-Advertisement-
Home Blog Page 3

Nematode-Resistant Rootstocks Offer Solutions and Challenges

By
Steve Pastis | Contributing Writer
-
0
Evaluation of new nematode-resistant rootstocks is an ongoing goal of researchers and the grape industry. With current concerns involving Freedom rootstock and Sudden Vine Collapse, having additional rootstocks available for use is prudent (photo by K. Lund.)

Rootstocks serve multiple purposes for grapevines, including dealing with vineyard soil pests and acting as the interaction points for water and nutrient uptake. Nematodes have continued to be a persistent issue through rootstock developments, and evaluation of new nematode-resistant rootstocks is an ongoing goal of researchers and the grape industry.

Karl Lund, UCCE viticulture advisor covering Madera, Mariposa and Merced counties, presented a session about nematode-resistant rootstocks at the recent Crop Consultant Conference at the Visalia Convention Center.

Rootstocks will Differ
Nematode-resistant rootstocks are different in the solutions they provide but also in the problems they don’t solve.

“You may have decent resistance for some nematodes, but that resistance breaks down,” Lund said, adding some nematodes are endoparasitic and others are ectoparasitic. “So, you end up having to pick, ‘I’m going to have resistance to this nematode and not that nematode.’”

Lund used charts to show the differences in rootstocks (Table 1).

Table 1. Newer, commercially available rootstocks have broader resistance to nematodes. RS3 and RS9 have broad resistance to root-knot nematodes. GRN1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 have broad nematode resistance (courtesy Ferris, Zheng and Walker 2012.)
*Very Small, <10% (resistant); Small, 10% to 30% (moderately resistant); Medium, 30% to 50% (moderately susceptible); Large, >50% (susceptible)

“Something like 1103 Paulsen allows large amounts of a whole bunch of different nematodes to build up on it,” he said. “Yet, 1103 Paulsen actually has moderate resistance to many of these nematodes because 1103 Paulsen can just deal with it. It likes to be hurt. It likes to continue to grow very happily after being hurt.

“Apparently, 1103 Paulsen needs to see a therapist or something,” he added.

“There are some differences between allowing growth and being resistant,” Lund said. “But even then, for 1103 Paulsen, once that population has gotten big enough, it does overwhelm its ability to grow.

“Harmony is a rootstock that was very popular right up until I got into viticulture in the early 2000s,” he said. “And then these Harmony AC nematodes were found up in Livingston, and they were able to overtake the resistance found in Harmony.”

These nematodes were much more pathenogenic and able to reproduce on things thought to have resistance, according to Lund.

“They’re able to overcome that resistance and cause damage,” he said. “So, at that point, a couple different breeding programs stepped in and said, ‘All right, we’ve now lost this good resistance. Let’s see if we can fix some things.’”

The result was two breeding programs were started, and two different sets of rootstocks were produced.

“RS3 and RS9 were bred specifically to deal with those Harmony AC root-knot nematodes, and they did a good job,” Lund said. “They have some pretty broad resistance to root-knot nematodes as well as to other endoparasitic nematodes.

“Now, their resistance does break down when you start getting into the ectoparasitic nematodes,” he said. “These are the nematodes that actually live in the soil.”

A nematode resistance trial was conducted in Traver, Calif. to test rootstocks.

“We didn’t fumigate beforehand, and then we planted them,” said Lund. “And it turns out the field was heavily infested with pin nematodes, and we lost all the RS3 and RS9. So, they have good root-knot nematode resistance, but they do not have good pin nematode resistance.

“Then we actually get to the GRN series,” he said “GRN1 through 5, those actually have pretty broad resistance to all sorts of nematodes, but it’s not bulletproof. There are some holes, and even these still allow the nematode to build up in the soil to some extent, but they are a broad resistance to nematodes.

“Right now, Freedom is the most popular rootstock in this part of the state, and overall accounts for about 23% of rootstock sales up to 2022,” Lund said. “Unfortunately, right now, what’s happening with Freedom is if you plant a vine with Freedom as the rootstock, and then you get leaf roll and one of the grape viruses, which are lettered A through H (they’re not even important enough to have an actual name), you end up causing that graft union to collapse at the slightest inclination of stress.

“The Freedom rootstock goes, ‘There’s a virus. I’m under stress,’ and just shuts off that graft union and prevents water from going up and sugar from coming down, and you have the complete vine collapse,” he said. “So, it is quite prudent at this time to have rootstocks in backup supply.

“We know these new rootstocks have good resistance to different nematodes, root knot nematodes for RS3 and RS9, and general nematode resistance for GRN1 through 5, but rootstocks are not just about resistance,” Lund said. “They also affect water stress, canopy growth, nutrient uptake, yield and, of course, grape quality.”

Two Separate Trials
To study the effects of different nematode-resistant rootstocks, two trials were conducted, one in Merced County and the other in Madera County.

“It’s actually a beautiful vineyard right outside of the city of Madera,” said Lund. “We have petit verdot as our scion, 8-foot by 10-foot spacing. I have 40 total vines for each one of these rootstocks with petit verdot on it. 1103 Paulson and Freedom are the two main rootstocks here, so I have both for comparison, and then I have all the new rootstocks.

“GRN1 and GRN5 have some issues at the nursery and transplant, so I’ve actually pulled them out because growers will probably never see them,” he said. “GRN1 has about a 20% take at the nurseries and has horrible wood production, so the nurseries don’t want to deal with it, and GRN5 sees up to 80% transplant loss. So, there’s something about GRN5 where it grows great at the nursery, but you transplant it, and up to 80% of it dies in that first few months.

“A second trial was planted in September 2016 up in Merced County, this time Malbec on 5 foot by 11 foot. The big difference here is each replicate is one row of 388 plants, and I have four rows per, so I have over 1,500 of each one of those combinations, so quite a lot of plants to look at. Here, though, we have a lot less because of that size. 1103 Paulson was the only control, and then I only had GRN2, 3, 4, RS3 and RS9.”

How Fine Screens Simplify the New Winery Waste Discharge Requirements

By
Lorene Bruns and John Charlton | Duperon Corporation
-
0
Fine screening technology helps wineries efficiently manage process water, ensuring compliance with California's stringent discharge requirements (all photos courtesy Duperon Corporation.)

Since 2021, California winemakers have been assessing the State Water Resources Control Board’s Waste Discharge Requirements for Winery Process Water resolution, which mandates more wineries monitor, report and treat their process water. To meet the January 2024 deadline, wineries across the state have submitted their initial technical reports and filing fees to comply with this order aimed at preserving California’s overworked and polluted groundwater resources.

Wineries that have submitted their plans to the board know compliance will come at great expense, regardless of how they address it. Some are purchasing land for wastewater treatment and disposal, while others are curbing their wine production to qualify for lower compliance tiers that exempt them from the stringent requirements imposed on larger operations. Many municipal wastewater plants apply heavy surcharges or outright reject winery process water due to its high levels of nitrogen, biochemical oxygen demand and salinity, forcing wineries to invest in expensive onsite treatment solutions.

With five years to materialize their proposed compliance plans, winery owners are likely juggling engineering consultant meetings, vendor pitches and board webinars on top of running their businesses. As high dollar figures are estimated for designing, constructing and procuring winery process water treatment systems, a fundamental wastewater treatment tenet can help wineries determine their operational costs for decades. Whether they excavate more lined evaporation ponds or install reverse osmosis membranes, fine screening technology will prevent costly equipment failures, ease process water treatment and minimize supervision, allowing wineries to focus on their grapes, staff and budget.

Screening at Its Finest
Crushed grape solids constitute most of the nutrients found in winery process water. These solids burden process water treatment systems, filling evaporation ponds, clogging pumps and membranes, and skyrocketing electricity bills. Fine screening addresses these foreseeable problems by removing virtually any solids from the wine crushing and equipment cleaning processes with tight screen openings (0.020 to 0.125 inches apart). With grape solids out of the equation, treatment systems with fine screens see interconnected benefits that protect winery bottom lines and prevent headaches.

Operations and Maintenance
Winery process water treatment systems are expensive. However, the technology chosen can determine annual operation and maintenance costs. Wineries that protect their systems with fine screens gain advantages, such as:

• Adaptability to irregular debris and flow variations dependent on harvest volume and weather

• Serviceability from the deck to eliminate in-channel or in-tank maintenance

• Operation on 0.5 horsepower motors to minimize energy use

With an easy-to-maintain helper keeping solids out of the mix, wineries can turn their attention to innovating their operations.

Fine screens contribute to water conservation and reduced carbon footprints.

