Wine & Viticulture Journal

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2012 · Volume 27 Number 6

THE BUSINESS OF WINE SHOWS • Humidification - keeping more of the angels' share in the barrel • Smartphone app for measuring canopy architecture • Regional focus: Gippsland • Tasting: Sparkling rosé • Profile: Phillip Jones

WISA winner

Chairman’s Award

2011

A UNIQUE YEAST PRODUCTION PROCESS

43® 71B®

BDX® CLOS™ CROSS EVOLUTION® CY 3079® HPS® ICV D254®

ICV D47®

Nouveau Monde DDB Toulouse - Crédit photo : Ze - Retouche : Thierry Delestre

QA23® Rhone 2056® Rhone 2226® THE EXPERTISE OF A YEAST PRODUCER FOR WINEMAKING

For more than 25 years, Lallemand has been selecting the best winemaking yeasts from nature. The ever-more challenging conditions of fermentation have propelled Lallemand to develop a new production process for these natural yeasts (100% natural and non-GMO). Since 2006, the YSEO® process has optimized the reliability of alcoholic fermentation and reduced the risks of fermentation off-flavours.

Lallemand Australia Pty Ltd: phone : +61 (0)8 8276 1200 email: australiaoffice@lallemand.com Lallemand Oenology: Natural solutions that add value to the world of winemaking / www.lallemandwine.com

SENSORIEL® Range What if the terroir you most desire was the one you were about to create?

34 - Morello cherry 30 - Rosewood 28 - Blackberry 26 - Violet 24 - Truffle 20 - Mocha 18 - Roasted 16 - Caramel 14 - Honey 12 - Flint Agence Buenos Aires – RCS Avignon 490352408

10 - Oak

Your next vintage lies ahead of you - what are your dreams for your 2013 wines?

How can you ensure your goals are reached? Now you have a tool which gives you the means to make the wine you desire - the SENSORIEL® barrel range from Cadus.

With SENSORIEL®’s guaranteed results you can orchestrate the aromatic profile of your wine to reveal its own unique qualities. Together with an expert from Cadus you choose which barrel from the SENSORIEL® range is right to bring forward the particular characters of your wine you wish to enhance: vanilla, berry fruit, almond… From the first degustation of your wine the quality of the work that has gone into its creation, the sense of innovation, will be evident. Your wine is unique, it’s how you made it.

See the SENSORIEL® Range at www.tonnelleriecadus.com

TONNELLERIE

CADUS Taste Unique

Publisher: Hartley Higgins General Manager: Elizabeth Bouzoudis Editor Sonya Logan Ph (08) 8369 9502 Email Associate Editors Gary Baldwin Mark Krstic Markus Herderich

Sonya Logan, Editor Fax (08) 8369 9501 sonya@winetitles.com.au Peter Dry Armando Corsi

Editorial Assistance Lauren Jones, Write Lane CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Matthew Bailey Denis Caboulet Laurent Dagan Roberta De Bei Marie-Agnes Ducasse Celine Fauveau Peter Godden Richard Halstead Brad Hickey Cathy Howard Ursula Kennedy David Lennaraz Matteo Marangon Julian McLean Sue Mills Victor Nash Cristian Pozo Ella Robinson Iain Riggs Remi Schneider Richard Smart Paul Smith Ben White Corinna Wright

Jane Bromley Sam Connew Karina Dambergs Jeremy Dineen Paul Evans Sigfredo Fuentes Steve Guy Erl Happ Ann Houlihan Dan Johnson Tony Keys David Lloyd Rodney Marsh David Metcalf Richard Muhlack Patrice Pellerin Andrew Price Dylan Rhymer Amelie Roy Neil Scrimgeour Mark Smith Stephen Tyerman John Whiting

Advertising Sales: Nicole Evans Ph (08) 8369 9515 Fax (08) 8369 9529 Email n.evans@winetitles.com.au Production and Design: Nathan Grant Administration: Esme Parker Subscriptions One-year subscription (6 issues) Australia $77.00 (AUD) Two-year subscription (12 issues) Australia $144.00 (AUD) To subscribe and for overseas prices, visit: www.winebiz.com.au The Wine & Viticulture Journal is published bi-monthly.

Correspondence and enquiries should be directed to Sonya Logan.The views expressed in the Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Journal or its staff.

A

s this issue of the Wine & Viticulture Journal was about to go to print, word broke of the passing of Ray Beckwith, chief chemist for Penfolds who worked alongside Max Schubert and is believed to been the first winemaker in Australia, and maybe even the world, to use pH as a control factor in the prevention of bacterial spoilage.

I was lucky enough to interview Ray in 2000 for an article I wrote on his career in the Australian wine industry for the Grapegrower & Winemaker when I was editor of that publication (now a sister to this one). It was suggested to me that I might like to interview Ray and to highlight his contribution to the Australian wine industry, which had hitherto been little told. If my memory serves me correctly, I spent at least a couple of hours at the Nuriootpa home of Ray and his wife Coral, who were one of the loveliest couples one could ever hope to meet. Aged 88 back then, Ray appeared to recall events in his career with such detail that you’d think they’d happened yesterday.

A humble yet clever man, Ray’s stories of his time in the wine industry were fascinating and my story on him is right up there among the articles I’ve written during my 18-year career working across wine industry publications of which I’m most proud. The obituary on Ray on page 8 of this issue draws on that article.

As one of this Journal’s main focusses is on innovation in the wine and grape industry, it seems entirely appropriate that we salute Ray Beckwith, a sure innovator himself.

The Business of Wine Shows is the theme of this issue of the Journal, a theme that we settled on well over 12 months ago. So, it was serendipitous that wine shows should become such a topic again in the recent months, beginning with the moves by some wine shows to convert from the 20-point to 100-point scoring system, and followed by the talkfest at the Len Evans Tutorial reunion in the Hunter Valley in September.

A summary of that talkfest kicks off our wine show focus, which starts on page 70. This is followed by commentary on the wine show system in Australia by three winemakers, namely David Lloyd, Corrina Wright and Erl Happ, and the organisers of five wine shows who share their challenges, a look at how the wine show system is structured in New Zealand and the US, and a summary of what the latest research is telling us about the influence of wine show awards on consumer spending and the consistency of wine judging results.

If you would like to comment on any of the articles in this issue or offer suggestions for future articles, please don’t hesitate to contact me via sonya@winetitles.com.au.

Cover: Highlighting this issue's focus on the business of wine shows, our cover photo was taken during the judging at the recent Great Australian Shiraz Challenge by Tarni West, of TMW Photography.

Regular features

News Wine Australia WFA Tony Keys Richard Smart AWRI Report

6 10 12 13 16 24

Alternative Varieties Industry profile Regional report Super Wines Varietal report Tasting

67 90 92 98 99 102

Don’t miss a Subscription is free and easy!

Visit www.winebiz.com.au to sign up today.

Address 630 Regency Road, Broadview, South Australia 5083

thing!

Telephone and Fax Ph (08) 8369 9500 Fax (08) 8369 9501

Email

General Editorial Subscriptions Advertising

info@winetitles.com.au sonya@winetitles.com.au subs@winetitles.com.au widsales@winetitles.com.au

Website www.winebiz.com.au Printed by Newstyle Printing, Adelaide, South Australia.

Adelaide ISSN 1838-6547 © Winetitles Pty Ltd, 2012. All rights reserved

A snapshot of wine business, research and marketing content gleaned from international wine media sources, with a focus on Australian news and content.

Distributed to over 10,000 subscribers (and growing) daily

4

www. wi n e b i z.com.au

Win e & V iticultur e Jo ur na l

NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

In this issue

R E GULA R F E ATU R E S

con t en t s

V I T I C ULTU R E

10 WFA (Steve Guy): Breaking down the barriers: addressing market access challenges for exporting Australian wine 12 WFA (Paul Evans): Label campaign sends important message 13 KEY FILES: Gongs, comments and egos 16 RICHARD SMART: Australia at the crossroads: will regionality help?

