more like a session beer to me, and I would have guessed a little lower than that. I thought the rye flavors might overpower the beer, but that’s not the case at all. It is light and refreshing throughout with just enough hop character (at 30 IBUs) for balance. It finishes with just a bit of rye flavor lingering, before dissipating quickly and cleanly. Again, I think my expectations were that if beer with just a fraction of rye tends to give it strong rye flavors and character, that with all rye it would be even more so, but that wasn’t really was not what happened. Instead, they managed to create a unique, ultimately very drinkable beer that in temperament seems closer to a wheat beer, but with the more barley-like flavors of rye.

The beer went through several trials before getting things right. To combat the wort turning to concrete, they had to watch the temperature fluctuations much more closely than usual (no more than 3-5 degrees or it turned to stone), and with bags of rice hulls added to make up for the lack of husks in rye malt. It was, of course, difficult to get the malt to break down and early test batches, if they didn’t become concrete-like, were still very thick and viscous and even hard to remove from the lauter tun at all. Even so, the first test batch that yielded drinkable results was the color of bad gravy, having a dull gray tint to it from all pale rye malt. Apparently it tasted fine, but who among us wants a beer the color of dishwater? Twenty-five pounds of chocolate rye malt was then added to give it the much more appealing color it exhibits today. The hops they used are Chinook and Saaz. It took four tries to get it right, as there really aren’t any manuals for tis kind of beer. Was it worth all that effort? I think so, as the results are quite tasty and in some ways different from anything else I’ve tried. It certainly must have been a learning experience and it’s interesting to see that it is possible on a commercial level to use only rye. It’s quite an achievement, and if you love rye — or just brewing innovation and creativity — you owe it to yourself to get up to Healdsburg to try this new beer.

Bear Republic brewers Rich Norgrove, Jode Yaksic, Peter Kruger and Ray Lindecker. Jode, according to Rich, had the most to do with creating the Easy Ryder, from doing the research, test batches and coming up with the name.

Eric Asimov had another great beer piece yesterday at The Pour, this one was an overview on cask-conditioned beers. Personally, if I have a choice I always go with the cask version. In fact last night while out with some old high school buddies, I enjoyed Sara’s Ruby Mild on cask at Magnolia and later Moonlight’s Sublimmminal at the Toronado. Yum.

 
And here’s some general information on casks.

The parts of a beer barrel.

Cask Sizes:

• Pin: 4.5 gallons
• Firkin: 9 gallons
• Kilderkin: 18 gallons
• Barrel: 36 gallons
• Hogshead: 54 gallons
• Puncheon: 72 gallons
• Butt: 108 gallons

“It is a great thing to know our vices.”        — Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BCE)

Nobody I’ve discussed the issue of the title “beer sommelier” with thinks that the term is an appropriate one, because wine is intrinsically embedded into the definition. Over a hearty brew or two, many of us who think about words far too much have been trying to come up with a new word that’s the equivalent of sommelier but for the world of beer. Don Russell in his Joe Sixpack column suggested “Cellarman” Others have tossed out “Beermaster,” “Zymurgier” and even “Ale Consumption Engineer” for discussion. For me, none quite hit the right note.

Ray Daniels has dug deep and found a word that’s fallen out of use: Cicerone, which is pronounced “sis-uh-rohn.” He’s setting up a program where people can be certified in one of three levels of expertise by studying and taking exams based on syllabuses being created as we speak. So far, a draft of the novice syllabus is ready, which is to attain the first level, called a “Certified Beer Server,” along with the master syllabus for both “Certified Cicerone” and “Master Cicerone.”

From the website:

The word Cicerone (pronounced sis-uh-rohn) has been chosen to designate those with proven expertise in selecting, acquiring and serving today’s wide range of beers. The titles “Certified Cicerone” and “Master Cicerone” are protected certification trademarks. Only those who have passed the requisite test of knowledge and tasting skill can call themselves a Cicerone.