Sustainable
Wine consumers and wineries continue to value water conservation and carbon footprint reduction in wine production. Some strive to produce and buy wine with sustainability certifications like SIP and Certified California Sustainable from the Wine Institute. Fine screens complement sustainable winery practices by:

• Foregoing spray bars, saving 3,000 gallons of water daily compared to other fine screen solutions

• Harvesting crushed grapes for composting, enabling wineries to cut their use of industrial fertilizers

• Being solar-powered

Ultimately, fine screens effectively remove the bulk of crushed solids and biological oxygen demand before the treatment process, reducing chemical consumption, energy use and high-strength wastewater surcharges from local municipalities. Equipped with fine screens, winery operators can minimize the time, labor and operational costs required to run their wastewater treatment system, allowing them to focus their time and attention on winemaking. The proven results have led some wineries to depend on this technology for decades.

McManis Family Vineyards in Ripon, Calif. showcases the benefits of fine screening, extending pond cleaning intervals and improving composting efforts.

Crushing Compliance
McManis Family Vineyards in Ripon, Calif. relies on wells for its on-site water use. Due to regulations, the vineyard cannot use winery process water to irrigate the land, forcing them to send it to lime ponds for evaporation. Solids sent to the pond settle to the bottom, deterring the evaporative process, decreasing pond capacity and increasing dredging frequency. Without access to city services, managing the vineyard’s solid waste falls on the Duperon FlexRake® Fine Screen with a T-shaped wedge wire screen.

“During our harvests, we crush the grapes to extract their juice,” the winemaker said. “We attempt to capture all parts not useful for wine into compost bins. The debris from those tanks ends up in the waste stream, and we don’t want that in the evaporative pond.”

Before installing the FlexRake Fine Screen in 2006, the vineyard used another manufacturer’s rotary drum screen for separation.

“It didn’t do a good job of removing the solids and was unreliable. We had a lot of downtime, clogging and times when the equipment was inoperable. We wanted to improve on that. After the 2005 harvest, we found the Duperon FlexRake Fine Screen.”

The vineyard’s FlexRake has operated for 18 years, managing grape solids and stormwater runoff before their evaporation ponds. In 2019, the staff installed a second FlexRake Fine Screen as they increased wine production.

“The benefits are multi-faceted,” the winemaker said. “We save water, create compost, reduce the energy required to keep the ponds healthy, and extend the time between pond cleanings from every two or three years before the screens to every five to seven years with the screens.”

It’s recommended wineries start conversations with their consultants and vendors as soon as possible to understand how fine screening can take the guesswork out of winery process water treatment.

The Future of Wine Production
As of 2023, only 10% of the estimated 6,200 bonded California wineries have existing discharge permits or waivers through the California Water Boards. Around 30% of these wineries are estimated to be affected by the order, meaning roughly 20% of California wineries must rethink how they treat their process water to comply.

California wineries have five years to get their new treatment systems up and running after submitting their technical reports. While consulting engineers focus on design details and vendors pitch their equipment, wineries of any size can stabilize the long-term cost of compliance with fine screening. The benefits of removing nutrient-heavy crushed solids before the wastewater treatment process pay dividends by managing treatment costs, protecting expensive treatment systems and cutting time spent operating and maintaining these systems.

Winery owners and operators don’t have to become wastewater treatment experts to be informed and insist on the right equipment for their wineries. It’s recommended wineries start conversations with their consultants and vendors as soon as possible to understand how fine screening can take the guesswork out of winery process water treatment.

Resources
General waste discharge requirements for winery process water: waterboards.ca.gov/publications_forms/publications/factsheets/docs/winery_order_factsheet.pdf

Duperon Corporation: duperon.com/our-products/screening-bar-screens/flexrake-fs/

The Great Data Debate: Does It Pay to Farm Organically?

By
Pam Strayer | Contributing Writer
-
0
Grgich Hills presented data on its regenerative organic yields, showing steady increases since 2019. From 2019 to 2022, the years in which data was available, their Chardonnay yield significantly outperformed Napa’s Chardonnay average.

For decades, growers and vintners have been divided on the issue of whether organic farming is worth the cost, and even the cost itself is often a matter of conjecture. Little attention has been paid to what actual producers report, leading to heated and opinionated debates on the topic.

At Napa Green’s breakthrough event, The Economics of Organic Viticulture, the group brought together an impressive array of vineyard managers and vintners from major brands to talk about the economic facts of growing organic vines. The panel was illuminating for the diversity of sites, the wide number of varieties grown, yield data and other factors. Presenters included:

• Brad Kurtz, vineyard manager at family-owned sparkling wine giant Gloria Ferrer in Sonoma’s Carneros (331 acres) (they make Cava in Spain and own Freixenet S.A.) Gloria Ferrer sells 60,000 cases of wine from the Sonoma vines and is in the final stages of organic certification (a multiyear process).

• Jesse Apgar, director of operations at Enterprise Vineyards (led by Phil Coturri), an all-organic vineyard management company which farms in Sonoma and Napa (600 acres, including Kamen, Lasseter, Mayacamas, Oakville Ranch, Stone Edge and many more). The company has been farming organically (certified) for more than 40 years.

• Rebekah Wineburg, winemaker at Quintessa in Rutherford, certified organic in 2020 (160 acres).

• Bernat Sort Costa, regenerative organic research manager at family-owned Grgich Hills Estates, which farms five sites in Napa ranging from the Carneros to Calistoga (365 acres) under regenerative organic certification. It was first certified organic in 2006.

Grgich Hills Regenerative Organic Research Manager Bernat Sort Costa presented cost and longevity findings at Napa Green’s breakthrough event, The Economics of Organic Viticulture. “We found in warmer, dryer years that with more organic matter in the soil, the vines are better able to retain water and become more consistent and resilient,” he said.

Better Yields? It Depends on Cultural Practices
At Grgich Hills, an evangelist for regenerative organic farming, Sort Costa reported the family-owned winery spends $11,000 per acre to farm, far less than the Napa average of $14,800, a savings of $3,800 or 25%.

Their cost data was collected by their accounting firm, Brotemarkle Davis & Co. LLP, aggregated from other Napa wineries the firm works with.

Grgich Hills also presented data on its yields, showing steady increases since 2019. From 2019 to 2022, the years in which data was available, their Chardonnay yield significantly outperformed Napa’s Chardonnay average.

In an interview with Grape & Wine, Sort Costa attributed that to their change to increased fertility when they switched to regenerative organic farming, integrating sheep into the vines during the dormant season and going no-till.

“We found in warmer, dryer years that with more organic matter in the soil, the vines are better able to retain water and become more consistent and resilient,” he said.

Caine Thompson noted similar yield increases in a regenerative organic study conducted at Robert Hall Winery in Paso Robles after adopting regenerative practices.

German researchers comparing conventional, organic and biodynamic Riesling vineyards in a Geisenheim University research study also reported yields in organic and biodynamic vineyards were higher than conventional in hot and dry years. The biological approaches also resulted in higher fruit quality, their study said.

Vineyard Longevity and Depreciation
Do organic vines last longer? Many organic vintners report they do and cite that as a major financial benefit.

The average Napa vine age is 25 years, Sort Costa said, compared to Grgich Hills, where the vines average 35 years of age.

“Our depreciation costs are lower than half [of 150+ Napa peers] on average,” he said, quoting $1,300 in depreciation versus $3,800 for Napa peers.

Quintessa’s Wineburg said metrics for an estate are different than for a grower. “The real metric is not cost per acre; it’s the number of tons that actually make it into the blend.

“There are huge benefits in terms of resilience in each of the vines,” she continued. “Replanting a vineyard is the biggest cost, the most expensive thing that you can do. So, if we can keep these vines in the ground for another 10 or 15 years, that’s wonderful from a cost perspective.

“From a quality, consistency and depth of flavor perspective, it’s even more important because vines only really come to express their terroir when they’re mature. They come into that balance, and when they are in that balance, they are more resilient. So, we do believe in building farming for resilience.”

Table 1. Cost per acre in 2023 for various large California wineries to farm organically.

Dramatic Improvements in Wine Quality
The biggest plus for many was the improvement in grape quality. “We’ve seen the quality as we transition from conventional to organic,” said Kurtz (the Robert Hall study found similar results.)

Enterprise Vineyards’ grown grapes (from Oakville Ranch, for example) that have received 100-point scores in its first year of regenerative organic farming include Stag’s Leap Wine Cellars’s 2021 Cask 23.

“As far as farming costs go [at Gloria Ferrer], we’ve actually held our farming costs fairly steady across the last five to six years, even with the increase in the cost of inputs,” said Kurtz.

Despite increased costs for weed control, he added, “Our farming costs have actually gone down slightly.”

