"Some of the interest in mandatory labeling for alcoholic beverages stems from the ongoing U.S. weight and obesity concerns," Alicia Triplett said.

Triplett is a researcher in the nutritional department at ESHA Research, Inc. in Salem, a company that develops nutrition analysis software for the food industry.

"Just because a food or beverage does not list nutritional content does not mean that food or drink is free and clear of calories and other components.

In addition, the popularity of tracking carbohydrates in the past few years brought to the market low-carb beer and other beverages. Consumers are looking for nutrition facts on all foods and beverages."

Area winemakers are jumping on this proposal with various degrees of animosity. Some have called it out-and-out ridiculous, while others are taking a more measured stance.

"I haven't read too much about this yet, but my initial reaction is that it would be interesting to see the carbohydrate content of wine. I do foresee the labels becoming more cumbersome," Chris Luby, head winemaker at Cherry Hill Vineyards in Rickreall, said. "I know that most winemakers like to include marketing information on the back label, along with the government warning that is already there. I don't see how it will all fit."

The Trade and Tax Bureau, the federal agency responsible for this proposal and for overseeing the wine industry, is taking comments about adding nutritional information to wine and beer labels until January 27.

According to their literature, small containers (50 ml) would be exempt from the "Serving Facts" panel requirement, but would be required to disclose the information in linear fashion.
There are other potential exemptions. Triplett said that sometimes the TTB has waived labeling requirements for very small businesses that can demonstrate a tiny market share. Overall, however, the Oregon wine industry is going to have to apply its collective creativity to packing more information into already cramped real estate.

"When the proposed labeling changes do become final, they will allow a three-year period for the companies to comply with the regulation," Triplett said.

"Such a period allows the wineries and breweries time to use their existing label inventory and to adapt to the new requirements. This adjustment period eases the costs of making the changes necessary to comply with the law."

Eric Rogers, business manager for Eola Hills Winery, also in Rickreall, is convinced the labels will cost more money. He's also aggravated by the government's insistence on regulating and controlling every aspect of his business.

"We kind of feel there is only so much room on the label and it's a cost that everyone shouldn't have to bear. Everyone would have to reprint their labels and for what? When you're drinking a bottle of wine you're not too concerned about the nutritional aspects, and there isn't any real variation from one wine to the next. A sweet wine might have a few more calories than a dry wine, but overall there isn't much difference. It seems ridiculous. It's just more government, more government, more government."