I confess that my initial reaction to the word wasn’t entirely positive, probably just because it is an unfamiliar word with no intuitive meaning. But by letting it marinate for a few days, it is beginning to grow on me. I certainly love the idea of having our own word. By using a word currently unknown to all but the most accomplished crossword puzzler, we can take it and make it our own. There are already rumblings and grumblings by people who don’t like the word because it isn’t beer-y enough or wasn’t decided upon by a committee of industry leaders. I say let’s just move past that and work on the more important task of creating a world where every fine restaurant has its own sommelier and cicerone. We could spend months and years debating the right word to use, and I for one probably have, but I’d rather keep my eye on the prize. I say kudos to Ray for hanging it out there and just going for it. The real trick for him is gaining acceptance on the front lines, at bars, brewpubs and restaurants. It’s in the beer industry’s best interests for an idea like this to take root, so I believe we should all support this idea and stop quibbling over the name. I, for one, am relieved to set aside that question. The sooner we’re united as an industry in using “cicerone,” the sooner it will gain broader acceptance, not only at eating and drinking establishments, but also with the general public, the civilian population. And when that happens we’ll have accomplished a grand leap forward toward our collective goal of getting beer the respect we all believe it deserves.

For my fellow word nerds, here’s some more information about the word “cicerone.” The website explains the origin of the word thusly:

Cicerone is an English word referring to “one who conducts visitors and sightseers to museums and explains matters of archaeological, antiquarian, historic or artistic interest.” For beer, a Cicerone will possess the knowledge and skills to guide those interested in beer culture, including its historic and artistic aspects. “Cicerone” now designates a person with demonstrated expertise in beer who can guide consumers to enjoyable and high-quality experiences with great beer.

According to my O.E.D., the word is taken from the name of the Roman orator and statesman, Marcus Tullius Cicero, and is “supposed [to be] referring to his learning or eloquence,” similar to the word mentor, which seems to fit. The OED definition is:

A guide who shows and explains the antiquities and curiosities of a place to strangers.

It was first used in print in 1726 and by the end of that century began to be used more in the general sense of a guide, before falling out of general usage in the mid-1800s. The OED suggests Ciceronage, Ciceroneship and Ciceronism to denote “the function or action of a Cicerone.” Also, according to the OED, it’s actual historical origin remains unknown and curiously was used in English before it ever shows up in Italian dictionaries.

Personally, I can’t wait to have my first restaurant experience where after the waiter hands me my menu, a man or woman standing behind the server walks up to the table, saying. “Good evening, I’ll be your Cicerone tonight.” That will be a wonderful day.

This has been a brutal month for me, in the last few weeks I’ve been to Denver, Portland and am writing this from Mammoth Lakes, California, where I’m attending a CSBA meeting and beer festival. So the Bulletin has suffered, but I didn’t want to miss this month’s Session because it’s an idea that I strongly believe in. I’ll try to be brief for this one (at least brief for me) since I have a speaking engagement in a few hours. Our host for the month, Greg Clow, chose fruit beers for this month’s topic and it’s another worthy one.

The use of fruit in beer, of course, is not a new phenomenon by any stretch of the imagination. The Belgians, for example, have been using fruit in lambics for centuries. I always chuckle to myself when people make allusions to fruit beer not being for men, without having the foggiest notion what their talking about. I’d love to see their face when they try their first sour cherry lambic and can no longer sustain that argument. Fruit beers are, according to taste, for everybody. It’s probably a good idea to like the fruit used in a particular beer, and to have it be not too sweet or not too sour, depending on your own tolerance and preferences. But there’s such a wide range and variety of fruit beers that there’s undoubtedly one to suit any person’s tastes.