52 Roostock breeding and associated R&D in the viticulture and wine industry 56 Development of a smartphone application to characterise temporal and spatial canopy architecture and leaf area index for grapevines 62 Taltarni trial shows insectariums still a sanctuary for beneficial insects in spite of increased chemical inputs

W I N E M A K I N G

24 AWRI REPORT: Beyond bentonite 32 Managing H2S production during fermentation – a focus on yeast nutrition 35 The influence of yeast strains on the phenolic and aromatic qualities of red wines 43 Humidification – keeping more of the angels’ share in the barrel 48 Assessment of CMC-induced tartrate stability over an extended period

67 Italian inspiration for novel Nero d’Avola making 69 Clarification of Gruener Veltliner clonal designation

business & marketing

70 Wine shows: the show must go on 74 Wine shows: a winery’s perspective 77 Wine shows: an organiser’s perspective

pro f i l e

90 Phillip Jones: Big rewards in fine detail

83 Wine shows: what’s the score in New Zealand and the US? 85 How important are wine medals and how much can we rely on those who assign them?

R E G I O N AL R E P O R T

88 Wine Intelligence: Inside the box

92 Gippsland, Victoria A N N UAL I N D E X V A R I E TAL R E P O R T

99 Putting the sparkle in sparkling rosé V2 7N 6

109 Index to articles published in the Wine & Viticulture Journal during 2012 W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

5

N E W S

Rejection of floor price for alcohol welcomed by WFA but still frustrated by focus on pricing policies

T

he Winemakers’ Federation of Australia (WFA) has supported the recommendation by the Australian National Preventive Health Agency (ANPHA) to reject minimum alcohol pricing as a policy option to reduce alcohol-related harm, but is surprised and disappointed that it is still advocating price-based mechanisms as a lever for addressing the issue.

ANPHA was established by the Council of Australian Governments in November 2008 to advise the Commonwealth and state and territory governments on preventive health matters as part of the National Partnership Agreement on Preventive Health. The Commonwealth Government asked ANPHA to advise it on the public interest case for a minimum price for alcohol and released its draft report on 1 November.

The key recommendation of the report is that a floor price for alcohol should not be introduced nationally at this time, but that such a measure continue to be considered where it can be effective in more local circumstances.

“While the available evidence shows that, in general, binge and heavier drinkers purchase cheaper alcohol than light and moderate drinkers, modelling the full impact of various minimum price points on Australian consumers switching behaviour at a national level is not currently feasible,” said ANPHA’s chief executive Louise Sylvan.

“Further, Australia has private sector alcohol distribution and retail systems, so unlike other countries that have government controlled alcohol distribution systems which are successfully using

minimum pricing strategies to reduce harmful alcohol use, a price increase would flow to private sector suppliers and retailers potentially creating ‘monopoly’ rents.

“Our agency advises that this would significantly reduce the possible benefits to Australians of such a policy at a national level,” Sylvan said.

However, ANPHA found that the current operation of the Wine Equalisation Tax (WET) was of concern and required reappraisal.

WFA chief executive Paul Evans said given that ANPHA could not justify a public interest case that supported using price via minimum pricing to deal with alcohol abuse, it was hard to see how another pricing mechanism was going to be any different.

“The evidence is unclear on whether price has any significant impact on the drinking behaviours of binge drinkers.

What is clear is that moderate drinkers and the regional communities supported by a viable wine industry would be penalised.

“Issues around harmful and hazardous consumption of alcohol require health, consumer education and cultural change policies not policies based purely on price,” Evans said.

Meanwhile, the WFA has also rejected claims by the Foundation for Alcohol Education and Research (FARE) that the oversupply challenges facing Australia’s wine industry are over and therefore the WET tax should be replaced.

FARE was established in 2001 by the Federal Parliament to distribute funding for programs and research aimed at

preventing harms caused by alcohol and legal substance misuse. In mid-October, FARE released a report into its findings of an analysis it conducted of the oversupply of wine in Australia and progress of the voluntary industry restructure. The reported concluded that the wine industry had stabilised, suggesting that the wine glut was at an end. This meant the wine glut could no longer be used as a reason to delay reforming Australia’s alcohol taxation system including the WET. FARE said the findings put increased pressure on the Government to replace the WET. “The conclusion by FARE that ‘by all objective measures the wine glut is over’ reveals a lack of understanding of all of the relevant issues, which are very complex,” said Evans.

“FARE’s analysis is based on a simplistic focus on a narrow sub-set of production data that tells us very little about the key issue confronting the industry – profitability.

“It fails to grasp that oversupply is about more than just data on the physical surplus. It is also about confronting unprecedented exchanges rates, a high cost base, and fierce competition abroad and at home from foreign wines.

“The industry is still going through considerable structural adjustment, and while some progress has been made on reducing the area under vine the potential remains for ongoing oversupply issues if yields return to normal.

“The suggestion that the industry has now recovered enough to have a $1.5 billion tax increase dictated to it is just not credible,” Evans said.

New executive director for GWRDC Dr Stuart Thomson is the new executive director of the Grape & Wine Research & Development Corporation.

Thomson was formerly the director of research at CRCMining, a multi-milliondollar mining research centre established by the Commonwealth Government under the Cooperative Research Centres Program.

He replaces Neil Fisher who resigned as the GWRDC’s executive director in August.

Chair of the GWRDC Rory McEwen said Thomson had extensive experience in leading strategic research and development programs in both government

6

www.win eb i z .c om.au

and commercial organisations. “Stuart joins the corporation at an exciting time, as the GWRDC’s new five-year strategic plan is being implemented. He will be instrumental in fostering and further enhancing the existing relationships with our key stakeholders, the Commonwealth, Wine Grape Growers Australia and the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia’, said McEwen.

Thomson will officially commence the role on Monday 10 December. Until then, GWRDC general manager Kate Harvey will continue as acting executive director.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Stuart Thomson V27N6

N E W S

Contribution to the NSW wine industry recognised F

ormer Professor of Wine Science at Charles Sturt University, Dr Brian Freeman, has had been acknowledged for his contribution to the New South Wales wine industry.

Freeman was recently presented the 2012 Graham Gregory Award, which is given as part of the NSW Wine Awards each year in recognition of someone who has made a significant contribution to the state’s wine industry His career in the wine industry began as a research scientist with the NSW Department of Agriculture, where he undertook research into mechanical grape pruning. He has also studied grapevine nutrition, soil management and the effect of irrigation on red wine quality, and has had 87 scientific and technical viticultural papers published.

During his time as Professor of Wine

Science at Charles Sturt University, Freeman was involved in the establishment of the National Wine Grape Industry Centre. He has also been president of the Australian Society of Viticulture and Oenology, a committee member of the Australian Wine Research Institute, Australian Society of Wine Educators and the Australian Wine Industry Technical Conference, and an executive member of the NSW Wine Industry Association.

In 1999, Freeman established Freeman Vineyards in the Hilltops region of New South Wales, where he grows two Italian varieties, Rondinella and Corvina - the only plantings in Australia. The fruit from these vines are used to produce the winery’s flagship, the Freeman ‘Secco’ Rondinella Corvina, which has twice won the trophy for best mature dry red at the NSW Wine Awards.

Legend

Brian Freeman

Mycloss Xtra

™

™

Fungicide

Fungicide

The PerfecT Pair for Powdery mildew ProTecTion For more information contact your local Dow AgroSciences representative on

TOLL FREE 1800 700 096 or visit www.dowagrosciences.com.au ™ Trademark of Dow AgroSciences

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

7

N E W S

Vale Ray Beckwith T he man believed to be the first winemaker in Australia, if not the world, to use pH as a control factor in the prevention of bacterial spoilage, Ray Beckwith, has died aged 100.

Born in Murray Bridge in South Australia, Beckwith graduated from Roseworthy with a Diploma of Agriculture in 1932. He then took up a 12-month cadetship in Roseworthy’s chemistry laboratory where, under the guidance of Alan Hickinbotham, he researched pure cultured yeasts which were hardly used by winemakers back then.

When his cadetship at Roseworthy ended, Beckwith took a job with Thomas Hardy & Sons where he became predominantly involved in sparkling wine production. Leslie Penfold Hyland subsequently offered Beckwith a job in the laboratory at Penfold’s Nuriootpa winery where he started work as an assistant to the manager in winemaking and distilling in 1935. He became Penfold’s

chief chemist in 1951 and remained with the company until his retirement in 1973.

During his years at Roseworthy, Beckwith had become interested in the role of pH in winemaking and in 1936 conducted some trials into the effect of various acids and pH on wine. A report on his findings concluded that “pH may be a useful aid in the control of bacteria in wine”.

In 1947 Beckwith was asked to transfer to Magill but he resisted and it was agreed he would travel there three times a fortnight. It was at Magill that Beckwith met Max Schubert, who is credited with creating Penfolds Grange, and tutored him on pH. Beckwith also pioneered the use of atomic absorption spectrophotometry in wine analysis in the 1960s and introduced phase contrast microscopy to the Australian wine industry to assist in the diagnosis of microbiological disorders.