At the same time, quality has improved.

“The quality of the wines has elevated every year, with tons of intensity on the palate,” he said, as the Napa Green event attendees tasted the 2021 Gloria Ferrer Royal Cuvee, a sparkling rosé. “Really long finish. Great midpalate, great mouth coat… It’s something we’re really proud of that we’re able to do this and still produce an extremely high-quality product… at a relatively affordable price point on the wholesale market.”

Elsewhere in California
While the vineyards featured in the Napa Green event are farmed for high priced wines, how are organic growers in lower priced regions faring?

Craig Ledbetter of Vino Farms in Lodi has 900 acres either certified organic or in transition and plans to convert more.

“I do believe it is an emerging market, and I want to be at the forefront of that,” he said in an interview with Grape & Wine. His costs range in the neighborhood of $4,500 an acre, depending on the type of harvest and administrative and hauling costs.

“Organic can be very similar in pricing because you’re not using some of those more expensive chemicals and because you’re not using some chemicals at all,” Ledbetter said. You’re using a lot of sulfur, and you’re not putting on a lot of sprays, and sprays can be more expensive over time.”

North Coast veteran vineyard manager Dave Koball (newly of KoballVit.com) has farmed for a wide variety of sustainable, organic or biodynamic clients. He said comparison is difficult.

“It all depends on site characteristics and bottle price,” Koball said. “At the end of the day, I just think that as an organic grower, you have to be in the vineyard more, and this leads to quality improvements.

“You must be ahead of the pests, preventing issues, not working behind the pests to eradicate them as you would in a conventional setting,” he added. “This is done through using all your tools (cultural practices, irrigation, crop load balance, fertility, encouraging diversity, etc.) holistically and synergistically. This leads to vines that are in balance with their soil, environment and crop load, which gives optimal fruit quality.”

That can be an economic benefit, Kurtz said, when it comes to selling fruit.

“We have a lot of neighbors that have a lot of fruit that was not harvested this year, and we were able to move more tons. I can guarantee you we were able to move more tons this year than we would have if we were not farming organically, and the price that we got for those was significantly higher than what everyone else was getting in our area.

“I think that is a very easy [return on investment] versus dropping your fruit on the ground. We’re selling it… that is a very easy equation. And if we were not farming organically, we would not have sold this fruit. Every single person we sold fruit to this year bought fruit from us because we were farming organically, and they were seeking out organically farmed fruit. And they may not be putting it on the bottle, but they are conscious of organic farming, and they understand organic farming produces better wines.”

Monitoring and Building Soil Health in California Vineyards

By
Charlotte Decock | Associate Professor, Grimm Family Center for Organic Production and Research, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, Lauren Picone| Masters Student, Environmental Sciences and Management, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, Priya Verma | Associate Professor, Dept. of Natural Resources Management and Environmental Sciences, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, Matt Grieshop | Director, Grimm Family Center for Organic Production and Research, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and Cristina Lazcano | Associate Professor, Dept. of Land, Air and Water Resources, UC Davis
-
0
Figure 1. Example of a vineyard soil health scoring function modeled after Cornell’s CASH framework.

Soil health is central to sustainable agriculture and a key goal of regenerative and organic farming. Practices like the application of organic amendments, cover cropping, reduced tillage and livestock integration are promoted to improve soil health. Traditionally, sustainability or organic certifications have relied on the adoption of certain practices for monitoring and verification. However, newer regenerative agriculture certifications are introducing requirements for direct monitoring of soil health.

This shift raises important questions: How should soil health be measured and rated? How can these ratings inform management decisions? Should soil health ratings and interpretations be tailored to specific crops and regions?

To explore these issues, we conducted a case study analysis of 87 vineyard blocks across California, representing diverse management histories. This study aims to shed light on the link between regenerative agriculture and soil health monitoring in the context of California winegrape production.

How to Measure Soil Health?
Numerous soil health assessment frameworks have been developed globally, each varying in practicality, sensitivity, and interpretability. These frameworks typically include indicators of physical, chemical and biological soil properties. In the U.S., commercial laboratories offer soil health testing packages priced between $55 to $165 per sample. However, the methods and indicators used in these packages vary, making it challenging to compare results across tests.

The Soil Health Institute evaluated 30 soil health indicators across 124 long-term experiments in Northern America and recommended a core suite of practical and affordable measurements: soil organic carbon (SOC), carbon mineralization potential (MinC) and aggregate stability index (ASI). These indicators were chosen for their response to management practices across a wide range of soils, climates and production systems. In our study, we focused on these three indicators due to growing interest among California growers and laboratories in the Soil Health Institute’s recommendations.

Interpreting Soil Health Measurements
When evaluating soil health indicators, it is common to wonder: Is a MinC value of 50 mg CO2-C/kg soil/day good or bad? Last year, my soil had 1.2% SOC, but this year, the lab results showed 1.15%. Does this indicate a significant decline in soil health? What is the maximum aggregate stability achievable in my soil?

Answering these questions requires an understanding of expected soil health indicator ranges, the soil’s inherent potential and typical sampling and analysis errors. To address these complexities, Cornell’s Comprehensive Soil Health Assessment (CASH) developed scoring functions for various soil health indicators using samples from the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, and Northeast U.S. regions.

The CASH scoring system assigns scores based on the percentage of samples with equal or lower values. For example, a score of 80% means your result is better than 80% of the reference dataset (Fig. 1). The system also accounts for soil texture, recognizing its role in influencing and sometimes constraining soil health outcomes.

Color ranges on the chart help evaluate whether soil health values differ significantly. Substantial improvements over time can shift soil into better color zones, with dark green zone indicating the soil has likely reached its potential. Though other rating and benchmarking frameworks have been proposed, we based our scoring system for California vineyards on the CASH framework, given its simplicity and clarity.

Rating Curves for California Vineyards
To develop scoring functions for California vineyards, we collaborated with winegrape growers who provided soil samples from vineyard blocks of red varietals. These blocks included those that had adopted cover cropping, compost application and no till or grazing for at least five years as well as blocks where none of these practices had been adopted for at least 10 years. Soil samples were collected from areas next to the vine and at the center of the drive rows. Additionally, growers completed a detailed survey about their practice implementation.

Figure 2. Map of participating vineyard blocks and sample locations. A total of 87 vineyard blocks were sampled from as far north as the Russian River Valley AVA and down to the Happy Canyon of Santa Barbara AVA.

The dataset includes a total of 87 vineyard blocks (Fig. 2), with various combinations of practice adoption, ranging between 0 and 27 years. Thus, the scoring functions represent how soil health values may improve with the adoption of regenerative practices across a broad range of soil types and microclimates (Fig. 3).

Figure 3. Soil health scoring functions for soil organic carbon (SOC), mineralizable carbon (MinC) and aggregate stability index (ASI) for California vineyard soils.

Like other frameworks, our scoring functions account for soil texture. Clayey soils are known to store more carbon and support greater microbial activity compared to sandier soils. Consequently, coarse-textured soils achieve high scores at lower SOC and MinC values than fine-textured soils. For ASI, values trend higher in coarse-textured soils because they are less prone to dispersion when slaked.

Comparing the ranges of SOC, MinC and ASI in our study to those reported in the literature supports the idea that building soil health may face more biophysical limitations in mediterranean regions compared to temperate climate zones. This highlights the importance of developing scoring functions tailored to specific regions and crops.

Monitoring Soil Health for Adaptive Management
For soil health scoring systems to be useful for growers, they must be sensitive to changes in management practices within an operation. To test this, we compiled individualized reports for each participating grower and evaluated whether the scoring system could detect differences in management history among samples from the same grower (Fig. 3).

The study involved 12 growers, each providing samples from 2 to 17 vineyard blocks. Overall, the scoring system successfully identified differences between vineyard blocks submitted by the same grower. Growers reported the scores either reinforced their management goals or highlighted areas where soil health management fell short of their targets. These findings demonstrate the soil health assessment framework can effectively support adaptive soil management in vineyards (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Anonymized grower report example. Soil health ratings are greater in the vineyard blocks with adoption of multiple practices compared to vineyard blocks with only cover crops.

Successful Paths to a Healthy Vineyard Soil
Adopting soil health practices, such as cover cropping, composting, reduced tillage and grazing, involves costs and uncertainties, often with unclear timelines for measurable impacts. We used quantitative comparative analysis to explore conditions leading to soil health scores above 60%, revealing complex causal relationships.

Long-term cover cropping (10+ years) emerged as the most important factor for achieving high soil health scores, especially when combined with another regenerative practice. This benefit extended across the vineyard floor, improving soil health in both alleys and under-vine areas. Notably, the integration of livestock was identified as a key practice for accelerating soil health improvements, yielding measurable benefits even after less than 10 years of cover cropping.