Off the top of my head, here’s just a few different fruits that are or have been used in beer:
 

• Apple: Jack Russell Harvest Apple, New Glarus Apple Ale, Unibroue Ephemere
• Apricot: Alpine Apricot Nectar, Cantillon Fou’ Foune, Pyramid Apricot Ale, Valley Apricot Ale
• Banana: De Troch Chapeau Banana Lambic, Wells Banana Bread Beer
• Blackberry: Coast Range Blackberry Wheat, Jack Russell Blackberry Abbey Ale, Oregon Trail Blackberry Porter (Jim Koch’s Oregon Brewing also made a blackberry porter)
• Black Currant: Lindemans Cassis Lambic, Unibroue Ephemere
• Blueberry: BluCreek Blueberry Ale, Jack Russell Blueberry Beer, Marin Blueberry, SLO Blueberry Ale
• Cherry: Bell’s Cherry Stout, Cantillon Kriek, Melbourn Bros. Spontaneous Fermentation Cherry, New Glarus Belgian Red, Samuel Adams Cherry Wheat
• Cranberry: Samuel Adams Cranberry Lambic
• Elderberry: Ebulum Elderberry Black Ale (I also once had an Elderberry Barleywine at a CAMRA festival in Peterborough that knocked me for a loop)
• Gooseberry: Grozet Gooseberry and Wheat Ale
• Grape: Cantillon St. Lamvinus, Cantillon Vigneronne, Concord Grape Ale
• Grapefruit: Groslch 2.5 Pink Grapefruit, St. Peter’s Fruit Beer
• Honeysuckle: Barrel House Honeysuckle Blond
• Kiwi: Bube’s Kiwi-Strawberry Wheat
• Lemon: Magic Hat Hocus Pocus, Saxer Lemon Lager, Stiegl Lemon Beer
• Lime: Lakeport Brava Lime, Viking Lime Twist
• Orange: Buffalo Bill’s Mandarin Hefeweizen, Caldera Dry Hop Orange, Craftsman Orange Grove Ale, Dogfish Head Blood Orange Hefeweizen, Triple Rock Orange
• Peach: Four Peaks Arizona Peach, Lindemans Peche Lambic, Unibroue Ephemere
• Pear: Hopper’s Pear Lambic
• Pineapple: Maumee Bay Pineapple Wheat
• Plum: J.W. Lee’s Plum Pudding, Watch City Jack Horner’s Plum Wit
• Pomegranate: He’Brew Genesis Ale (original recipe), Moylan’s Pomegranate Wheat
• Prickly Pear: Real Ale Brewing Prickly Wit, Sleeping Giant Prickly Pear Pale Ale
• Raspberry: Undoubtedly the most popular fruit in beer, probably because it works so well. Great Divide Wild Raspberry, Lindemans Framboise, Marin Raspberry Trail Ale, New Glarus Raspberry Tart, Purple Haze Raspberry Wheat Brew
• Strawberry: Melbourn Bros. Spontaneous Fermentation Strawberry, Pete’s Wicked Strawberry Blonde
• Tomato: Pizza Beer, Uehara Shuzou Tomato Bibere
• Watermelon: 21st Amendment Watermelon Wheat

This list is merely to show the amazing diversity of different fruits used in beers. No two are alike, and so saying you don’t like fruit beer is like saying you don’t like people. There’s just too many variables to make such a blanket statement. I think it comes down to perception again of some weird prejudice in the U.S. where fruit in beer is seen as unmanly, as ridiculous a notion as I can imagine. There’s just too many good flavors here to ignore them over masculinity. But I guess that’s more for the rest of us.

When fruit beers became trendy fifteen years ago, there were certainly some that were better than others and a few used too much extract, in my opinion. But at some point there seemed to be something of a backlash for reasons unknown, and a lot of breweries quietly dropped their beers made with fruit. Today, breweries that still make fruit beers are generally the ones where their popularity never waned and they just continued making them without worrying too much about how they were perceived. Customers were buying them, and that was really all that mattered. Happily, new breweries are also venturing into fruit beer and seems pretty clear to me that they’ll always be around, at least as long as people care about flavor and how things taste.

