As you know from previous posts, I am very interested in terroir and man’s attempt to define and regulate it. I have said that a truly pure belief in terroir would mean absolute trust and a completely hands-off approach as to viticulture. But the truth is that in most parts of the world where fine terroirs have been identified, there are varying degrees of viticultural legislation. This article questions their effect.

I will begin with appellation rules. Appellation rules can be quite simple. Let’s take say the Napa Valley AVA (American Viticultural Area). The rules are that 85% of the grapes must hail from the AVA and the wine must be finished in the state of California. However, take Chianti Classico. Chianti Classico comes from specific municipalities in Tuscany between Florence and Sienna. It must be red and have a minimum of 80% of Sangiovese. It has a minimum required level of alcohol, a maximum vineyard elevation of 2,300’, a maximum level of residual sugar and minimum ageing requirements depending on the level; Chianti, Chianti Riserva or Chianti Gran Selezione. In other regions, such as Burgundy, higher appellations have maximum permitted yields with strict rules for exceeding them. Many regions do not permit irrigation. Some regions such as Chateauneuf du Pape go so far as to specify vine training systems. Many prefectures in France publish official harvest start dates. For the most part, viticultural legislation serves to protect the integrity, authenticity, quality, typicity and style of the grapes that will go into the wine. On its face, this is a good thing although it could be argued that while it forces lesser and / or less committed producers to adhere to minimum standards, it may well prevent the very best producers from growing their ultimate quality grapes.

Along with viticultural legislation, there is increasingly environmental legislation governing permitted treatments such as sprays, pesticides and fumigants that have to be observed by viticulturists. Generally this is good as it serves the interest of worker and consumer health and supports the goal of sustainable farming and a healthy environment. The production of organic and biodynamic wines must also be addressed. Organizations such as NOP in the USA and Ecocert, certify organically grown grapes. Organizations such as Demeter certify biodynamically grown grapes. While these are not strictly viticultural legislation, these standards must be adhered to achieve and maintain the relevant certifications. While it is true that there are very positive aspects to marketing in these credentials, my experience is that farmers are largely committed to the production of better grapes and to the health of the planet.

So, overall, what harm can be caused by the adherence to viticultural legislation promulgated to control the quality of viticulture? When we talk of harm, we mean the possibility that the legislation prevents or impacts in a negative manner, the production of the very best grapes. Perhaps the stricter the legislation, the less room there is for experimentation in respect of new grape varieties, methods of vine training, irrigation for quality and other factors. Legislation removes unfettered decision making and consideration of the universe of options. As stated above, in a real sense, this author believes that legislation, by defining terroir, impinges on ultimate terroir expression, albeit only for the most committed and passionate growers! It must also be recognized that much of viticultural legislation is proposed by consortia and organizations heavily influenced by the very growers subject to the legislation and so, there is an undeniable element of marketing involved. It is good marketing to have a degree of uniformity, style, consistent quality and limited production and so some of the legislation is arguably self-serving.

On the flip side, the good cannot be denied for all the same reasons given above. Quality grapes are all but guaranteed. Successful styles are popularized; prices are largely, if not guaranteed, then controlled. And, it is true that the legislation does legally encode decades, even many decades, of collective experience and synthesized knowledge of what constitutes best practice, the most successful grape varieties and farming methods. Viticultural legislation is probably unnecessary or less necessary for the best, most committed and most passionate producers, those who may achieve greater heights in a completely unfettered environment. But these growers will always find a way to excel. These individuals have found ways to produce the best grapes for their best wines, even if they have to step outside of legislation and lose some or all of their appellation. People like Angelo Gaja in Piedmont come to mind, when he declassified his best wines to Lange Rosso some years ago. The same is true for the “Super Tuscan” movement of about 20 years ago when producers stepped out of the regulations to produce “better” wines, some of which now have their own appellations such as Sassicaia in Bolgheri.

In conclusion I must state that viticultural legislation does more good than harm! It protects the consumer and the grower and, for the most part, does not prevent the very best growers from indulging their vision.

Want to receive complimentary educational posts via email?

Please subscribe below.

Copyright © 2018 GreatWine2U.com. All rights reserved.