Washington, hmm the state known for glacier water(beer), IT companies and some very cold ocean frontage, now wants to be a "bourbon" state? Yea ok, well we'll see about that. Having tried the standard Woodinville earlier I procured a few samples of the port finish, maybe it can impress where the plain jane failed. Indeed from the top you get a nose of vinted grape sugars, in fact a lot of port on the nose and maybe just hints of vanilla and honey creep up along with a bit of astringent barrel tones. It's not at all bad. The first sip reveals a good bit of that barrel wood astringency, apparently a good effort to live up to the "Wood" in the name. The port sugars are feint, in fact very faint, and are quickly drowned out with a bitter leather note. Even with extra port finishing this still comes off as a very dry bourbon. The "fruity" profile claimed on the bottle notes just don't seem to be there for me. The barrel wood tones just dominate and finally on the finish I get a bit of the vanilla and sugars. Giving this a bit of time with a few drops of water in the Glencairn this just does't seem to have much else to offer. I'm sure some might find more value in this than I, but then I am a bit spoiled on the good stuff from Kentucky. Maybe it's the Non-limestone glacial water, the colder climate, the fact it's a startup on the left coast, or all of the above, you be the judge. There just isn't anything here that I would pass up a 6 year old Kentucky bourbon for. This will be a pass for me. Cheers!