Local wine scoops top honours at Canberra International Riesling Challenge A wine produced in the Canberra District has been judged the best wine in the recent 13th Canberra International Riesling Challenge.

The 2012 Ravensworth Riesling, which subsequently sold out following the release of the results from the Challenge,

was judged best wine of the show, best Riesling in Australia and best Canberra Riesling.

Based at Murrumbateman in New South Wales, 30 minutes north of Canberra, Ravensworth is owned and operated by Bryan and Jocelyn Martin

and family. Brian Croser was granted the Wolf Blass Award in recognition of his contribution to the development and promotion of Riesling, while Andrew Cherry, of Alkoomi Wines, was presented with the encouragement award for up and coming Australian Riesling winemakers.

Are you listed?

Don't miss out in 2013!

Gain maximum exposure with your free listing Ensure the industry can find you and your company • Other industry personnel – Winemakers, Viticulturists, Marketers, Managers…

• Wine show committees • Wine buyers, distributors & retailers • Print & Online coverage

The Directory is a POWERFUL MEDIUM because it stays on desks, by the phone, all year round!

Contact Winetitles on +618 8369 9500 or email wid@winetitles.com.au

8

www.win eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

On behalf of Céline Cousteau, O-I is making a donation to the World Resources Institute’s Reefs at Risk Initiative.

TM

ENVIRONMENTALISTS KNOW GLASS LOVES THE SEA. “Glass comes from nature,” says Céline Cousteau. “It’s made from sand, limestone and soda ash. It’s safe for human life and ocean life. And it’s endlessly recyclable, so it’s sustainable for our blue planet. Choose glass for yourself, for dolphins, for sea turtles, for our future.”

GlassIsLife.com makers of safe, sustainable, ocean-friendly glass packaging

© Owens-Illinois, Inc. Nov/Dec 10525.1.1.15

W I N E AUST R AL I A

Breaking down the barriers: addressing market access challenges for exporting Australian wine

By Steve Guy, General Manager, Regulatory Advice, Wine Australia

Wine Australia is working hard to ensure the sustainable future of Australia’s export efforts by breaking down technical trade barriers and obtaining mutually beneficial agreements with our international markets.

A

ustralian wine is exported to 125 countries. It would be naïve to think that the laws, regulations and requirements of all those countries allow our wine to be freely traded as if export markets were merely an extension of our own. Rather, there are many potential technical impediments facing Australian wine in international markets. This article identifies some of the more common issues confronted

by Australian wine exporters and discusses some of the initiatives through which Wine Australia attempts to minimise potential disruption to wine trade.

Barriers to accessing overseas markets fall into two broad categories: Tariff barriers Tariffs are distinguishable from other taxes, such as excise duty, VAT, GST, etc, in that they apply only to imported products. Hence, they work to make imported products more expensive than they otherwise would be, and provide an advantage to any domestic producers of similar products or to any country that can negotiate preferential treatment. Tariff barriers are not substantial in our more mature markets of the US, Canada and the European Union, although we have seized any chance to remove them.

For example, under the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Australia and the US, staged tariff reductions, which commenced in 2005, will be complete by 2015.

Generally, we rely on FTAs in order to achieve preferential treatment for Australian wine in those markets that have erected high tariff walls, although direct representation by Wine Australia in 2005 may have contributed to the elimination of tariffs on wine entering the Hong Kong market.

China, Japan, Korea and India are

10

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

amongst those countries currently engaged in FTA negotiations with Australia. Tariff barriers affecting bottled wine range from 14% (China) to 150% (India). Some of our competitors, particularly Chile and New Zealand, have been able to obtain lower rates through their FTA arrangements with some of these countries and, thus, have an advantage over Australian exporters. Wine Australia continues to work with Australian Government negotiators to ensure FTA outcomes that are at least as favourable as those obtained by our competitors.

Earlier this year, Australia concluded FTA negotiations with Malaysia. The agreement ensures that no other country can obtain preferential access over Australia to that market. Any tariff concessions that our competitors may achieve in the future will also flow to Australia.

Technical barriers Tariffs directly affect the price of a product and, thus, its competitiveness in the marketplace, but there are other technical impediments to free trade in wine that can be equally frustrating for exporters. Furthermore, tariffs tend to be applied automatically through a relatively transparent process, whereas wine composition, production, labelling and certification provisions may be obscure, unduly restrictive and without basis in legitimate food safety concerns.

Wine Australia assists exporters to navigate the export process by monitoring trends in the technical requirements of international markets and communicating them to the trade.

We publish guides to the requirements of 36 key international markets, accessible through our website www. wineaustralia.com.The following points provide a sample of the advice from these guides and demonstrate the W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

necessity of consulting them prior to entering export markets: • The use of ascorbic acid renders a product unsaleable as ‘wine’ in Korea. If you use ascorbic acid during winemaking, the product must be labelled as ‘other liquor’ and it will attract a higher rate of duty • Copper sulfate cannot be used in wine destined for the Japanese market • Brazil imposes a limit of 0.2g/L for chlorides in wine • The maximum volatile acidity in wine in Russia is 1.1g/L • Maximum sulfur dioxide in red wine in the European Union is 150mg/L and limits on free sulfur dioxide apply in Canada.

Maximum permissible levels for residues of agricultural chemicals applied in the vineyard also vary markedly between countries. A wine may comply with the limits published in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, yet be unmerchantable in the destination market due to lower limits being applicable in the importing country.

The best source of information on these maximum residue limits is the online resource maintained by The Australian Wine Research Institute at www.awri.com.au Wine Australia, in association with relevant government departments and industry bodies, works to overcome some of these technical obstacles, and improve access for Australian wine to overseas markets through various means. In particular, we seek to engage governments in key export markets in negotiations towards binding international treaties designed to eliminate technical trade impediments. The bilateral treaty on trade in wine between Australia and our largest export market, the EU, is one such treaty. Similarly, the V27N6

nothing but the fruit

Winery

On-Board High-frequency linear destemmer and roller sorting table.

Gentle motion keeps stalks and berries intact, unlike traditional rotary destemmers.

Straight to the fermenter or press!

Removes more than 95 % of Petioles, MOG and green waste

*Available in 3 models to suit all winery sizes and sorting requirements.

www.pellenc.com.au

For more information contact: Pellenc Australia 14 Opala St, Regency Park SA 5010 P| 08 8244 7788 F| 08 8244 7788 E| admin@pellenc.com.au

W FA

Mutual Acceptance Agreement (MAA) on winemaking practices, and the Labelling Agreement, negotiated between the members of the World Wine Trade Group of countries (Australia, US, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Chile, Argentina and Georgia) go a long way towards addressing these technical trade barriers.

The latter agreement, for example, renders it possible to design a label that can be applied to a wine bottle in

Australia, allowing it to be sold in virtually all our significant export markets, without any amendment.

Wine Australia also builds relationships with counterpart regulators around the world. These relationships are designed to provide early warning of impending regulatory changes that may affect Australian exporters, and to minimise trade disruption if, and when, breaches of importing countries’ laws are detected.

Given that most technical trade barriers have equal impact on our competitors, we work with those countries through international bodies such as FIVS in an attempt to obtain outcomes that are mutually beneficial. Much of this work is intricate, detailed and protracted and there is never a guarantee of a satisfactory resolution. But, it is also critical to the sustainable future of Australia’s export WVJ efforts.

Label campaign sends important message

By Paul Evans, Chief Executive, Winemakers’ Federation of Australia

The response from several Australian wine producers and the Federal Government have been positive in supporting WFA’s campaign to see pregnancy-related warning labels on our bottles and casks.

W

FA’s campaign to have Australian winemakers adopt pregnancy warnings on bottles and casks has created the anticipated level of interest, but I am pleased to say that the response has been positive.

Certainly, the support of the Federal Government is encouraging.

Ministers Joe Ludwig and Mark Butler and Parliamentary Secretary Catherine King released a joint media release on the day of WFA’s announcement, welcoming the initiative and noting that it is “a real indication of how seriously the wine industry takes its social responsibility”.

That is important because our message to Canberra all along has been that this is something the industry believes in and will commit to when it can be done in the right way.

By the ‘right way’, I mean two things. First, the logistics of making it happen are appropriate to the wine industry. Secondly, it is part of a broader, co-ordinated campaign. We know that labels alone will not give us the result we are after.

