A Calgary distillery has been forced to pull some of its award-winning spirits off store shelves after running afoul of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA).
Bridgeland Distillery produces some popular brandies and whiskies, including a corn-based whisky called Berbon, and a Taber corn-mash spirit that’s only aged for a year, so can’t legally be called whisky which needs to be aged for three years.
The Berbon and the corn mash together make up about 50 per cent of sales for the distillery, which has been in business for about seven years.
But on June 27, 2025, the owners were informed by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that someone, who is still unknown to the distillery owners, had filed a complaint about the spirits they were selling.
“So the CFIA came. They came and inspected. They asked us a bunch of questions regarding the product itself and which was our Tabor corn bourbon spelled B E R B O N, which is a corn mash spirit,” said Daniel Plenzik, co-owner of Bridgeland Distillery.
“They indicated that we were trying to mislead our customers into thinking it was a bourbon. We were in disagreement because bourbon whiskey, spelled B-O-U-R-B-O-N, is not allowed to be labelled on a bottle. Our spelling (B-E-R-B-O-N) is associated with the town of Taber, (Alta.), where our corn comes from, along with the barley and the wheat that comes from Penhold, ” said Penzik.
The inspectors returned in July looking for more information and told the owners they should hear from the CFIA in September.
“We heard nothing until Feb. 4, two weeks ago, when the CFIA got us on the phone, read the inspection report, and told us we need to pull off the shelf all that product until the infractions are basically corrected,” said Jacques Tremblay, the distillery’s other co-owner, who insists there are no health concerns with the product that have been identified.
He claims the CFIA said it would consider the company’s claims, but it has been almost two weeks and still there’s no resolution.
Get breaking National news
“On the use of bourbon, we explained our rationale, why we spell it the way it is,” said Tremblay.
“The word B-O-U-R-B-O N is not on the label,” said Penzik. “Bourbon is not a geographical identifier like we would say champagne or cognac. Can’t spell champagne with an S (or) Cognac with a K. That would be misleading because those are geographical identifiers.
“Bourbon can be made anywhere in the U.S.,” claims Penzik. “There is no geographical identification as long as you do not use the word B-O-U-R-B-O-N.”
Plenzik said the distillery has made some corrections to social media posts to comply with the CFIA’s concerns, but hasn’t had to make any changes to the actual labels on the bottles because the spirit is sold as Berbon.
But the distillery owners are still waiting to hear back again from the CFIA.
When contacted by Global News, the CFIA provided a statement that reads:
“The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) received a complaint regarding products from Bridgeland Distillery. A complaint investigation was completed to determine if there were any compliance issues and to verify that regulatory standards for distilled beverages were followed. CFIA is working with the company to review the inspection findings and determine next steps.”
The owners hope it is all “just a misunderstanding.”
“A misinterpretation of the rules, said Plenzik. “Our issue is that there was no discussion. It was just handed down. You must put these products in detention because that is our process. So we are basically being told we are guilty before any sort of ability to be proven innocent.”
“I say, well, the CFIA has some real issues with their own processes and need their own corrective actions,” Plenzik added.
Garrett, that maybe so but they’re calling it B E R B O N.
CFIA is spazzing on one unidentified individual’s complaint. Ridiculous and waste of taxpayers’ money.
I hope they know that bourbon is actually a protected name from the US and can only legally come from the US, as their example of conac and champagne shows they understand.
I thinks it’s frivolous but they probably shouldn’t have lead with “this protected name isn’t like these other protected names
Classic Canadian anti-business roadblocking. No transparency. Bureaucrats dictating to business people with no appreciation of what it takes to be successful in a business, esp in Canada.
Another shiny example of Canadian government overreach. Completely un-necessary and a waste of taxpayer money. Who cares what they call it, as long as it’s not Bourbon.
Hmmm interesting “inside” tip from someone in the industry. Someone who may be a bit jealous of all the whisky sales. Sounds like the owner of Eau Claire Distillery written all over it
Calling it something very similar is an attempt to mislead. The owner whining about how it is spelled differently only serves to reinforce that view. That’s like calling something joose instead of juice. We have orange juice and orange drink so people can tell. I am on the side of the CFIA on this one.
Probably the Alberta government who initiated this so it would increase American sales of American products. The smith government supports a hostile foreign nations products being sold on Alberta liquor store shelves . Such an anti albertan trump supporter.
Sounds like some political push from outside Canada because Canadians are boycotting Kentucky Bourbon. Too bad.
Just another LWNJ with nothing better to do.
Want less bureaucracy? Have fewer bureaucrats. The CFIA clearly got bored of shooting ostriches so now need to busybody their way into another non-controversy.
I don’t see what the issue is…. Another government over reach…
Mr. Plenzik is right, CFIA has “issues”, major ones like power tripping. One unidentified person complains (not even a real and valid issue being complained about), and CFIA jumped the gun, again.
Just like the 300+ healthy ostriches killed with no proper investigation.
CFIA needs to be put in their place some way, that free reign to destroy every single private business will continue.
Then again, probably some mewling peon collectivist
One has to wonder about the IQ of the inspector ?
Probably Danielle Smith, she has a problem with everyone!
Who would complain about that? Probably rival pub or restaurant.