Achieving high ASI and MinC scores appeared to require long-term adoption of more practices compared to high SOC scores. However, our findings suggest tailoring the right combination of practices to specific environmental conditions is more important than simply increasing the number of practices used.

Practical Implications for Vineyard Managers in California
Our study provides proof-of-concept for the use of SOC, MinC and ASI to evaluate vineyard soil health in California, supported by practical soil health scoring functions. This approach can help monitor vineyard soil health and inform adaptive management strategies. Given the variability of soil type and microclimate, growers are encouraged to experiment with different strategies to determine what works best for their conditions. While monitoring can identify effective practices, building soil health is a slow process that often takes over a decade. This underscores the need for long-term commitment, with monitoring intervals every few years being sufficient.

Winegrape growers can use our rating curves as a reference to monitor soil health. For SOC testing, ensure that labs report SOC specifically, rather than total carbon, especially in calcareous soils where high carbonates can skew results. Many labs also offer MinC (soil respiration) testing; our scoring functions are applicable as long as results are expressed in mg CO₂-C kg–¹ soil d–¹, regardless of preparation or incubation duration (one to four days). For ASI, only results obtained using the Soil Health Institute’s SLAKES test are compatible with our scoring functions. Growers can work with labs that use SLAKES or measure ASI in-house via the SLAKES app available at soilhealthinstitute.org/our-work/initiatives/slakes/.

Future Work
The scoring functions in our study are based on data from 87 vineyard blocks and reflect the progression in soil health scores that may occur over time with the implementation of a soil health management strategy. As more data becomes available, these scoring functions could be refined further to address specific soil types or microclimates.

Since the effectiveness of soil health management practices depends on factors like implementation (e.g., cover crop species, compost type, etc.) as well as soil type and environmental conditions, future research should focus on identifying the most effective combinations of practices for specific contexts.

Finally, soil health is rarely a management goal on its own. Future research should quantify the impact of improved soil health on key agronomic and environmental outcomes, including yield, grape quality, pest and disease pressure, pollution from leaching and runoff, biodiversity and climate change adaptation and mitigation.

This project was funded by the CDFA Specialty Crops Block Grant and the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research. We thank all growers who participated in this study.

References
Hughes, H. M. et al. Towards a farmer-feasible soil health assessment that is globally applicable. Journal of Environmental Management 345, 118582 (2023).

Feeney, C. J. et al. Development of soil health benchmarks for managed and semi-natural landscapes. Science of The Total Environment 886, 163973 (2023).

Bünemann, E. B. Soil quality – A critical review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 120, 105–125 (2018).

Shi. Recommended Measurements for Scaling Soil Health Assessment. (2024).

Fine, A. K., van Es, H. M. & Schindelbeck, R. R. Statistics, scoring functions, and regional analysis of a comprehensive soil health database. Soil Science Society of America Journal 81, 589–601 (2017).

Moebius-Clune, B. N. et al. Comprehensive Assessment of Soil Health – The Cornell Framework Manual. (2016).

Maharjan, B., Das, S. & Acharya, B. S. Soil Health Gap: A concept to establish a benchmark for soil health management. Global Ecology and Conservation 23, e01116 (2020).

Six, J., Doetterl, S., Laub, M., Müller, C. R. & Van de Broek, M. The six rights of how and when to test for soil C saturation. SOIL 10, 275–279 (2024).

Müller, T. & Höper, H. Soil organic matter turnover as a function of the soil clay content: consequences for model applications. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 36, 877–888 (2004).

Nunes, M. R. et al. SHAPEv1.0 Scoring curves and peer group benchmarks for dynamic soil health indicators. Soil Science Society of America Journal 88, 858–875 (2024).

Fajardo, M., McBratney, Alex. B., Field, D. J. & Minasny, B. Soil slaking assessment using image recognition. Soil and Tillage Research 163, 119–129 (2016).

Slakes: A Free Smartphone App to Measure Aggregate Stability. Soil Health Institute (2024). https://soilhealthinstitute.org/our-work/initiatives/slakes/#overview

Market Research Shows How to Win Up-and-Coming Consumers, Widen Wine’s Multicultural Appeal

By
Pam Strayer | Contributing Writer
-
0
61% of those studied preferred sustainable, family-owned brands, with 58% explicitly preferring organic (photo courtesy Maverick Farming.)

As marketers know, the adage “markets are conversations” still rings true, and a remarkably in-depth new study, “Attracting More Young Adults and Multicultural Consumers to Wine,” released December 17 by the Wine Market Council, underscores that in spades.

Currently, wine marketing can sometimes trend towards inertia. Example: With 68 million (out of 170 million) wine drinkers on TikTok, brands are intimidated by (and often absent from) the media platform favored by their newest customers. Innovation is lacking. Are these problems solvable?

Yes, according to the latest data from Mike Lakusta, CEO of Ethnifacts, and the Wine Market Council, which studied 1,816 consumers in their 20s and 30s to find out how that wine currently appeals, or does not, to younger consumers who are increasingly more diverse.

Said Lakusta, “We purposely oversampled the multicultural populations. About two-thirds of the people in this study were Hispanic, Black, Asian or other versus Caucasian, which is about 50% of this age cohort. For the purposes of this study, about two thirds was multicultural,” because researchers wanted to explore these segments in greater detail.

In addition, “20% of the surveys for Hispanics were done in Spanish,” he said, “so we could make sure we were getting good representation, and that is about the percentage of Spanish dominant in the country.”

While the mountain of data substantiates current perceptions, the authors found many eye-opening ways to improve wine marketing at every level.

Inclusion as a Game Changer: Overcoming the Culture Gap
With the multicultural demographics of the U.S alcoholic beverage drinker expanding, the data clearly shows a gap exists. While 52% of respondents found wine relaxing, only 12% felt wine was connected to their culture.

54% said they preferred to buy wine from someone of their own culture.

Therefore, the study recommended making marketing images reflect more diverse demographics.

“When asked who the typical wine drinker is, 35% of Hispanics, 34% of Asians and 27% of Blacks said they were of a different culture than them versus only 13% of non-Hispicanic Whites,” the study authors wrote. “Marketing portrayals of wine drinkers must become more inclusive to attract new consumers.”

Wine Pigeonholed for Formal Occasions and Gift Giving
Wine positioning should be more about fun and less about formal, the study found, with respondents saying they associated wine with a high-end restaurant meal (59%) or as a good choice at an Italian restaurant.

Only 10% said a concert or sport event was a good wine occasion.

While their ideal retail price point while shopping off-premise remains $10 to $20, the data showed this group often prefers small cans or bag in box wines, allowing retailers better price flexibility in meeting the $10 to $20 purchase price.

Relatable Wine Marketing
Counteracting that formal occasion mindset, Lakusta pointed out the wine shop Pairings Portland, run by retailer Jeff Weissler, has made wine tastings very relatable, hosting shop tastings focused on Taylor Swift’s Eras tour, Harry Potter, Dune, Lord of the Rings, Pride and Prejudice, Tarot for 2025, Disney Princesses and more.

The study also showed 61% of those studied preferred sustainable, family-owned brands, with 58% explicitly preferring organic (80% of the wines offered at Weissler’s shop are organically farmed.)

Paint and sip events were also popular at other venues.

A recent study by Wine Market Council, “Attracting More Young Adults and Multicultural Consumers to Wine,” found wine positioning should be more about fun and less about formal, with respondents saying they associated wine with a high-end restaurant meal (59%) or as a good choice at an Italian restaurant (courtesy Wine Market Council.)

Better Wine Descriptions and More Wine Cocktails
In the on-premise world, the study found a startling contrast between the way regular cocktails were marketed on menus, with appealing descriptions of their flavors and ingredients, while wine by the glass had little to no descriptions on menus.

“Wine marketers must demand better wine menus, lists and choices at on-premise,” the study authors wrote. “All groups indicate they wish there were more wine choices at on-premise and there was more information about the wines they can choose. Lack of descriptions and taste information make wine less appealing.”

The study also found wine cocktails were a hot, on-prem opportunity with 72% of 20- and 30-somethings saying they would be likely to purchase wine in that form.

Roughly 30% to 40% of them were aware of wine slushies, frose, wine cocktails mixed with spirits, wine spritzers and wine aperitif cocktails (with Aperol, Campari, etc.).

The Infamous Wall of Wine: It Only Gets Worse Online
Echoing previous studies, the wall of wine in retail continues to be an obstacle for most consumers, with 25% to 30% saying they are overwhelmed. They say wine aisles should be “better organized.” Most reported buying by a brand they know (as a way to combat the overwhelm).