The Plumcots Are Coming, The Plumcots Are Coming!   Russian River Brewing recently added another fruit to the list of fruit beers, the plumcot, which is a hybrid cross between a plum and apricot. It was crossbred by none other than Luther Burbank right in Santa Rosa, just a few blocks from the brewery. That’s why brewer Vinnie Cilurzo chose it, because he could use a local ingredient created right in his own backyard. Plumcots are also called Pluots, but the two are not interchangeable. Pluots are a variation on Burbank’s Plumcot created by Floyd Zaiger. Pluots are three-quarters plum and one-quarter apricot whereas plumcots are closer to 50-50. Pluots are also a registered trademark owned by Zaiger, a practice that I understand but loathe on many levels.

The beer is Compunction, a blonde ale brewed with plumcots. It had an original gravity of 1048 and is 5.8% abv. It’s slightly cloudy with golden color and a thin white head. Brett is the first aroma that hits you with fruity esters coming closely behind. The sweetness is puckering and works nicely as a contrast for the Brettanomyces. It’s surprisingly refreshing and light, given its strength. The beer is also aged in wooden barrels, but the beer’s strong flavors don’t allow much barrel characteristics to come through, really only a touch. Another interesting beer from Russian River Brewing.
 

Countless new hop varieties are created every year, so many in fact that they are given only a number. A hop has to really prove itself worthy before it actually gets a name. For example, Hop #01046 began its life in Prosser, Washington at the Golden Gate Roza Hop Ranches. During the summer of 2000, a female hop known as Zeus was cross-pollinated with a male known simply as #98004 (whose mother is in effect Nugget hops). Its lineage, therefore, is “50% Zeus, 18.75% Nugget, 25% USDA 19058m, and 6.25% unknown.”

The following year, seeds were collected and the plant was grown in a greenhouse for the next two years, and screened for powdery mildew resistance, along with gender, vigor, and cone type. By 2002, #01046 was exhibiting higher than usual alpha-acid percentages with good resistance and several other very positive attributes. The next year, 2003, #01046 was asexually propagated and rhizomes from the original plant “were dug, divided and planted into multiple greenhouse grown containers.” Eventually, 4,000 softwood-cutting plants were created and then grown at two different locations, the original Roza ranch and also at Golden Gate Emerald Hop Ranches in Sunnyside, Washington. These plants represented the second-generation of the hop plant.
 

Over the subsequent three years the hops were grown, sampled, tested and analyzed on a variety of factors. These tests confirmed that the new hop had good resistance to disease, along with exceptionally high yield and high alpha-acids percentages. The hops were harvested and processed into 200 lb. bales, which were tested using the ASBC (American Society of Brewing Chemists) spectrophotometric method and showed “average alpha-acids level of 17.5% and beta-acids level of 3.5%.” The alphas were almost exactly the same as Mom (Zeus) but with much less loss of alpha-acids in storage, a good sign.
 

In 2005, third-generation plants were created and a large-scale field test was conducted at the Emerald Ranch. Declared a success, #01046 was re-christened “Bravo” and S.S. Steiner, who operated the hop fields in Washington, filed a patent application. 2006 yielded the first commercially available Bravo hops.
 

For every one of these success stories, there are hundreds that never make it. But even getting this far doesn’t guarantee a hop’s success. How it works in the beer is the final and arguably the most important test. So what will it taste like in your beer? Nobody’s certain, though there is a great way to find out. Tomorrow you have an opportunity to sample at least 21 single hop IPAs, using only Bravo hops, made by breweries from around northern California. Drake’s Brewing in San Leandro is hosting their 2nd annual Drake’s Brewing Beer Festival and Washoes Tournament. Each brewery will also be serving some of their other available beers so you’ll have plenty of other beers to sample, as well. But it’s a great educational experience on several fronts. First, you get to try a new hop in its debut in a commercial beer. Second, you can see firsthand how different brewers using different equipment but the same hop and the same IPA recipe can craft 21 beers that all taste distinctively different (at least that was the experience from last year when Summit hop was used at the festival). It should be a fun time. Come join us at Drake’s for a memorable afternoon of beer, food, music and games. See you there.