The key to what we announced in late September is that it is a partnership between WFA and DrinkWise that will allow winemakers to be a part of a broader campaign to change Australia’s attitude to alcohol through education and information.

We have always argued that while warning labels may increase awareness, in isolation they do not change behaviour. The evidence shows that clearly.

So, our campaign combines a specific pregnancy warning (either in words or using the internationally recognised pregnantlady pictogram) with the broader DrinkWise invitation to ‘get the facts’ from its website about a range of issues related to drinking choices.

Label messages will be supported by a retail point-of-sale campaign as DrinkWise works with government to provide educational materials to consumers in outlets where alcohol is sold, including cellar doors.

I invite everyone to visit the website (www.drinkwise.org.au) to see just how comprehensive the DrinkWise approach is. I think it is

12

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

significant that some of the most genuine attempts to treat alcohol abuse as a social issue – such as the ‘kids absorb your drinking’ television campaigns – have been funded by the alcohol industry through an organisation it established.

WFA has worked with DrinkWise to allow all winemakers to use this key messaging at no cost to them, and we look forward to collaborating with DrinkWise on other campaigns in the future.

WFA knows label changes are more complex for winemakers than for beer or spirits producers because of the wide range of brands, styles and vintages, as well as the time delay between production, bottling, cellaring and eventual sale.

However, as the peak industry association, we also know it is important for the industry to not only meet government and community expectations, but also to demonstrate its genuine commitment to take a leadership role in an area where there are real community concerns.

Consumers will begin to see the impact on retail shelves soon. As we noted in our media release, Australia’s three largest producers – Accolade Wines, Treasury Wine Estates and Premium Wine Brands – have already begun incorporating the new joint messaging and will be more than 50 percent compliant by the middle of 2013.

The way is now open for everyone to come onboard. In saying that, however, I must acknowledge that a number of winemakers have been using pregnancy warnings for some time. As one winemaker said in an email in response to our announcement, “(We) have been doing it for years – welcome to the club!”

We support pregnancy warnings because it is the clear advice of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) that, on the basis of current research findings, it is safest not to drink alcohol when pregnant. In a similar vein, we refer to NHMRC guidelines when urging consumers to drink in moderation.

However, we will continue to vehemently oppose tobacco-style mandatory label warnings and the increasingly regular calls for the scope, size and severity of warnings to increase. Education and WVJ information is the key.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

K E Y

F I L E S

Gongs, comments and egos

By Tony Keys

After almost 40 years in the wine game, Tony Keys gives his opinion on the current status of the Australian wine show system and the value of our wine writers.

T

his is possibly one of the most difficult articles I will ever write.

It’s akin to stepping into the sacred paddock and poking a pointed stick up the backside of Apis, the sacred bull of the Egyptians, grazing there.

The business of wine is a complex one, as it’s interwoven on many different levels. There are grapegrowers who sell the crop and, apart from enjoying a glass of wine, have no more than a passing interest in the production and distribution of the finished project.

A large number of wineries include vineyards, therefore, have a stake in both farming and production aspects.

Many winemakers own or have a stake in a winery and act as wine show judges, writers, bloggers or commentators on the industry. This puts them in all categories of wine from growing through making and commentating on their own and others’ wines.

I have come to the conclusion that the show system has survived for two separate reasons: one being tradition…The other is an almost desperate need for winery proprietors (winemakers or not) for outside recognition, driven by insecurity. The statement ‘improving the breed’ only appears to have merit. It is my experience that winemakers on receiving show results do not buy a case of the winning wines and try to make theirs the same.

Rather, they curse the judges and hope they get a gong in the next show entered.

Let’s not forget we live in a democracy.

Therefore, to be involved in any number or all of the above is not illegal. More so, the integration or cross-fertilising of talent is to be welcomed rather than demonised.

Also manufacturers of

• S G Spur Pruners • Single Side Pruners • Vine Cane Sweepers • Hydraulic Power Packs • Double Acting Cutter Bars

Having said that, I sometimes feel there are aspects of crossover roles between winemakers acting as judges and commentators that do not sit in harmony with each other. In articles I write for this

SUMMER TRiMMing

AUSTRALIAN MADE PRUNERS

For further information visit our website at www.spagnolo.com.au or contact: Ph (03) 5021 1933 Fax (03) 5021 5233 Email sales@spagnolo.com.au Mildura Victoria Australia V2 7N 6

Summer Trimming • Smooth cutting action • Unique quick-change blade system • Sizes available from 600mm to 2100mm • Cutter bars can be used for summer trimming and winter pruning

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

Vineyard & Orchard Sweepers • Single and double sided • Spring-loaded head enables it to glide around posts and vine trunks.

• Optional hydraulic lift, tilt and side shift cylinders.

• Ideal for cleaning up uneven terrain • Durable powdercoated finish

www.winebiz. com . au

13

K E Y

F I L E S

publication, I usually present a view and invite comment from others. This time it’s a standalone personal piece, which is open to criticism from readers.

The worth of wine shows The worth of wine shows has been debated for decades. The usefulness of wine writers is more a current issue. On wine shows, there was a recent weekend debate held in the Hunter Valley, ‘Wine shows in the 21st Century’, chaired by Iain Riggs, of Brokenwood. I didn’t attend, but reports from the debate lean towards much discussion with a lot of old ground

conversion table from 20 to 100, is not a sign of confidence.

It is right saying a bronze medal should not be considered as third place, but the consumer thinks differently. Anyhow, is bronze or silver really of worth in the retail and consumer world? I noted some talk at the debate concerning the consumer.

After almost 40 years in the wine game, I’m not convinced the makers of wine have a great understanding of the consumers of wine. There are exceptions, such as the keen wine lover, but the majority is not understood. It’s the middlemen who understand consumers i.e., the retailer.

Less people read wine columns than wine writers think, or even claim they do. As with wine shows, change is needed…a huge part of the writer problem is there being many willing to offer copy free-of-charge to get on bandwagon of free samples and junkets. covered and covered again, and not much resulting in the way of progress or radical thinking.

My view of the worth of wine shows?

I’m ambivalent, and reading the comments presented at the debate it is easy see the many problems. But, are they really as complex as the attendees made out? Wine shows exist because they generate money for those that organise them. There may be the odd loss, but if a show posted a loss for several years, it would fold.

Wineries enter shows voluntarily, therefore, if one side is giving product and paying to be there, with the other side receiving and making a profit, so be it. Is it not the nature of basic commerce? If the system is not good enough (and, to me, it has looked shaky - even shonky - for years) how come it has survived?

I have come to the conclusion that the show system has survived for two separate reasons: one being tradition, which is easy to understand. The other is an almost desperate need for winery proprietors (winemakers or not) for outside recognition, driven by insecurity.

The statement ‘improving the breed’ only appears to have merit. It is my experience that winemakers on receiving show results do not buy a case of the winning wines and try to make theirs the same. Rather, they curse the judges and hope they get a gong in the next show entered.

The fact the show committees cannot seem to make up their mind on what point system to use or not use, or feel the need to invent a complicated mathematical

14

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

But, as retailers shrink in number it puts the understanding in fewer hands.

The industry often rants at the power of the supermarket, but it’s supermarkets that understand consumers. It would be worth the industry taking onboard, as it’s how supermarkets became as powerful as they are.

What doesn’t appear to have been covered at the debate is why wine producers seem to give such little consideration to the wines they enter into shows. The mentality used looks to be ‘enter all’, as a medal might stick to one of them. The constant gripe of judges being asked to review 150 wines a day is valid, but it simply shouldn’t be an issue. It’s a problem because companies are not selective in the wines they pick to enter into shows and the shows are greedy and rake in the cash. I see a certain lack of respect in the fundamental approach of wineries and show organisers to the principle of submission, judgment and outcome.

If it costs judges time and money, why do they do it? Ignoring all their comments about helping the industry and gaining knowledge, I simply say because they want to. They enjoy the experience but, mainly, I suspect it’s because it’s good for the ego. I don’t accept the altruistic reasons many who judge put forward. If there isn’t the time or they can’t meet the expense, don’t do it. I note wine writers who are on the judging circuit often get one or several articles out of a show, which could be W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

considered a form of payment. What I can’t pin down is the real incentive; if wine producers are not being selective in entries, what can be their incentive in entering wine shows? The possibility of a gold medal or trophy is the obvious answer, but the overall quality of entries doesn’t bear that out. If a wine company pre-judged all its wine entries and were honest, there would be fewer entries, and few wines would be below a bronze standard.

