I think the chart probably only depicts popularity in a certain region, maybe the US. To be honest I had a hard time viewing the page. This could explain why Mittellfruh is in the top ranks while it only represents a small percentage of the global production of hops.
A lot of this is matter of perspective, and thus subjective. 10 years ago, you make that sound like it was centuries ago, to me that's basically yesterday. Acreage importance and brewery importance is also subjective. Some regions have mega hop farms as the norm, others have small familial hop yards as the norm. In my parts, it's mostly the latter, hop yards having only a few acres at most, I'm not sure if any of them have over 10. They all live off a couple of breweries each. I'm not sure how it's like in New York, but I suspect that since it's not a major hop region anymore, and that they are next door, there are probably similarities. A grower who has 1000 acres might not bother with a cultivar unless he can sell many acres' worth of it at once, but such small growers can afford to grow a special variety on just one row for a client, and it just takes a few small brewers, or one not so small, to buy them out. I mean, just a few years back we had 68 hectares in the whole province, so that one specific region of Germany has "only" 539 of one landrace hop, out of many...
I'm not sure why we are still debating that point, though, I already conceded that my statement was an exaggeration, due to not having looked up the pedigree of the more recent cultivars. "Most", while still probably inaccurate, was never intended as relative to acreage or production, but merely to the number of existing named cultivars. I mean, The Hop List talks about 265 named cultivars, I'll be honest I have not researched a significant portion of their pedigrees, for the most part the information isn't public (or doesn't exist) anyways.
I never meant to imply that taking a wild seedling had good chances of giving the next Cascade. I think to state those odds are remote would be, in itself, generous. But I also didn't see the OP state such ambitions. He only mentioned growing them, naming them, and having others brew with them, and that some third parties he contacted had been enthusiastic about his hops. If some breweries still order the "inferior" varieties that would never make it in today's world, how's it so far fetched that he could sway a few micro-breweries to use some native hop, even if it turns out to not quite be on par with some of the most recent releases?
If they aren't in a field, they won't end up in a beer... maybe. But on the other hand, if a brewer wants them in his beer, and is willing to pay enough for the grower to get a reasonable margin, then it will end up in a field. Grower's want to sell, and everyone's got a price.
A lot of this is matter of perspective, and thus subjective. 10 years ago, you make that sound like it was centuries ago, to me that's basically yesterday. Acreage importance and brewery importance is also subjective. Some regions have mega hop farms as the norm, others have small familial hop yards as the norm. In my parts, it's mostly the latter, hop yards having only a few acres at most, I'm not sure if any of them have over 10. They all live off a couple of breweries each. I'm not sure how it's like in New York, but I suspect that since it's not a major hop region anymore, and that they are next door, there are probably similarities. A grower who has 1000 acres might not bother with a cultivar unless he can sell many acres' worth of it at once, but such small growers can afford to grow a special variety on just one row for a client, and it just takes a few small brewers, or one not so small, to buy them out. I mean, just a few years back we had 68 hectares in the whole province, so that one specific region of Germany has "only" 539 of one landrace hop, out of many...
I'm not sure why we are still debating that point, though, I already conceded that my statement was an exaggeration, due to not having looked up the pedigree of the more recent cultivars. "Most", while still probably inaccurate, was never intended as relative to acreage or production, but merely to the number of existing named cultivars. I mean, The Hop List talks about 265 named cultivars, I'll be honest I have not researched a significant portion of their pedigrees, for the most part the information isn't public (or doesn't exist) anyways.
I never meant to imply that taking a wild seedling had good chances of giving the next Cascade. I think to state those odds are remote would be, in itself, generous. But I also didn't see the OP state such ambitions. He only mentioned growing them, naming them, and having others brew with them, and that some third parties he contacted had been enthusiastic about his hops. If some breweries still order the "inferior" varieties that would never make it in today's world, how's it so far fetched that he could sway a few micro-breweries to use some native hop, even if it turns out to not quite be on par with some of the most recent releases?
If they aren't in a field, they won't end up in a beer... maybe. But on the other hand, if a brewer wants them in his beer, and is willing to pay enough for the grower to get a reasonable margin, then it will end up in a field. Grower's want to sell, and everyone's got a price.