7.14

Single Hop Festival & Washoe Tournament (2nd annual)
Drake’s Brewing, 1933 Davis Street #177, San Leandro, California
510.562.0866 [ website ] [ directions ]

NOTE: The patent filing lists Bravo as #01046 but the photo shows #1046. So far, I’ve been unable to confirm which is correct.

According to Wired Science, scientists from Down Under (the Department of Food Science, University of Otago, in Dunedin, New Zealand, and the Australian Centre for Research on Separation Science, Department of Applied Chemistry, RMIT University, in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia more specifically) have published a paper identifying the chemicals creating the spicy aromas in noble hops using four different hop varieties: Target, Saaz, Hallertauer Hersbrucker, and Cascade. (That’s what’s being reported, target and cascade, of course are not noble hops.) They’ve now succeeded in finding the chemicals responsible for “spiciness,” using “two-dimensional gas chromatography mass spectrometry.” The equipment takes “individual chemical[s] from the hops in a two-step process, and then weighs the individual molecules to identify them.” There are nearly 1,000 separate chemical components that contribute to the aromas just from hops so this was definitely like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

Dr. Lingshuang Cai and Jacek Koziel at Iowa State University

From the Wired article: When the test results came in, five chemicals stood out from the others. All of them are terpenes. Geraniol, which is named after geranium flowers and obviously has a floral scent. Linalool, has a floral and spicy scent. It is also found in mint, cinnamon, and rosewood. Eugeneol has a spicy, clove-like aroma. Beta-ionone has a complex woody and fruity scent. Caryophyllene is found in black pepper. Terpenes are a class of chemicals that are often responsible for the unique scent of food, perfume, and beverages. In 2002, other researchers showed that adding a tiny amount of a particular terpene to a very bland beer made it smell fantastic, but not quite as complex as a premium brew.

From the Abstract in the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry:

The “spicy” character of hops is considered to be a desirable attribute in beer, associated with “noble hop aroma”. However, the compounds responsible have yet to be adequately identified. Odorants in four samples of the spicy fraction of hop essential oil were characterized using gas chromatography-olfactometry (GC-O) and CharmAnalysis. Four hop varieties were compared, namely, Target, Saaz, Hallertauer Hersbrucker, and Cascade. Odor-active compounds were tentatively identified using comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC) combined with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (TOFMS). An intense “woody, cedarwood” odor was determined to be the most potent odorant in three of the four spicy fraction samples. This odor coincided with a complex region where between 8 and 13 compounds were coeluting in each of the four spicy fractions. The peak responsible was determined by (i) correlating peak areas with Charm values in eight hop samples and (ii) heart-cut multidimensional gas chromatography-olfactometry (MDGC-O). The compound responsible was tentatively identified as 14-hydroxy-ß-caryophyllene. Other important odorants identified were geraniol, linalool, ß-ionone, and eugenol.

The British advocacy group CAMRA, the Campaign for Real Ale, promotes the month of May as “Mild Month” in an effort to educate people about a style that’s dying before their eyes throughout England. Since this Friday’s “Session” — a.k.a. Beer Blogging Friday — that I’ll be hosting will be about Milds, I thought I’d collect and provide some basic information about this relatively unknown and misunderstood style. In fact, the theme for Friday’s “Session” is “The Mysterious Misunderstood Mild” in an effort to make these delicious beers less so. Yesterday, CAMRA had a press release in anticipation of Mild Month beginning today that summarizes their efforts.

Mild was once Britain’s most popular style of real ale, but had fallen out of fashion in favour of other beers. However there are still many brewers who are enthusiastic about the future of Mild and CAMRA is dedicated to making sure their beers get the credit they deserve.

May has been designated as Mild Month by CAMRA and the consumer organisation is urging beer lovers to seek out milds in their local pubs and rediscover this wonderfully flavoursome beer.

CAMRA also suggests a few recipes for cooking with mild.