If winemakers are also judges, they shouldn’t complain about the time involved or the dates when shows take place. If their time could be better spent improving the wines they make, then they should use the time to do so.

I cannot accept the hypocrisy of the wine assessment of any winemaker that acts as a judge but doesn’t enter the wine they make in shows. It doesn’t have to be the show they are judging, but sometime during the year, the wine they make should be up for judging, somewhere.

In the 21st Century, it’s a global marketplace. Unless the Australian wine industry starts to think global, it’s going to become stagnant. The domestic market is not large enough to absorb all the wine made in Australia.

The significance of the show system to the business of wine is a gap difficult to bridge. Marketing and PR people make a noise about medals and trophies won. I don’t doubt those that say a medal on a label helps to sell wine, but do ponder the question: if a $15 bottle of wine wins a trophy, can the increase in sales be monitored against a wine selling at $12? Or, do the increased sales only come from other $15 wines?

Then again, if a consumer’s budget is normally $20, do they drop to $15?

Until a medal awarded at an Australian show generates sales globally because that show is highly recognised internationally, such as the Decanter World Wine Awards, has any Australian show got real merit?

Focussing on China, which seems to be sending many wine companies into orgasmic frenzy on its possibilities, is the Australian wine show system geared to help that market understand the worth of them? I would say not, nor was it ever geared towards the UK or US market. Taking it as a collective, the show system sits on its backside doing very little. It’s a domestic set-up; local wines, local people all going to the country fair for a good day out. Have a ride on the merry-go-round and back home for tea and toast with grandma.

It’s all very indulgent, self-serving and often puerile.

V27N6

K E Y

What worth the wine writer?

Several wine writers are wine show judges, and there is nothing wrong with that. The question for this article is what in the 21st Century is the worth of the wine writer? The answer that springs to mind is wine writers are not worth a great deal.

This is not a tirade against wine writers or the quality of their work. It’s an observation based on the declining columns carried in newspapers which, in turn, is based on the inability of wine columns to generate advertising for the publication.

It’s the same situation in the UK, and with the decline of print media and the rise of online content, it’s a situation that will continue. Also worth taking into consideration is that in its most basic form, reviewing a wine is no more than opinion. Anyone who can be bothered to voice their opinion can do so with ease using the internet, and there are plenty of wine blogs out there to prove the point.

Fairfax publications state the Good Wine Guide sells 25,000 copies. In the Fairfax 2012 publishing menu, it says, ‘Unlike other wine books in the market, our reviews focus on the most current vintages’. It also says, ‘Our team of expert writers and designers can create a custom Fairfax book for you or your company’. What they don’t say is the book is compiled by wine writer Nick Stock.

The value for Fairfax is in the book, not the author. Note the repeated use of ‘our’. If Stock stops writing it, Fairfax will find someone who will. Therefore, what worth the writer? The opposite of that is James Halliday’s Wine Companion, published by Hardie Grant. The question here is what happens when Halliday stops writing? One assumes there will be some financial arrangement in place where the name will be retained until such time as it becomes outdated.

Halliday, along with Max Allen, have columns in the Weekend Australian. The

newspaper is said to be costing News Corporation as much as $20 million a year. The cover price has recently increased dramatically; how long it survives in a print format is hard to judge. But, it appears its change to fully digital may be sooner rather than later.

It’s also said that Fairfax publications, including The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Canberra Times, will be ‘digital only’ by 2019. Digital wine column readership can be tracked with greater precision at the moment than a newspaper or magazine. Print media claims readership based on circulation.

Often circulation is dubious, as it includes vast amounts of publications given away and does not always include the returns.

The Age has a circulation reported by Roy Morgan of 592,000 (paid) copies on weekdays. What is harder to ascertain is the exact readership of its various sections. Not all are interested in food and wine, so will never look at the Epicurean section. It can be assumed there is enough advertising income to cover costs and make a profit. Once online, it could reveal only that the recipes are read and not the wine reviews, or it can show the reverse.

Sometimes articles written for The Age will appear in The Herald or The Canberra Times and vice versa. The logic of reducing wine writing staff across the three mastheads is obvious and, as time passes, looks to be real possibility.

It appears the value of a wine column is of greater worth to what can be considered the serious newspapers, such as The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, etc.

The tabloids are different and have gone some way to dumping wine columns, an example being the individual wine writers for Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Courier-Mail and The Advertiser being replaced with the one drinks editor, Tony Love.

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

In theory, Love should be the most powerful wine writer in Australia, but the wine content is so thin it would be untrue to say so. What it shows is the people who buy those tabloids do so for other reasons than wine or even food.

An article by Love is becoming a rare event; the best that can be expected is six wine reviews, but not in all editions.

Some may contain six, but others may only have four, three or none. However, the articles, no matter how scarce, and the reviews, no matter the amount, show that Love is still receiving a full spectrum of samples. This leads me to the assumption that the industry rates his publications worthy of the time and expense of getting a ‘Love review’ or a few words written in an article, if one should appear. What I don’t understand is why?

In conclusion, my view is it’s the publication that is important, with Halliday being the one exception. I also believe less people read wine columns than wine writers think, or even claim they do. As with wine shows, change is needed. Unfortunately, I can offer little advice for the direction for either shows or writers. If you think that's a cop-out, don’t, as a huge part of the writer problem is there being many willing to offer copy free-of-charge to get on the bandwagon of free samples and junkets. I have only been involved in the Australian show system once, and made the decision not to continue. I did not agree with the set-up and I found the dinner and presentations extremely boring.

To comment on this article, email editor Sonya Logan, WVJ sonya@winetitles.com.au

Now farmers can read Australasia’s leading farm dealers and products magazine AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ & DEALERS’ JOURNAL

ON LINE

NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE FOR MORE READERS AND INCREASED BUSINESS

Simply go to

Visit www.afdj.com.au today to view your copy online

www.afdj.com.au AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ & DEALERS’ JOURNAL

subscriptions NOW For AVAILABLE ONLINE

t/04d04258/40-12

The question for this article is what in the 21st Century is the worth of the wine writer? The answer that springs to mind is wine writers are not worth a great deal. This is not a tirade against wine writers or the quality of their work. It’s an observation based on the declining columns carried in newspapers which, in turn, is based on the inability of wine columns to generate advertising for the publication.

F I L E S

call Cathy onREADERS (03) AND 9888 4822 FOR MORE INCREASED BUSINESS

AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ & DEALERS’ JOURNAL Visit www.afdj.com.au today to view your copy o www.winebiz. com . au

15

R ic h a rd s m a r t

Australia at the crossroads: will regionality help?

By Richard Smart. Email: richard@smartvit.com.au

In this article, Richard Smart shares his views about Brand Australia, and promoting regionalisation in Australian wine. Richard argues that Australia has too many wine regions, many of them too small to be effective contributors to the wine trade.

T

his article has been written following several days spent presenting seminars on Pinot Noir research results in Tasmania, Yarra Valley and Mornington Peninsula.

During the travels with a group of colleagues, we discussed the state of the Australian wine sector, which inevitably led to a discussion of the present ‘strategy’ of promoting regionalisation in Australia as a method to revive the export success of Australian wine. This seemed appropriate for the cool climate regions we visited, but is it appropriate everywhere?

Such an approach of promoting regionality does seem reasonable, at least on face value. After all, we hear that Brand Australia as a name has been tarnished in overseas markets, and there is a need for change.

However, how can we be sure that replacement of Brand Australia with multiple regional brands will be effective?

The ‘A+ Australian wines’ website (www.apluswines.com) extols the virtues of more than 60 regions and 100 grape varieties, among other attractions. At first glance this may suggest, as for Europe, some regional specialisation in varieties. This is not so, as we shall see. If there are not varietal differences between Australian wine regions, then what differences are there?

GIs: Australia’s wine regions defined A few decades ago, Australia’s wine regions were notional and poorly defined. That was all to change with Australia’s exporting of wine to Europe, which required the Australian Government to develop and register descriptions of viticultural (or wine) regions. Consequently, the so-called ‘geographical indications’ (or GIs)

16

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

under the Wine Australia Corporation Act 1980 was created.

The following statement comes from the Wine Australia website (www.wineaustralia.com): "A geographical indication (GI) for wine is an indication that identifies the wine as originating in a region or locality where a given quality, reputation or other characteristics of the wine is essentially attributable to the geographical origin. GIs are determined by the Geographical Indications Committee and are listed on the Register of Protected Geographical Indications and Other Terms, which is maintained by Wine Australia. The process for establishing a GI is set out in the Wine Australia Corporation Act and Wine Australia Corporation Regulations. The Geographical Indications Committee (GIC) is a statutory committee of Wine Australia established in 1994 and its role is to deal with applications for the determination of GIs in relation to both Australia and foreign countries.