Online, they tend to buy wine at a grocery store’s site (44%) or liquor/wine brick and mortar store’s site (42%). 33% buy from a strictly online retailer (e.g., wine.com) and 28% buy online from a winery.

When shopping online, they pay most attention to peer reviews (39%), similar to their shopping habits for other types of purchases.

20% say wine shopping online is harder to navigate than in a store.

Echoing previous studies, the wall of wine in retail continues to be an obstacle for most consumers, with 25% to 30% saying they are overwhelmed.

Wine Additives Give Them Headaches
An unusual finding: Between 15% and 20% of respondents said wine gives them headaches, leading the study’s authors to write, “Marketing methods utilized to minimize this could have an effect on up to 20% of consumers.”

Dry whites (Sauvignon Blanc or Pinot Grigio) and sparkling wines all have lower histamine levels compared to red wines.

Light at the End of the Tunnel: Millennials
While earlier reports have blamed wine’s slower sales on younger drinkers, Lakusta did not embrace that point of view. “There’s a very good light at the end of the tunnel, particularly with millennials when they hit their 30s,” he said.

The full webinar and data are available to Wine Market Council members. Membership information is available on their website at winemarketcouncil.com/join.

‘YES’ Vote Urged for Referendum to Continue Pierce’s Disease Control Program in California

By
Natalie Collins | President, California Association of Winegrape Growers
-
0
Xylella fastidiosa, the bacterium responsible for Pierce's disease, poses a significant threat to vineyards, highlighting the importance of ongoing pest control efforts.

The Pierce’s Disease Control Program within the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) has been slowing the spread of the glassy-winged sharpshooter (GWSS) and minimizing the impact of Pierce’s disease (PD) in California vineyards for over two decades. The program is overseen by the PD/GWSS Board and is made up of industry leaders, including growers and wineries alike.

The core strategies of the program are to protect California winegrapes through the following means:

• Contain the Spread: Prevent the spread of GWSS to non-infested areas with nursery inspections, trapping, treatment, bulk citrus inspections, area-wide treatment programs and biological control.
• Statewide Survey and Detection: Find new GWSS infestations and confirm that non-infested, at-risk areas remain free of infestation.
• Rapid Response: Respond quickly to detections of GWSS in new areas with surveying and treatments.
• Outreach: Raise awareness about PD and its vectors.
• Research: Sponsor research and development for sustainable solutions to PD and its vectors.

California winegrape growers are urged to unite and support the referendum for the continuation of the Pierce’s Disease Control Program, ensuring the protection of vineyards against invasive pests (all photos courtesy California Association of Winegrape Growers.)

By design, the program is subject to a referendum of growers once every five years. This referendum is to hold the program accountable and to make sure growers are satisfied with the work the program is doing on their behalf to protect vineyards. Therefore, the California Association of Winegrape Growers (CAWG) co-sponsored legislation in 2024 to create the referendum in spring 2025. 

Last year, when Assemblywoman Dawn Addis authored AB 1861 to extend this crucial line of defense for the wine industry against an invasive disease, she said, “We have a track record of collaboration among State, local, federal government and the industry itself when it comes to battling Pierce’s disease and the glassy-winged sharpshooter. I’m proud to extend this collaboration and to be part of the on-going success of California’s wine regions.”

AB 1861 was approved unanimously by the legislature in 2024 and was signed into law by Governor Newsom. This means CDFA will conduct a vote of growers this spring to determine whether the program and the PD/GWSS Board will be extended from 2026 to 2031. The last PD/GWSS referendum, conducted in 2020, passed with 78% approval of California winegrape growers. CAWG urges a ‘YES’ vote this spring to continue the program.

Continuing to Address PD/GWSS
Growers know all too well one of the most pervasive pests to vineyards is the aggressive PD, carried between plants by GWSS. PD is caused by the bacterium Xylella fastidiosa. Since the 1990s, GWSS has been one of the most invasive and deadly pests for vineyards. When a vine develops PD, its ability to draw in moisture is hindered, and the plant will either die or become unproductive. PD has caused millions of dollars in damage throughout the state.

Xylella fastidiosa works by blocking the xylem in plants, which conducts water around the plant. Symptoms include chlorosis and scorching of leaves. Entire vines will die within one to five years. GWSS, Homalodisca vitripennis (formerly H. coagulata), is a far-flying leafhopper, which means it can easily spread the disease-causing bacterium from one plant to another. When GWSS feeds on a plant infected with Xylella fastidiosa, it acquires the bacterium and transfers it to another plant when it feeds.

Over the last 23 years, the program has been fundamental in addressing the challenges posed by PD and other pests and diseases. In the last two years alone, there was a Notice of Treatment and Proclamation of an Emergency Program in Fresno, Madera, Solano, Stanislaus and Tulare counties to knock down populations of GWSS.

California’s first indication of a severe threat posed by this disease occurred in Temecula in August 1999, when more than 300 acres of vineyards were infected with PD and had to be destroyed. In response, the Legislature enacted a legislative package that year, creating the advisory task force. In 2001, the program was created to fight the spread and find solutions for PD and GWSS.

The PD/GWSS Board has invested $55 million in research to combat pests and diseases threatening California’s wine industry.

Program Has Solid Track Record
The program, funded through a combination of federal and industry funds as well as grape grower assessments, has demonstrated success in controlling the spread of PD and GWSS. These assessment funds are used for research, outreach and related activities on PD, GWSS and other designated pests and diseases of winegrapes.

The research overseen by the PD/GWSS Board is critical to advancing knowledge, improving practices, and guaranteeing the longevity of the California winegrape industry. The focus of current research projects ranges from investigating pests and diseases to evaluating existing control methods to exploring new promising control strategies.

Since 2001, the PD/GWSS Board has invested $55 million to support about 300 research grants to protect vineyards, prevent the spread of pests and diseases, and deliver practical and sustainable solutions. Research is focused on PD and GWSS, and other designated pests and diseases of winegrapes, including:

• Brown marmorated stink bug
• European grapevine moth
• Grapevine fanleaf disease
• Grapevine leafroll disease
• Grapevine red blotch disease
• Mealybugs
• Spotted lanternfly (SLF)

The PD/GWSS Board is looking ahead regarding SLF. Native to Asia, SLF started showing up about 10 years ago in eastern states and has caused substantial damage to vineyards in Pennsylvania, New York and the region. Education is crucial to early detection and treatment as the pest continues to make its way west. Investing in research now will also aid in identifying a means of quick treatment and eradication of the pest when it does make its way to California.

For all the aforementioned reasons, in support of growers, CAWG is urging the passage of the referendum in 2025.

“Know More, Use Less” New Precision Imaging Vineyard Software Enables Smarter Use of Inputs

By
Pam Strayer | Contributing Writer
-
0
Precision imaging vineyard software, which can recognize underperforming vines in a vineyard among other insights, can now be mounted to ATVs and cover larger areas significantly faster than a human on foot (photo courtesy Bloomfield AI.)

What if you could target underperforming vines in a vineyard and apply more resources to them, not to entire blocks? What if you could improve yield estimate accuracy so you would know whether you’re a grape buyer or a seller this year? What if you no longer had to send workers into fields to scout vines, but could collect useful data during the passes you already make and, afterward, view actual scans of the fruit for all your vines?

Experts making new precision imaging vineyard software say these are attainable goals, and several of California’s biggest vineyard companies are piloting their products. Vendors are on the cusp of rolling out these next-generation labor saving products more broadly to large-scale growers in 2025.

While most vineyard managers today rely on aerial imaging from flyovers from VineView or Ceres AI (which covers 350,000 acres of vines globally flying at an average height of 3,500 feet), vineyard managers large and small are taking a real-world look at what next-gen precision imaging vendors like Green Atlas, Bloomfield AI and Scout AI offer. These new products provide insights from photos taken in the vine row.

“Imaging tech is really blowing up,” as one North Coast vineyard manager put it. Part of the reason? Future proofing. These new precision tools are poised to enable variable-rate spraying products major hardware vendors are currently developing.

Scout AI user interface via mobile app. Developed and funded by California-based data scientists and investors, Scout AI is focused solely on winegrape vineyards. It uses only cameras on ordinary Samsung phones to assess vine and grape quality, a design choice CTO Mason Earles insisted on early on (photo courtesy Scout AI.)

Three Precision Imaging Systems: Green Atlas, Bloomfield AI and Scout AI
Two of the early entrants, Green Atlas and Bloomfield AI, cover multiple crops and use proprietary cameras, while one, Scout AI, is focused solely on vineyards and uses ordinary Samsung phone cameras.