Mild’s popularity has been waning since at least 1960. In 1959 the style accounted for 42% of beer sold in Great Britain, but by 1980 its popularity had dropped to a mere 10% and today it’s far less than that. For a good overview of the history of the style and what led to its decline, read the December 1998 article that All About Beer magazine ran on the subject by Roger Protz, entitled “Vanishing Mild.”

Here’s how CAMRA describes milds: Mild is one of the most traditional beer styles which is enjoying a revival in today’s real ale market. Usually dark brown in colour, due to the use of well-roasted malts or barley it is less hopped than bitters and often has a chocolatety character with nutty and burnt flavours. Cask conditioned Mild is a rarity in a lot of parts of the country, which is a crying shame, because Mild is a distinctive and tasty beer. Mild is one of, if not the, oldest beer styles in the country. Until the 15th century, ale and mead were the major British brews, both made without hops. Hops were introduced from Holland, France and Germany after this time. This also started the trend on reducing the gravity of ale, as the Hop is also a preservative, and beers had to be brewed very strongly to try to help preserve them. The hop also started the rapid decline of mead, which is only made in a very few places today. So what is Mild? It is a beer which has tastes and textures all it’s own. Basically it is a beer that is less hopped than bitter, etc. The darkness of Dark Milds, such as Greene King XX Mild, comes from the use of darker malts and/or roasted barley which are used to compensate for the loss of Hop character. “Chocolate “, “fruity”, “nutty” and “burnt” are all tastes to be found in the complexity of Milds. However, not all milds are dark. Yorkshire brewed Timothy Taylors Golden Best is one of the best examples of a light coloured mild, as is Bank’s Original, the name changed from Mild to try to give it a more modern image. In Scotland, 60/- ale is similar to mild (Belhaven’s being a good example).

Milds today tend to have an ABV in the 3% to 3.5% range, with of course some notable exceptions. In fact, a lot of the Microbreweries who try their hand at mild are bringing the alcohol content back up somewhat! Mild wasn’t always weaker though. In the latter half of the 19th Century, milds were brewed to about the same strength as bitters as a response to the demand for a sweeter beer from the working classes and in those days most bitters were around 6 to 7% ABV.

During the First World War, malt rationing and pressure from the temperance movement led to brewers rapidly reduced the strength. Following the Second World War, as prosperity returned, mild`s popularity as a cheap ale began to fade, not being helped by being kept badly in run down pubs as the Big Brewers began to heavily promote their keg lager brands. Coupled to this was a gradual, but steady decline in heavy industry in the North and Midlands of Britain, mild`s great marketplace.

By the 1970s, the keg lager boom had seen mild’s share of the market fall to around 13% and it was a shame to see a bland gassy and overpriced product, which was generally weaker than the mild it was trying to oust, succeed in many cases.

On this side of the pond, there is a great deal of confusion about milds, though for me the most curious issue is that people don’t like the name. What on earth could be wrong with the word “mild,” which in terms of flavor is defined as “not sharp, pungent, or strong.” It’s the very opposite of extreme, but is still full-flavored and delicious. I can think of countless scenarios where a mild would be the ideal compliment to the situation, weather, food, etc.

Making things more confusing is the fact that oftentimes in England a mild when bottled is called a brown ale, but this is still not the same as a brown ale like Newcastle. And then there’s the fact that there are two recognized styles of milds, pale milds and dark milds, further clouding things.

The BJCP organizes milds under their Style #11, English Brown Ale, with 11A designated mild and two additional sub-styles, northern and southern English brown ale. They suggest IBUs of 10-25, SRM of 12-25, and ABV of 2.8-4.5%, with most falling between 3.1-3.8%. The only American example they list is Goose Island PMD Mild.