The GIC requires an application from an individual winemaker or winegrape grower or an association or declared organisation representing growers and/or winemakers. When assessing an application for a GI, the GIC must consider relevant criteria (see Regulation 25) and must consult with any declared wine growers¹ or winemakers organisations (Australian GI applications only). It may also consult any other organisation or individual." Australia is divided into wine ‘zones’, which can include the name of the country, state or larger region, like ‘south eastern Australia’ and ‘Tasmania’. The next category down includes ‘regions’, like Barossa Valley, and there have been some celebrated court cases about boundary locations of some regions, for example, Coonawarra, in South Australia. A few regions are divided into sub-regions.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

I have been studying the size of GI regions to consider if there might be a minimum size above which regional promotion might be effective. My particular point of reference was the present size of Tasmania’s plantings.

At around 1300 hectares, is Tasmania large enough to make its presence felt in the wine marketplace? Tasmania is an unusual GI, since all vineyards in the state are included in the one zone.

Data for production and area is now presented for GI regions by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Data for 2010 was analysed, and is shown in Table 1. There appeared some inconsistency of data for some regions, which are not presented as a result.

The data do, however, represent the majority of plantings in Australia, and most of it in proclaimed GI regions.

Table 1 shows results for 43 GI regions. Remember, Tasmania is a zone, not strictly a GI ‘region’.

Surprisingly, Tasmania, with 1250ha, is number 29 of 43 in the ascending sequence of region bearing area.

Interestingly, there are more GI regions with smaller vineyard areas than Tasmania than there are larger than it. The total bearing area of 28 regions smaller than Tasmania is 12,949ha (average is 494ha per region), and total of the 14 regions larger than Tasmania is 103,365ha (average 7383ha).

This analysis indicates the very small area of the majority of Australian GI regions, and I wonder if some are so small as to be insignificant in promoting their products in the wine trade. That would certainly appear to be the case.

Why does Australia have so many small wine regions? Is this for parochial reasons? By contrast, America has 189 AVAs (American Viticultural Areas), which vary in area from Ohio River Valley, at 16.6 million acres to Cole Ranch, at 150 acres V27N6

R ic h a rd s m a r t

(total land area, not planted vineyard area). The US produces around 2.5 fold the amount of wine of Australia (2010 statistics), but I query if the American process has also allowed too many small regions. Admittedly, the US system allows counting of sub-regions within regions, but there are 14 AVAs of less than 1000ha land size, which is very small indeed.

The Australian GIs span a range of climates. The mean January temperature of the GIs ranges from 15-25°C, which is about as large as could be found in the world. Climate differences between regions are the major difference likely to produce distinctive wine styles, and should be recognised and promoted as such.

Are contiguous wine regions an Australian first?

Wine region maps normally show discrete regions, as is the case for the famous wine regions of Europe. The Australian approach is different, and for reasons I have not seen explained, many wine regions are contiguous. One wine region typically shares a common boundary with another, yet, the regions

Figure 1. The wine regions of Victoria. Courtesy Wine Australia. are supposed to be homogeneous and discrete, which seems to argue against common boundaries.

One might imagine such a mapping approach justified when wine regions

are on an immense plain, with small climate gradients, as is the case for inland Australia. However, it would seem increasingly difficult to justify where climate gradients are more

Bordeaux places its trust in CaduS...

In 2011 Bordeaux became one of our biggest markets 39 Grands Crus Classés already place their trust in us....

Why wouldn’t you ?

CaduS Honor your Terroir

See ORIGINE Range

Contact our Agent : Bouchard Cooperages - Tel. : 707-257-3582 - sales@bouchardcooperages.com - www.bouchardcooperages.com Tonnellerie Cadus - France - wwww.tonnelleriecadus.com

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

17

R ic h a rd s m a r t

Table 1. The 2010 bearing area for Australian GI regions, sorted by size.

Rank

Region smaller than Tasmania

2010 (ha)

1

Shoalhaven Coast

40

2

Beechworth

57

3

Kangaroo Island

89

4

The Peninsulas

93

5

Peel

96

6

Sunbury

129

7

Henty

183

8

Southern Highlands

202

9

Macedon Ranges

224

10

Gippsland

235

11

Tumbarumba

254

12

Swan Hill (NSW)

308

13

Granite Belt

331

14

Strathbogie Ranges

369

15

Gundagai

408

16

Southern Fleurieu

414

17

Hilltops

484

18

Grampians

506

19

Geelong

515

20

Perricoota

671

21

Mornington Peninsula

752

22

Bendigo

771

23

Swan District

784

24

Rutherglen

853

25

Pyrenees

874

26

Adelaide Plains

880

27

Geographe

1181

28

Heathcote

1245

29

Tasmania

1251

Rank

Region larger than Tasmania

2010 (ha)

30

Yarra Valley

2440

31

Great Southern

2804

32

Hunter

3450

33

Adelaide Hills

3861

34

Swan Hill (VIC)

3869

35

Clare Valley

4801

36

Margaret River

4894

37

Langhorne Creek

5957

38

McLaren Vale

6490

39

Murray Darling – NSW

6533

40

Murray Darling – VIC

8339

41

Barossa Valley

9763

42

Riverland

20,009

43

Riverina

20,154

18

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

marked, for example, in mountainous regions or near the coast.

A notable example of common boundaries is for Victoria, as shown in Figure 1, although all states apart from Queensland have contiguous wine zones. In Victoria, only Geelong is not contiguous with another.

Time will tell if this emerges as a problem for Australian wine regions, and their authenticity. It may, however, prove a thorn in the side of the regionality promotion.

Regional differentiation in Australia: The situation with varieties Europe has had centuries to develop regional characteristics. These are essentially by geography, and variety. Any student of wine should know that vine varieties differ from region to region, as may be found in France, Italy, Portugal and Spain. There is no doubt that this differentiation of varieties is a major reason, perhaps larger than geography, for differences in wine styles between regions. That seems to me to be the nub of the regionality argument; that there are distinctive wine styles from each region.

With more than 100 varieties in more than 60 regions, does Australia show regional specialisation? Sadly, no.

In common with other New World countries (and some regions in the Old World), production is dominated by the so-called ‘international varieties’. Of course, this is largely a consequence of varietal labelling. So, in Australia, using Wine Australia 2008 statistics, some 63 percent of the crush was due to three varieties: Chardonnay, Shiraz and Cabernet Sauvignon. The remaining top 10 varieties, in order of production, were Merlot, Semillon, Sauvignon Blanc, Colombard, Pinot Noir, Riesling and Muscat Gordo, bringing the total to 88%, with the next 10 bringing the share to 97%.

In Australia, there is limited specialisation in varieties by region. If varieties become popular, they tend to be planted in all regions, and especially the hot regions. We have seen this for all of the major varieties, and I wonder if such practices enhance the reputation of some varieties.

Australia utilises a limited winegrape range. There is some specialisation of varieties in very hot and very cold regions, but not much elsewhere. The following is a list of varieties that I have seen to make excellent wines in other places, some of them well adapted to hot climates where we badly need new varieties to improve quality. Each variety is followed by its percentage of total production in 2008: Petit Verdot (1.3%), Durif (0.2%), Tempranillo (0.2%), Malbec (0.14%), Touriga (0.01%), Graciano (>0.00%), Tannat (>0.00%) and Alicante (not listed) for reds, and Verdelho (1.1%), Viognier (0.7%) and Vermentino (not listed) for whites.

Conclusion My arguments here are that Australia has too many wine regions, most of them so small as to make them ineffective contributors to wine trade. There also seems to be flaws in their geographical definition, since many have common boundaries. There is limited specialisation of variety use, which limits distinctiveness between regions.

This situation would appear to contrast with the Old World, which may render any promotional campaign based on regionalisation as having limited benefit.

In future columns I will consider the question as to whether the Australian wine sector needs to refresh its WVJ strategic planning.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

O UTL O O K

Outlook Conference delivers message that there is still work to be done but there is good cause for optimism

By Sonya Logan

Editor of the Wine & Viticulture Journal Sonya Logan attended the recent Wine Industry Outlook Conference in Melbourne and summarises the key messages from a selection of the presentations from the main program

T

he future health of Australia’s wine industry, including its biggest opportunities and challenges, were examined during the two-day Wine Industry Outlook held in Melbourne in late October.