Green Atlas, Treasury Wine Estates trial
At Treasury Wine Estates, viticulturist Allie Hermanson has been trialing Green Atlas on 120 acres for several years. Green Atlas is an Australian-based company that has historically trained its data collection and insights on orchard crops.

“We did actually see quite a difference between our manual counts and the Green Atlas counts, which we thought was interesting, because they’re collecting so much more data than ours,” said Hermanson.

Bloomfield AI, Gloria Ferrer
Pittsburgh-based Bloomfield AI, recently acquired by Kubota, was used in 2023 at Gloria Ferrer in Sonoma, Calif., according to Bloomfield’s website. Quoted in the press, vineyard manager Brad Kurtz said, “Yield monitoring is just the very tip of the spear of what this technology is going to bring to agriculture.”

Scout AI, various vineyards (Mayacamas, Hardin, Enterprise and others)
Developed and funded by California-based data scientists and investors, Scout AI is focused solely on winegrape vineyards. It uses only cameras on ordinary Samsung phones to assess vine and grape quality, a design choice CTO Mason Earles insisted on early on.

Like an X-ray, Scout AI’s software shows where red blotch is suspected and lets growers view photos of any individual vines. This differs from traditional satellite imaging used in the winegrape industry by many vineyard managers in California (photo courtesy Scout AI.)

Earles is a UC Davis viticulture and enology assistant professor who runs the Plant AI and Biophysics Lab (the university owns a tiny percentage of Scout.) The main investor is Silicon Valley entrepreneur-turned-vintner Kia Behnia, a wine industry innovator who was already a data geek in his previous career and in his life as a vintner in Napa starting a decade ago.

After successfully beta testing for two years with boutique, artisanal growers in Napa and Sonoma and with two of California’s largest wineries (among the top six in the state), Scout released its fourth-generation version software in December based on three years of vineyard research with growers in both low-priced and high-priced winegrape regions.

Matt Hardin, owner of Hardin Vineyard Management, has been using it with his team and finds it increases efficiency and saves labor.

Said Hardin, “At the end of the year on every single ranch, I used to send a guy through to look for missing vines, rootstocks, young vines, etc. With Scout, we were able to do a scan with one guy. The software would count not only all our missing vines, and all our rootstocks, it would also export all that data which we send to the nursery to order plants. It takes only one guy four hours on a four-wheeler instead of four or more days. And all the data comes back to us.”

After doing a vine inventory with Scout, Steltzner Vineyards in Napa’s Stag’s Leap District found out of 24 acres of vines, it had a half-acre of missing vines. For fifth-generation Napa grower Allison Steltzner, the first scan paid for itself already.

Behnia said these savings are typical across its many users.

“We can do this scouting now on an ATV at 9 miles an hour, about five times faster than it would take humans walking around with a clipboard or with a clicker,” he said.

“The first thing we did for all our customers,” Behnia continued, “is to do an inventory so they have accurate baseline data. The second thing is identifying the lowest-performing vines in every block. Fixing those will get you back into profitability a lot more than focusing on the top ones, right?

“Most people don’t know where those are,” he said. “We literally get down to creating a watch list. Now, some of our customers are doing targeted treatments like compost or biochar just for those vines. Their plan is to see if those vines don’t improve after two years, then maybe they have to replant because the plant was damaged or is not worth keeping.”

Like an X-ray, Scout’s software shows where red blotch is suspected and lets growers view photos of any individual vines.

Hardin said having the data Scout collects is a conversation enabler with customers. “It’s a tool I can use to talk with my clients,” he said.

After meetings in 2024 with 20 growers in Paso Robles and others in Monterey, in 2025, the Scout team is expanding their product offering to more regions and growers, including many large-scale growers with 5,000- to 10,000-acre vineyards.

“We believe we have the largest ground set of photos anywhere in the world,” said Behnia. “What this does, and I think this is where our customers get excited, is not only does this help them this year, but five years from now, they can go back and look at the data.”

Adoption
It’s still early days for the precision imaging industry, and many vineyard managers are waiting on the sidelines for others to prove that the data provides return on investment. But most believe the day is coming when these tools will be the industry standard, widely used in all vineyards.

“When I show it to winemakers, they say, ‘I asked Google to build this 10 years ago. For a lot of them, they’re just in awe,” said Behnia. “The idea is so simple. It’s just they couldn’t believe that we can finally do this now.”

Said Earles, “I think Scout is a tool in your tool belt that can help you farm more profitably and far more sustainably through precision agriculture.”

Added Behnia, “We’re building a tool that helps you measure. If I can measure what you did, that will change culture. I’ve seen this before. Over half my career was built on creating business tools that changed cultures and organizations so that they become data-driven and measure the right things.

“Given climate change and labor shortages, no one can continue doing the same thing they’ve been doing in the next five years,” he continued. “Labor is not going to get cheaper. Oil industry-generated inputs are only going to increase in cost. Today, growers too often spray everything, and agrochemical and farm input companies get a big check. We all need more targeted inputs. We can’t go backward.”

Ground Truth Data on Regenerative Practices: Insights from Real-Time Soil Monitoring

By
Pam Strayer | Contributing Writer
-
0
Agrology’s Arbiter soil monitoring system measures soil microbial biomass and continuous metabolic activity in the soil, which provide advantages compared to more static measurement systems disadvantaged by lag time from sending samples to a lab and waiting for a result.

What are the impacts of various vineyard practices on soil health, water retention, soil temperature and yields? Agrology, a soil health monitoring vendor, provided data and insights in a year’s-end online webinar showcasing data from more than a half dozen vineyard clients it works with in California.

Agrology’s Arbiter soil monitoring system measures soil microbial biomass and continuous metabolic activity in the soil, which provide advantages compared to more static measurement systems disadvantaged by lag time from sending samples to a lab and waiting for a result. Static sampling does not provide real-time data on fluctuations.

“The Arbiter system looks at CO2 concentration in three different ways,” said Charlie Dubbe, head of regenerative partnerships for the Sonoma-based company. “It looks at it through a soil chamber, looking at what’s called soil respiration.

“We’re telling you what the actual activity is based on the real-world conditions of soil moisture and the climate that you’re in and the practices that you’re doing. So, it’s this really interesting continuous measurement of the amount of life in your soil.

“The larger and more robust that dialog is between soil microbiome and plant roots, the better a plant can produce these biochemicals that are called secondary plant metabolites,” he said. In wine, those are polyphenol compounds and tannins.

Dubbe said up to 50% of the energy that plants gather from the sun is released into the soil microbiome then slowly processed by the soil microbiome and humified (turned into humus). “That stable carbon form is what we’re really looking forward for,” he said, both for fighting climate change and increasing crop production.

“So, long story short, Agrology monitors that amount of microbial activity through soil respiration,” Dubbe said.

The trio of presenters then went on to provide a cornucopia of data from various clients and vineyard sites, ranging from Napa and Sonoma to the Central Coast, looking at no-till practices. Data showed no till preserved soil structure, enhanced microbial life and water retention and reduced the need for irrigation. It also improved overall soil health.

“No-till methods, while potentially more labor-intensive and difficult to implement to transition, offer longer-term benefits like improved water retention, reduced evaporation and better microbial health,” said Dana Revallo, Agrology’s head of customer success.

“We know consistent tillage does very bad things for the soil microbiome,” added Dubbe. “No. 1, by just disrupting all their homes and kind of slicing up the structure and destroying that pore space, you’re creating this massive feast, you’re chopping up all the soil organic matter, and then you are adding all this oxygen, so there’s this massive kind of burst of activity. But all that food is gone later in the season.”

“The Goldilocks Zone”: No Till’s Benefits in Soil Temperature and Moisture
Jay Radochia, head of agribusiness development at Agrology, pointed out soil temperature plays a critical role in determining the rate of evaporation and microbial activity in the soil.

“When the top 6 to 8 inches of soil goes above 100 degrees [F], we lose 85% of that moisture just through evaporation,” he said. “The full-till blocks experience soil temperatures over 100 degrees [F] for extended periods. By contrast, the no-till practices buffered soil temperature fluctuations, keeping temperatures lower and stable. The data from the trial showed the full till resulted in 69 days, or exceeded 85 degrees [F], while the no till above 85 was only 29 days.”

When the top 6 to 8 inches of soil goes above 100 degrees F, 85% of moisture is lost just through evaporation, Agrology’s Jay Radochia says.

Water Retention
The team also reported no-till practices yielded the highest water retention levels, allowing the soil moisture to be more effectively held, rather than full till or the every-other-row till. The ability to reduce irrigation while maintaining healthy soil is a significant advantage, they noted.