For the 2007 Great American Beer Festival, The Brewers Association will for the first time include milds as a separate category in the style guidelines. Two categories, actually, as they’re dividing them into two separate styles, English-Style Pale Mild Ale and English-Style Dark Mild Ale. These appear to be the same as Category 56 for the World Beer Cup. For the BA, Pale Mild has IBUs of 10-20, SRM of 8-17 and ABV of 3.2-4% and for Dark Mild, IBUs of 10-24, SRM of 17-34 and ABV of 3.2-4%. The color distinctions between the two are described as “golden to amber” for pale mild and “deep copper to dark brown (often with a red tint)” for dark mild. Both are dominated by malt favors with very low bittering discernible and allow for some low levels of diacetyl (butterscotch). The dark mild may also include some licorice or “roast malt tones.”

On Friday, if you’re participating in “The Session,” be sure to post a comment to the mild hosting post that will appear here on the Bulletin shortly after midnight PDT. I’ll try to add links in near-realtime and write up the days’ entries as time permits.

So for Friday’s Mild Session Blogging Extravaganza, it might not be quite as simple to find a mild as going to your friendly neighborhood corner bar or liquor store. Hopefully, the information listed above may give you some help in finding a suitable beer to write about. The beer may not have the word “mild” written anywhere on the label, but if it’s close to the style parameters then go for it. The idea of Beer Blogging Friday is to be as inclusive as possible so we’re not going to get too hung up on strict style standards — whatever those might be. Find a “mild” beer and join us. To get you started, listed below are some American milds listed on the major beer forums:

The Top Rated American Milds From Beer Advocate^*

English Pale Mild Ale:

Mild Ale, from Southern Tier Brewing, Lakewood, New York
Arcadia Special Reserve, from Arcadia Brewing, Battle Creek, Michigan
Cattail Ale, from Lakefront Brewery, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

English Dark Mild Ale:

Merrimack Mild, from The Tap (Haverhill Brewery), Haverhill, Massachusetts
Milltown Mild, from Victory Brewing, Downingtown, Pennsylvania
Harbor Lighthouse Ale, from Bar Harbor Brewing, Bar Harbor, Maine
Pride & Joy Mild Ale, from Three Floyds Brewing, Munster, Indiana
Motor City Brewing Ghettoblaster, from Motor City Brewing Works, Detroit, Michigan
 

The Top Rated American Milds From Rate Beer^*

Merrimack Mild, from The Tap (Haverhill Brewery), Haverhill, Massachusetts
Dawn Patrol Dark Mild, from Pizza Port, Solana Beach, California
Titletown Brewing Whistling Chicken Mild Ale, from Titletown Brewing, Green Bay, Wisconsin
Flossmoor Station XXX Mild Ale, from Flossmoor Station, Flossmoor, Illinois
Brew It Up! Northern Mild Brown Ale, from Brew It Up!, Sacramento, California
 

And here are a few more American milds that I know about:^*

Bells New World Ale, from Bells Brewery, Galesburg, Michigan
Iron Hill Mild Ale, Iron Hill Brewpubs, various locations in Delaware and Pennsylvania
Jeezum Jim, from Magic Hat Brewing, South Burlington, Vermont
John Harvards British Pale Mild, John Harvards Brewhouse, various locations
Lee’s Mild, Stone Brewing, Escondido, California
London Tavern Mild, from Valley Brewing, Stockton, California
Midlands Mild Ale, from Avery Brewing, Boulder, Colorado
Sara’s Ruby Mild, from Magnolia Pub & Brewery, San Francisco, California
Schlafly English Mild, from the Saint Louis Brewery, St. Louis, Missouri
Thunderhead Mild Ale, from Thunderhead Brewing, Kearney, Nebraska
Triumph Mild Ale, from Triumph Brewing, Princeton, New Jersey
Wynkoop Mayorale Mild, from Wynkoop Brewing, Denver, Colorado
 

^* For both Beer Advocate and Rate Beer, most of the top-rated milds are, naturally, English beers. I removed those British beers from the list here because I figured it was we Americans (and Canadians) that will need the most help in finding a mild. And for all of the listed beers, I have no idea whether or not they are currently available.