Comment from Nugent, Maurice J. (Nugent Vineyards, Inc.)

Document ID: TTB-2008-0009-0012
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Alcohol And Tobacco Tax And Trade Bureau
Received Date: October 09 2008, at 11:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: October 10 2008, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: 
Comment Due Date: December 19 2008, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80742c7c
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

REBUTTAL TO GALLO PETITION TO EXPAND THE RUSSIAN RIVER VALLEY AVA Re: 2008R-031P Since the TTB has asked for specific data to consider when deciding on the Gallo Petition to expand the Russian River Valley AVA, I would like to suggest that the data is readily available. The argument about the expansion hinges on whether or not the grape-growing environment in the proposed expansion area is similar to the rest of the Russian River Valley AVA. The Growing season for the Gallo expansion area appears to be much longer in the expansion area than it is in the Russian River Valley. In fact, Gallo had not picked their red varietal (presumably Pinot Noir) by October 4, 2008 (observation of many drivers along the 101 corridor) when according to the Santa Rosa Press Democrat: “Countywide, 80 to 90 percent of the grape crop has been picked, including almost all of the thinner- skinned white varieties, said Nick Frey, executive director of the Sonoma County Winegrape Commission”. http://www.pressdemocrat.com:80/article/20081004/news/810040321. Most Pinot Noir and Chardonnay in the Russian River Valley was picked by the weekend of September 14th a little over 3 weeks earlier with sugar content over 24 brix. Even the Cabernet Sauvignon (a late-ripening variety) in the Middle Reach of the Russian River Valley was already picked before Gallo picked their red grapes (presumably pinot noir). The degree summations provided by Gallo are at best ambiguous. Gallo presents a “Growing Season Table” which contains temperature summation data Gallo obtained from their ranches over some undefined period of time, not necessarily the same time at all of the ranches. Instead of vague temperature summations and arguments by hired experts about marine layers and fog, Gallo can allow verification of harvest dates and sugar content of similar varieties at their Two Rock Vineyard, their Frei Road Vineyard near Sebastopol and their McMurray Ranch, by opening these harvests to observation by independent observers, say from the Russian River Valley Winegrowers Association, TTB, or the Sonoma County Agricultural Commission. These data can then be compared with each other as well as other data from vineyards not controlled by Gallo in the Russian River Valley AVA. The reason that these observations must be made by independent observers is because Gallo has a policy of secrecy: ALL of their facilities are closed to outside verification and visitors. The Russian River Valley, which has become one of the most important grape-growing regions in the world, is extremely important to the economy of Sonoma County, California and the consumers who purchase our wines. The proposed expansion merits careful attention. Until Gallo opens their facilities to outside verification of harvest dates and grape-sugar content, the expansion should be postponed. This delay will certainly not harm Gallo, who is one of the leading wine producers in the world; however, an unjustified, hasty expansion would harm an agricultural treasure, and violate the TTB's mission to protect consumers. Arguments against the specifics of the Gallo petition are continued in the section below. Respectfully submitted, Maurice Nugent Ph.D. SPECIFIC ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE GALLO SUBMISSION 1. Gallo claims: The proposed expansion area lies almost entirely within the Russian River Watershed. The key here is “almost”. The entire Dry Creek and Alexander Valley AVA’s are in the Russian River watershed, as well as others in Mendocino county. These kind of arguments with regard to the proposed expansion are fallacious and certainly would confuse consumers whom the TTB is trying to protect. 2. Gallo claims Before the establishment of the current viticultural area boundary, the proposed expansion area was commonly considered part of the Russian River Valley. History is against the Gallo historical perspective here: (a) In History of Sonoma County California 1850, p. 19. “The lower end of this vast [Sonoma County] plain is Petaluma, the central portion is Santa Rosa, and the northern section, the Russian River Valleys.” (b) The Transactions of the State Agricultural Society on page 392 states that “Healdsburg, is the largest town in the [Russian River] valley”. It is noteworthy that neither Santa Rosa nor Petaluma was thought to be in the Russian River valley at this time, circa 1880. 3. Gallo asserts: that the History of the Sonoma Viticultural District by Ernest P. Peninou clearly shows that the growers in the two areas grew similar grape varieties under similar growing conditions with similar yields. Examination of the 1893 Phylloxera survey data shows that there were 4 vineyards on Stony Point Road, 2 in Peachland. Assuming without any contrary information that these are the vineyards that Gallo asserts were similar, there were 87 vineyards in Sebastopol, Forestville and Trenton townships. Apparently the growers in the area knew that the Stony Point and Peachland areas were not good areas to grow grapes. The vineyard data is even more overwhelming if one includes the northern part of what is now known as the Russian River Valley AVA. The 1893 data in Peninou clearly shows that the expansion area is not similar. 4. Gallo also includes a written opinion in agreement with the new Gallo historical interpretation. from wine historian William F, Heintz. It is interesting to note that Michael J. Heintz is the Director of Public Relations for Gallo Winery. (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_/ai_n27138215) Is the William F. Heintz opinion independent of any Gallo relationship? This opinion by historian William F. Heintz is in conflict with all of the written historical facts in article 2 above. 5. Gallo geographical consultant Shabram seeking to discredit the independent research at The University of California (Paul Vossen 1986) re- defines Vossen’s use of “marine zone” by stating that grapes cannot grow in a marine zone. It is difficult to take Shabram’s definition of the Sonoma Coast AVA as a marine zone seriously. Gallo’s grapes are now located in the Sonoma Coast AVA, a grape-growing region defined by TTB where many successful and highly regarded vineyards are located. Shabram’s argument that if it is not a marine zone it is Russian River Valley is not germane.

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 118
Comment from Youngs, Floyd Richard
Public Submission    Posted: 08/25/2008     ID: TTB-2008-0009-0002

Dec 19,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Stanghellini, Daniella
Public Submission    Posted: 09/16/2008     ID: TTB-2008-0009-0003

Dec 19,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Chamorro, Oswaldo Javier
Public Submission    Posted: 09/16/2008     ID: TTB-2008-0009-0004

Dec 19,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Leras, Alvina Virginia
Public Submission    Posted: 09/16/2008     ID: TTB-2008-0009-0005

Dec 19,2008 11:59 PM ET
Comment from Azevedo, John Albert
Public Submission    Posted: 09/16/2008     ID: TTB-2008-0009-0006

Dec 19,2008 11:59 PM ET