The full webinar with several case studies, including some from Donum Estate, Joseph Phelps and a very large grower, provides graphs and insights into a variety of practices, including using rye as a cover crop, ROI analyses and more. It can be seen online at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvfUipcXJzQ.

Can Regenerative Organic Farming Pencil Out? Study Provides State-of-the-Art Data and Demonstrates Dramatic Improvements in Wine Quality

By
Pam Strayer| Contributing Writer
-
0
Robert Hall Winery General Manager Caine Thompson came on board in 2020 and got the thumbs-up from O’Neill Vintners & Distillers CEO Jeff O’Neill to start the regenerative organic trials.

At Robert Hall Winery on Paso Robles’ east side, a remarkable three-year study is comparing yields, costs, wine quality and more in a conventionally farmed vineyard and a regenerative organic one (supplemented with biodynamic herbal and mineral sprays and compost). The results show a dramatic difference in water retention, soil respiration, soil carbon, wine quality and yields.

The regenerative organic certification (ROC) requires organic certification enhanced with additional practices, including no till, animal integration and keeping the ground covered. The standards were created and are enforced by the Regenerative Organic Alliance (ROA).

Usually, winery trials like this take place under cover of darkness and are typically aided only by subjective, qualitative assessments. Often, growers will try out organic farming on a block or two (and the same for biodynamics) and decide whether to implement these farming techniques. After several years of building their confidence through various vintages, they may decide to become certified organic.

Not so at Robert Hall, which has jumped into an impressive research study that is finding startling new results and is open to the public and peers thanks to an initiative proposed by General Manager Caine Thompson. The winery is also on the brink of ROA certification, having met all the requirements and awaiting the final paperwork.

Thompson praised the ROA certification not only for its faming standards but for the human social fairness practices it encourages. “We’ve got a really transparent feedback loop with monthly meetings with the vineyard team and myself and the winemaking team,” he said. “We’ve noticed more engagement, and turnover has gone down. The quality of work has gone way up.”

When Thompson came on board in 2020, he asked Jeff O’Neill, CEO of O’Neill Vintners & Distillers, if he could conduct a side-by-side comparison and measurement of conventional versus regenerative organic (no till and more). Tablas Creek, certified both biodynamic and ROC, had previously worked with academics to study the impacts of tillage and grazing, which provided a helpful precedent. O’Neill gave the Robert Hall study the thumbs-up.

Thompson, a native of New Zealand, had personally been farming organically and biodynamically for 20 years in New Zealand at Pyramid Valley and Mission Estate Winery and had previously conducted research on converting to organic.

Begun in 2021, the Robert Hall study encompassed 48 acres in the vineyard surrounding the winery (in the Geneseo AVA). 43 acres were converted to regenerative organic. 5 acres were retained as the conventional control. The control includes the use of cover crops and compost which advantaged it with better practices than the average conventional vineyard (though cover crops are widely used). Both the control and regenerative organic vines are Cabernet Sauvignon (clone 15, originally from the Bordeaux region).

Thompson wanted to make sure he was measuring like with like and went the extra mile to make sure that was the case. “We had satellite images and soil maps to ensure we were setting up the trial with like for like literally side by side, the same soil type and the same clone,” he said.

Four years later, he and his team have a lot of data to look at and experiences to review.

Their ongoing study is finding regenerative organic practices have benefits that exceeded their expectations. “I was surprised at how quickly the differences showed up,” he said. “Even in year one, there were noticeable changes.”

On a vineyard tour in November, he pointed to a newly planted neighbor’s vineyard, where the soils were clearly pure hardpan.

“When we broke ground farming this way four years ago, you could barely get a spade into the ground,” he said. “Now, we’ve got a living, breathing soil.

“The soils are more open, more friable, and there’s just so much more life within the vineyard. When you walk into the vineyard now, it’s like this biodiversity nightclub of energy and insects and life all around you, and I think that’s translocating down through the roots, into the soil, and you’re getting that expression back up into the fruit and then into the resulting wine,” he said.

Regenerative organic farming is easier in addition to being more rewarding financially, he said.

“When you have that type of biodiversity within a vineyard, the diversity and the predators take care of a lot of the pests and disease. You’re building these polycultural systems; it’s not just a monoculture. You’ve got a whole bunch of different cover crops growing in there and different species. You get more diversity through predators in there, so the pest populations get brought into balance naturally,” he added.

“When we started the project, we were doing three to four biodiversity drops of pest predators to build up a baseline [predator] population. Now we’re only doing one or two. They’re basically maintenance drops now, and of course, there’s no insecticides being used, no herbicides being used, no synthetic fungicides.”

The team has the data to prove yields are up, water retention is up and wine quality is improving, he said. In 2021 and 2022, they collected all the data themselves.

Farming costs for the regenerative organic block increased an average of 10% annually overall.

Agrology Technology Adds Insights: Water Retention Up 13%
In 2023, the study began integrating state of the art carbon monitoring and other data-gathering technology from Agrology, measuring soil moisture, soil respiration, CO2 in the canopy, carbon concentrations in soil, and ground and canopy temperatures.

The team found the regenerative organic block increased water retention 13% in just one year compared to the conventional block. In a region that typically gets only 18 inches of rain per year, while the climate continues to warm, that is significant.

The regenerative organic vines also boosted microbial activity, Agrology found.

Regenerative Organic Mitigated Heat and Heat Spikes
This fall, Paso’s heat spikes shattered heat records for six days in a row, reaching a high of 107 degrees F and affecting soil temperatures.

The regenerative organic block were consistently lower in temperature than the conventional block, the data showed. Similar results applied in measuring the canopy temperature.

The team calculated there was “a 7.8% decrease in average daily high temperature during the critical harvest period in the regenerative block,” when grapes are typically in danger of ripening too quickly.

Carbon Sequestration Bolstered
In October 2023, the accumulated canopy absorption of CO2 was 26.79 PPM in the control block versus 1,397 PPM in the regenerative block, leading the study to conclude the regenerative block absorbed 192% more CO2 than the control. Organic carbon in the regenerative block was 1.51% vs 0.86% in the conventional block as of July 2024.

The regenerative block scored 7.8 on the Haney soil health score compared to 4.7 for the conventional block.

Yields and Costs
Yields were up three out of four years in the trial, while farming costs increased an average of 10% annually overall, Thompson said.

In the trial’s fourth year (the 2024 vintage) during another warm vintage, yield data showed a 15% increase in the regenerative organic vines.

The conventional control yielded 1.85 t/acre while the regenerative organic yielded 2.17 t/acre. The data highlights in three out of four years, the regenerative organic vineyard has produced a more resilient canopy that has helped protect the fruit, leading to improvements in yield.

Canopy comparison of regenerative organic and conventional vines during year two (summer 2022) of the trial.

Wine Quality Skyrocketed
Another major benefit was dramatically increased wine quality.

Thompson and winemaking partner Amanda Gortermade made wines the exact same way from both the conventional block and the regenerative organic block. After seeing dramatic improvement in wine quality, they upgraded cultural practices in specific areas within the regenerative organic vineyard, increasing shoot and crop thinning in the hopes of creating a $50 bottle wine. Mission accomplished.

“There’s more complexity in the wine compared to the conventional control,” Thompson said. “There’s freshness, there’s more vibrancy, there’s a different energy in the wines. We’ve got more of those classic Cabernet characters,” he said.

Yields in the trial were higher three out of four years for the regenerative organic block vs the conventional block.

Sharing the Data (and the Wine)
An advocate for regenerative organic farming, Thompson is enthusiastic about sharing the trial’s data and findings with the world.

“The whole idea of the study was to be collaborative, to be open to industry,” he said. “We hold quarterly field days to share the results and the learnings and this whole journey toward regenerative organic.”

Visitors are welcome to taste the wines side by side from the trial during field days (open to all) to compare the differences for themselves.

Thompson’s scope in applying learnings from the study is wider than the vines at Robert Hall. He oversees sustainability for all O’Neill Vintners & Distillers properties (the seventh-largest winery in California) and sits on the boards of several international sustainability groups.

O’Neill’s vast holdings include 870 acres in Parlier, Calif. The company also contracts 200 growers with 15,000 acres of vines. All are now required to meet some kind of sustainability program requirements. In July, O’Neill purchased its first Washington winery, Wines of Substance. O’Neill’s luxury brand, Ram’s Gate in Sonoma, is in the process of becoming certified regenerative organic on 28 acres in the Carneros AVA.

Thompson’s study has reinforced his belief and experience that regenerative organic winegrape growing can be profitable for all.

“We now have a vineyard that’s alive, that’s diverse, and more resilient in the face of climate related issues and pests and disease,” he said.