Around 270 delegates gathered to hear talks by local and international presenters on trends in the global wine market, projected sales of Australian wine in the domestic market over the next five years, online wine sales, the outlook for Australian wine in the US, UK and China, pricing structures, the challenges facing the wine industry from the anti-alcohol lobby, trends in social media that can be taken advantage of by wine producers and the degree to which it is revolutionising marketing, the growth potential and pitfalls of the Chinese market, and the potential gains from regional branding.

President of the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia (WFA), Tony D’Aloisio, kickstarted the main program with a presentation aimed at delivering the state of play in the Australia wine industry.

D’Aloisio first urged delegates not to lose sight of the industry’s “positives” during its current challenges, namely its “good industry base, great product and history of performance across grapegrowing, winemaking, marketing and distribution”.

“The adaptive attributes of our industry, our strong focus on the consumer and the dedication within winemaking to product integrity and value have placed us in a good position to deal with the challenges we face,” D’Aloisio said. “Sure, we have challenges, but we have the underlying strengths to work with of quality and customer focus and a globally competitive product.”

He noted that the wine industry’s central challenge continued to be low profitability throughout the chain “from vine to consumer glass”, but said there were “good signs emerging for improved profitability”, although there was “quite a way to go to deal with the challenges we face and return to acceptable profit levels”.

Bringing supply and demand back into balance was one way this would be achieved, and there were signs that this process was under way. On the supply side, these signs V2 7N 6

James Halliday (left) with James March, communications and marketing manager with the Barossa Grape & Wine Association. included the reduction in land under vines from around 166,000ha in 2008 to 145,000ha, improving grape prices (the national average for vintage 2012 increased 11% reversing a decade-long downward trend), and the fall in the inventory-to-sales ratio to its lowest level since 1995.

But he warned that the current vineyard bearing area, in spite of recent reductions, was capable of producing a vintage of 1.9 million tonnes, grapegrowers were finding it difficult to absorb any rises in costs due to the deflated grape prices of recent years, and costs of production for winemakers continued to increase with little or no movement in retail price points to offset these.

With respect to demand, D’Aloisio said the positive signs included some easing and reduction of discounted wine such as cleanskins, and some evidence of producers achieving better profit margins. But exchange rates remained a concern, affecting the competitiveness of Australian wines in export markets, particularly against the likes of Chile, Argentina and South Africa. The domestic market was also facing increasing competition from imports, which due to exchange rates were cheaper than they had been in years past.

D’Aloisio said the industry was tackling these challenges and referred W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

to companies, trends and initiatives that promised improved profitability, such as Treasury Wine Estates in opening new markets for its (and Australian) wine in China and Russia, Australia’s First Families of Wine, the growth of on-line distribution channels and the “competitive tension” it will place on the major retailers in the longterm, the increase in emphasis on direct sales by smaller wineries using the web and social media, and companies moving out of unprofitable ventures.

“Over the next two to three years we need to drive profit improvement initiatives with a greater sense of urgency. In the competitive and free market economy we have – and which has delivered so much to Australia – the industry players will continue to drive to deal with the challenges to lift profit. Each industry player needs to continue to evaluate and assess and respond to market changes. We have done that well, but we need to do better.

“Making significant contributions to this drive will be WFA’s primary objective,” D’Aloisio concluded.

An overview of the recent trends in the wine markets of Australia’s major competitors in Spain, Argentina, Chile as well as the UK, US and China was the crux of the next presentation by Mark Soccio, a ▶ senior analyst with Rabobank. www.winebiz. com . au

19

O UTL O O K

From left, Dim Georgiadis, of FABAL, Chester Osborn, of d’Arenberg, in McLaren Vale, and Rivlerand grapegrower and a director of CCW Cooperative Jim Caddy.

Soccio said that many of Australia’s New World competitors, such as Spain and Argentina, were continuing to raise the quality of their production. He said the Spanish had invested a lot of time and effort to find out what their competitors, such as Australia, were up to and what’s happening in markets at home and abroad. He suggested this market research was as good, if not better, than

anything seen in the industry today.

Exports of bottled varietal wine from Argentina continued to grow strongly, while exports of bulk varietal wine had “shot up” in the last 12-18 months primarily because bottling costs in the country had risen sharply due to the dire state of the economy. Furthermore, the peso remained “dramatically over-valued” against the US dollar, affecting export

earnings. Although Argentina had tried to raise prices to combat this, the move was beginning to affect its competitiveness and long-term sustainability in a tough global marketplace.

Soccio said Chile was continuing to improve the quality, quantity and branding of its products and was now producing and exporting more wine than Australia. In 201112, Chilean exports rebounded from the earthquake-affected 2010 vintage, partly off the back of higher bulk sales to the US, and given the large 2012 harvest, another strong year was expected in 2012-13.

In the UK, Australia was still the leading supplier in the off-premise market, where it and its competitors were doing their best to quit unprofitable price points. The average retail selling price (RSP) of a 750ml bottle of Australian wine in the UK off-premise market during the 12 months to August 2012 was £5.03. Soccio said that although New Zealand (£6.29), France (£5.63) and Argentina (£5.41) had achieved a higher RSP during the same period, Australia was a much larger supplier to this channel than these countries which suggested some level of brand equity for Australian producers, but the gap between them and

G N I K S A T I T L U M Y B S T S O C N O I T DUC

STAINABILITY SU TS EE M E G D E WHERE CUTTING

SAVE PRO

put ctive, low in tion for effe lu so s. ve se si r pas hen ucing tracto ith a compre urces by red g growers w so in d re vi d ro p an e e tim ers ar EEDER while saving Fischer mow D BIO-BRUSH W weed control EE SP ee fr GH HI al ic & or chem RVINE MOWERS DE UN TO W RO INTERwatch us on STABLE JU AD TH ID W Y LINEAR HYDRAULICALL search for

FISCHER GL4

FISCHER BV2

ER

FISCHER TWIST

GL4K

Improve your

LS GREEN CREDENyoTIAur and slash T CARBON FOOTPRIN

alis Fischer Austr eo Showcase Vid 1&2

YOUR BS AND REDUCE CONSOLIDATE JO A MINIMUM! TO RIP ST DE HERBICI ting nt & rear moun ment • Available for fro herbicide equip ted ra eg int th • Available wi ce an en int ma low • Heavy duty &

TION S A TOTAL SOLU OFFERS GROWER NTROL CO ED WE IVE FOR EFFECT ard Managers Australian Viney • Acclaimed by options n tio ra gu nfi co us • Offering vario eyard rows vin d lve de d t an • Available for fla

G SYSTEM, -BRUSH WEEDIN HIGH SPEED BIO EE LINES TR D AN S IN VINE REMOVING WEED mounting r rea & nt fro • Available for m and as split syste er hydraulic) ated (electric ov • Joy stick oper m) rp 00 (26 h us br ed • High speed we

WE PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE TECHNICAL AFTER-SALE SUPPORT e: jmuggli@fischeraustralis.com.au p: 08 9433 3555 f: 08 9433 3566

20

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

For a free customised recommendation, please contact Jurg Muggli on 0409 572 581 For quick enquiries and to view demo videos, please visit us on www.fatcow.com.au TWISTER technology is also available in combo with Fischer BV2 - video available soon!

Follow us on Facebook To view our full range, please visit www.fmg.bz.it

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

O UTL O O K

their counterparts from the likes of the US, Chile, Spain and South Africa was closing.

In the UK on-premise market, France, Italy and Spain continue to dominate.

Soccio said in the US, Australia was continuing to lose “significant ground” following attempts to increase prices to combat declining profitability, but it remained the second largest supplier of wine imports to the market as a whole.

In China, Soccio said that although France remained a “juggernaut” in this market, Australia had an “enviable position” as the second most consumed foreign wine with attractive pricing.

In a presentation that painted an encouraging outlook for Australian wine in the domestic market, Michael Walton from Nielsen Pacific provided an overview of the recent and projected spending habits of Australian wine consumers.

He said sales of alcohol had grown by around $1.4b in the last five years, with wine having a 30% share of that growth, compared with spirits at 44% and beer at 25%. The bottled wine market had grown by $416 million during this period, of which $194m was in private labels. By comparison, the cask wine market had fallen by $84m.

Andrew Wilsmore (left), general manager of policy and government affairs, and Paul Evans, chief executive, Winemakers’ Federation of Australia.

