Right, after some discussion regarding today’s review of Widow Jane bourbon, it appears I have fallen for the PR crap that is their website. (‘They’ is the Cacao Pietro Distillery in New York City).
It appears they are currently distilling a bourbon in New York City, using the mine water they so heavily promote. On their website they show the label of their straight bourbon distilled on site.
However, before someone starts compiling another comment telling me I suck, the sample I was given was from a different label, stating KENTUCKY bourbon. Apparently, this whiskey was distilled in Kentucky, and sourced by Cacao Prieto Distillery. They then used the mine water to get it to bottling strength.
So, for some reason the distillery’s website doesn’t say anything about them sourcing the whiskey. Even if you read their press releases they already state that their seven (now eight) year old bourbon is made in NYC.
It seems they are going to some lengths to hide a lot of details. Even on the website of the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce I can’t find any data on the distillery. Not by category, address or product do you get any data. The Yellow Pages gives you no results either. Strange…
After some more digging I found a label of a whiskey they produced stating it’s ‘Wapsie Valley bourbon’, and Wapsie Valley seems to be in Indiana, so that’s something different again.
It seems people more knowledgeable than me on American Whiskey know this. It’s strange though, that I can’t find any information on the initial release of Widow Jane, but on a site not related to anything whiskey there is a short report and a picture from 2010 stating the distillery is still under construction.
I knew there were some distilleries trying to hide the fact that they’re sourcing their whiskey, but this seems to be taking it rather far.
Malt Fascination 
I think that the whiskies under 3 years old are theirs, and the older ones are sourced till they exist for long enough (similar to high west). I agree it’s part of the conspiracy that’s basically taken over american whiskey. However, all that given, I really liked the whiskey and thought you might too. Planning an in person visit next month to check things out.
I do like the whiskey, so mission accomplished!
What I don’t like is that they hide the sourcing of the whiskey. If you check out High West’s website they simply state where each bit of whiskey was sourced from (except the blended bit in their Campfire).
I just wonder why some people want to hide that simple fact. There’s nothing wrong with sourcing booze, right? If you blend it, then take pride in it.
I’d be happy to guest blog here on my upcoming visit to widow Jane. Set the record straight
If a whisky is distilled in one state using corn from four other states and yeast from another, is then shipped to another state for maturing, to another to be cut down to bottling strength, and then to yet another for bottling, which state is it made in?
(That doesn’t make it any better that they try and use the “made local” movement to try and shift the whiskey, but “where is this whiskey from” is a hard question)
Funnily enough, us geeks are annoyed by American distillers trying to pass off other’s booze as their own, while the law in Europe is that the country that has the most deciding factor on a product’s flavor is the country of origin.
For example, Michel Couvreur Whiskies imports spirit from Scotland, matures it in France, and EU law states that it is a Product of France. The same goes for Belgian Chocolate.
So, while we accuse ‘the Americans’ of hiding data, we use double standards too.
Pingback: A FEW and Widow Jane Tasting, with Whisky4All | Malt Fascination