“The vineyards are definitely becoming more resilient to climate change and some of the extremes that we’re seeing with temperature, with heat, and the pressure that’s put on canopies and fruit. Under the regenerative organic side, we’ve got a bigger, healthier canopy, resulting in more shade and protection. We’ve got darker, greener leaves that are working really efficiently, and they’re protecting the fruit. Those leaves obviously move with the sun, but they protect the fruit in these larger canopies, so the resulting fruit is intact. It’s not shriveled, it’s not dehydrated, and that’s leading to better wine quality,” Thompson added.

Robert Hall Winery offers consumer and trade vineyard tours to the control and regenerative organic blocks (side by side) and schedules field days that provide growers and others to learn in depth about the trial.

The full study can be seen online at shorturl.at/suO86.

Blending Wine and Philanthropy at Rancho Oso Libre: The Social Impact of Sustainable Wine

By
WHITNEY BROWNIE | Vineyard Team
-
0
The Oso Libre Por Vida Foundation, an integral part of Rancho Oso Libre dedicated to helping those in need, predates the winery by nearly two decades.

Today, Paso Robles residents Chris and Linda Behr may be best known for their successful cattle ranch, winery and SIP Certified® sustainable vineyard: Rancho Oso Libre.

Anyone who has visited the ranch and talked with the Behrs probably knows about their dedication to helping those in need through their Oso Libre Por Vida Foundation. But they may not know the origins of the Foundation predate the establishment of the winery by nearly two decades.

Before the Behrs moved to Paso Robles and started the ranch, they lived in Los Angeles. At this time, Chris ran his construction company, Behr Construction.

Chris was contracted by the Children’s Institute to build special one-way interview rooms to give children a safe space to share their stories. The rooms would allow a social worker to work with a child privately while another agent could observe the interaction without being intrusive or putting stress on the child.

For Chris, this experience turned into more than a construction project. The job invited him to learn about the Institute’s mission. He saw children heal through dedicated time and support, and it moved him deeply.

This experience inspired Chris to reach out to the Big Brothers Big Sisters of America program. He felt called to become a mentor. During his time with the program, he took on challenging cases and even coached others to become a “Big” mentor.

Helping children was just the beginning of his and Linda’s devotion to charitable practices. Their attention next turned to people involved with the armed forces, and then to animals in need. When Linda’s parents were diagnosed with and eventually passed from cancer, they dedicated funds to support cancer research.

The impact of Chris’s work with children in need and Linda’s parents’ illnesses were instrumental to what several years later became the Oso Libre Por Vida Foundation.

Chris and Linda Behr are owners of cattle ranch, winery and SIP Certified® sustainable vineyard Rancho Oso Libre (all photos courtesy Rancho Oso Libre.)

La Vida En el Rancho
In 1996, the Behr’s hearts called them north. They bought a 90-acre ranch on the west side of Paso Robles to pursue farming.

The birth of Rancho Oso Libre was a group effort. Chris drew up plans for the home and winery. His Behr Construction crew brought the plans to life. Over the next four years, the Behrs planted their grapes and acquired cattle. In 2000, their good friend Michael Barreto taught them how to make wine.

In 2008, Chris and Linda’s son, Jeff, and his wife, Liz, joined their parents to put the finishing touches on the winery. But Jeff and Liz’s visit yielded more than a winery ready for business.

The group discussed how the Behrs would tie their charitable services to the winery. Chris and Linda wanted their passion projects to be intertwined, but they weren’t sure what that would look like.

That’s when Linda came up with the name “Oso Libre Por Vida” Foundation. Together with the name of the ranch, the translation is “Free Bear for Life.” The name ties the two together in a meaningful play on the Behr’s name and their charitable philosophy.

Although still unsure of what the union would look like in practice, Chris and Linda knew with a great name and a winery to engage the community, they were off to a good start.

Votive Candle Offering
One of the first features that entwined Rancho Oso Libre and the Por Vida Foundation was built into the winery itself, or, rather, omitted from it. Chris left a hole in the wall near the winery’s entrance.

Despite uncertainty over how the feature would be accepted, the Behrs left this opening for a Votive candle offering: A space for their guests to take a moment to think about someone they love and light a candle in their honor.

To their surprise, it was a hit. The Behrs found that as well as lighting candles, guests were leaving offerings at the Votive. “We really didn’t think it would be used,” Chris said. “Early on, a woman came up to me to tell me the tray was full and handed me her offering. That’s when we knew this was something people truly appreciated.”

All Votive offerings are donated to support people and animals in need under the Por Vida Foundation. At the end of each weekend, Oso Libre’s team collects the offerings from the tray and puts out fresh candles for the following week’s guests.

Winemaker Michael Barreto is a business partner in Rancho Oso Libre and taught the Behrs how to make wine.

Vines, Wines and Angus
With the space to host, wine to bring people together and beef to feed them, the Behrs came up with another way to tie the ranch’s activities to the Por Vida Foundation: Saturday Angus Days.

While tickets to the event welcome guests to enjoy an Estate Angus Burger, sides, wine and live music, they also give back to the community.

Each of Oso Libre’s Angus Day events is held to support a specific cause. Prior to each event, the team sits down to decide what that cause will be. If there is an issue or tragedy affecting the community, that’s where their Angus Day proceeds go.

Chris said Angus Days have “really gotten a life of their own. People connect drinking their wine with the money that will go to charitable causes; some even give money without drinking wine.”

The Behrs host around 20 Angus Day events each year, inviting the community to come together to enjoy great wine and angus and support those in need. “If people don’t like their burger, they like it more knowing it goes to charity. They say, ‘That burger was delicious.’”

Poker-Style Tasting Chips
Oso Libre’s Poker Style Tasting Chips are tasting certificates with a twist. Similar to standard certificates, guests can exchange a chip for a complimentary tasting for two. What makes them unique is for each chip that is redeemed, Oso Libre gives $5 to charity.

Chips are easy to come by. They are given to new members who can pass them along to friends, and Oso Libre staff hands them out to guests at their own discretion.

The over-1000 chips Oso Libre distributes each year represent thousands of dollars the community helps give in charitable contributions.

Rancho Oso Libre has a tradition whereby all its wines are combined into one called Solera. It’s served growler-style in the tasting room.

Solera
The beacon of the winery is the Solera wine program. “It’s a continuous layered wine that has over 10 years of vintages and varietals,” Chris said. “Every wine we make is in it.”

Solera is treated like a growler at a brewery. Oso Libre even uses growler bottles for this special club-exclusive blend. Two barrels of Solera are kept safe right in the tasting room so members can bring their growler in and watch it be refilled. All proceeds from Solera sales and refills go to the Por Vida Foundation.

The Solera tradition began in 2004, back when Jeff and Liz were Oso Libre’s winemakers. Since then, Solera has never been emptied.

“We keep the bung proper, keep nitrogen clear, monitor S.O., we keep it safe and freshen it up. It’s got to taste great, people love it,” Chris said.

When Jeff and Liz returned to Los Angeles in 2019, the Behrs brought in winemakers Michael and Joey Barreto, who are now also business partners. The team who taught the team how to make wine in 2000 continue the Solera tradition today.

Every quarter, the Oso Libre team counts all the Por Vida Foundation funds and sits down to decide how they will be distributed to different charities.

Passion in Every Pour
Every quarter, the Oso Libre team counts all the Por Vida funds and sits down to decide how they will be distributed.

Keeping with the roots of their charitable activities, Chris and Linda donate most of the funds to the same four main causes: cancer research, prevention of child abuse, support for armed forces and veterans, and humane care of animals.

“We often plan weeks or even months in advance,” Chris said. But tragedy can strike at any time. If the team hears about an issue affecting the community, plans change and they direct funds toward reliving the local issue.

“We’ll switch gears if a big deal comes up and dedicate an event to it.”

Chris and Linda Behr take great pride in Oso Libre’s Por Vida Foundation and love telling their guests how their visit supports the community. “People connect enjoying wine with giving back,” Chris said. “It makes them feel pretty darn good!”

Sustainability doesn’t stop at the farm level. Like Oso Libre’s Por Vida Foundation demonstrates, it includes socially responsible practices that support the community and those in need. A winery in San Luis Obispo, Calif. found a creative way to get their staff involved in finding new ways to practice sustainability. Read the next Sustainable Story to learn how.

1234...14Page 3 of 14

EDITOR PICKS

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY

ABOUT US

Grape & Wine Magazine is the industry leading magazine for grape growers and wineries.

Contact us: info@jcsmarketinginc.com

FOLLOW US

© Grape & Wine Magazine - JCS Marketing, Inc.