He said that of the growth in bottled wine sales, the majority (68%) had been in the over $10-per-bottle price point.

Walton said that in the last five years, 75% of the growth in wine sales in Australia was in imported brands, compared with 10% for Australian brands and 15% for private and retailer brands.

However, forecasts by Nielsen Pacific for the next three years suggested that Australian brands would represent 70%

of the growth, compared with 20% for imported wines and 10% for private and retailer brands.

Walton noted that in the last 12 months, wine brands owned by family companies had grown faster than private label and retailer brands.

The Nielsen Pacific analysis shows that there is the potential for Australian wine sales to grow by $320m over the next three years, with 51% coming from family

Take The guesswork ouT of LighTbrown appLe MoTh ConTroL Eggs laid on leaves after spraying are killed

Eggs already on leaves at spraying are killed Controls caterpillars

Prodigy

™

www.hortsolutions.com.au

Insecticide V2 7N 6

™ Trademark of Dow AgroSciences

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

21

O UTL O O K

From left, Bo Zacharchuk, of Guala Closures, Terry Lee, editor of Australian Journal of Grape & Wine Research, and Andrew Kay, of Wirra Wirra, in McLaren Vale. brands and 56% coming from sales of wines priced between $10-20 per bottle.

The results of recent research into how wine producers rate the benefits of online bottled wine sales via third party providers was summarised by Roberta Veale, from The University of Adelaide.

Veale said that although the landscape for online wine sales was changing rapidly, anecdotal evidence and industry estimates suggested that they will top $600m this year.

A survey of 133 Australian wine producers asked them to rate how well various third-party online wine distributors were working for them. These channels comprised wine clubs, exclusively online wine retailers, ‘bricks and mortar’ wine retailers with an online outlet, variety retailers that also sell wine, wine auctions, variety auctions and wine exporters. The producers were asked to rate, using a scale of 1-9, their opinion of each online retailer in terms of eight key business indicators: ease of doing business (e.g., reliable, professional staff, good administration), profitability (i.e., good margins), support for brand equity (including the tendency to rely on discounting and the perceived impact of that discounting on their brands), fulfillment to wine buyers, prompt payment for wine, marketing activities, market coverage and sales growth.

Veale said the results of the survey showed that the industry’s perception of third party online retailers according to the eight key indicators was “somewhat underwhelming”, with no online retailer scoring well. The average rating across the eight indicators showed that online retailers that also had ‘bricks and mortar’ outlets were rated the best, but even that was mediocre at 5.16 out of 9, with the average of all other outlets rated at between 2.5 and 4.7 out of nine. Veale said this demonstrated that with regard to the eight indicators, producers did not believe

22

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

third party online retailers were good for business.

Despite this, producers continued to use these channels, so the survey asked producers to identify the benefits driving their continued use of them.

When asked to describe the best thing about using third party online distribution retailers, wine producers’ answers suggested that these options were deemed to be easy, in spite of their ratings, provided cashflow, but not margin, and moved large volumes of wine, which implied that much of it was hard to sell otherwise. There was also a belief that because of the large customer bases of some of these organisations, they provided wine producers with an opportunity to get their brand ‘seen’ and ‘tried’ without spending money on promotions or staff.

Providing an overview of wine markets that show promise for Australian wine, namely the UK, US and China, was James Gosper, general manager of market development for Wine Australia. Gosper said since the last Wine Outlook Conference two years ago, a number of significant shifts had taken place in these markets, including the rise of the influence of social media and an increase in the premiumisation of wine.

Gosper said expected shortages of home-grown wine in the US, the increasing premiumisation of wine, and the growth in the on-premise sector, online wine sales, and the number of potential wine consumers aged between 21-34, meant the US market promised “massive opportunity” for Australian wine producers.

In the UK, where Australia remained the number one wine brand by volume (19.9% share) and value (20.4% share), premiumisation was also taking place with sales of Australian wine at £5 or less per bottle in the off-trade declining in the last two years, while those over £5 had grown, albeit it off a small base. Online wine sales in the UK were also rising, with 12%-15% of all wine sales in the UK now bought online, W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

worth £1.2-1.4 billion. And while off-premise sales had been declining, there was a rise in the number of casual dining and wine bar outlets opening which were better suited to the Australian wine category than pubs and “white table cloth” restaurants.

Gosper said UK babyboomers, who helped build the Australian category, should not be overlooked, as they still had loyalty to Australia, were child-free, and liked to travel.

Gosper said that while Australian wine sales had experienced impressive growth in China, including at premium price points, and there were many success stories, there were still many unknowns about the market. He said although there were many growth opportunities, including “massive” social media and online media opportunities, he cautioned producers to familiarise themselves with the route to consumers and the branding prospects, and know their customers (both trade and consumers).

Social media featured in the vast majority of presentations at Outlook, but two that focussed on the subject specifically and put its role in fostering consumer demand for wine and wine marketing in perspective were Lulie Halstead, of Wine Intelligence, and Angie Bradbuy, of Dig Marketing Group.

Halsted said research by her company had shown that social, mobile and online media were merely “enablers” of human behavior that already existed; these media simply enabled this behavior to be carried out more often, more quickly and in new ways.

Bradbury said the fundamentals of marketing, while still valid by their broadest definition, had fundamentally shifted thanks to technology and the digital revolution. She said wine producers, therefore, needed to: increase the degree to which they listen to their customers – “good listening has always been a social artform but it has never been more relevant given the rise in social media platforms”, create a real brand proposition so consumers are clear on what it means to them to have a relationship with producers’ brands – “is your brand making genuine emotional connections or just offering empty promises ?”; be creative, encourage employees to be creative and be receptive to their ideas; allow marketing to drive the function of wine companies – integrate marketing into long-term planning so that it is treated as seriously as the annual budget because by doing so will deliver stronger, more valuable, more adaptive and more in-demand products and services; realise that they are no longer in control of what’s being said about brands but appreciate that they can influence it; influence the influencers – know who your consumers are and who influences them; be transparent and open; actively engage V27N6

O UTL O O K

with their consumers; be agile – develop marketing strategies that have 3-5 year goals, but have an annual plan that is measured quarterly and reviewed annually and rewritten, if necessary; seek feedback and be flexible - brands have to be more nimble, responsive and flexible than ever before.

While acknowledging it was a complex issue, UK wine industry consultant Mike Paul challenged Australia to consider promoting “more forcefully” the regionality of its wine industry.

“Having regional brands which have a stronger personality than the parent brand, as is the case with, say, Burgundy, Bordeaux and Rioja, protects the premium sector from any quicksand developing in the mainstream sector and thereby also implies less constraint on marketing in the mainstream sector itself.

“Regions also give marketers a way of differentiating the premium from the mainstream sectors, thus helping to answer one of the fundamental questions of the wine industry: how do you get people to trade up when there is often so little differentiation between the branding of cheap and the branding of expensive wine?”

Paul suggested that if Australia did not segment its brand and beef up its promotion of regionality, from an intellectual point, he

Colin Campbell (left), of Campbells of Rutherglen, with Ian Hollick, of Hollick, in the Coonawarra. could not see how the nation was otherwise going to “separate itself from the rest of the New World pack or come close to competing with the best of the Old World on a level playing field.

“One of the great capabilities,the great strengths, the overarching competitive advantage perhaps, of wine producers in Australia is your capacity to come together as an industry to both develop and, crucially, to implement long-term visions. You are very hard on yourself in terms of your

Conventional

WIN EB AR of ort nsp tra nd ga lin

ACKS LR RE

Flexibil ity f or s tac kin g, ha nd

arrels wine b

Proudly designed and manufactured by JOHN FALLAND AUSTRALIA “Setting Standards Since 1961” Moppa Road South, Nuriootpa, SA 5355 Ph: (08) 8562 1533 Fax: (08) 8562 2103 Email: john@jfallandaust.com.au Website: www.jfallandaust.com.au

• Fabricated 20 years ago and still popular • Over 270,000 made for over 1200 wineries • Stack five high with your forklift • Lifetime galvanized finish • Competitive prices • Reg Design No 117931

criticism of how some of your initiatives have been implemented but, in my view, relative to the difficulties involved and the lack of success in other parts of the world, you should be pretty proud of your achievements in this regard.

“This suggests to me that if any New World country could go regional - and in a way that learnt from the Old World in terms of how to go about it but also in terms of how not to go about it - then Australia WVJ could,” Paul concluded.

or

Barrel Master

• Superior rack on rack stack system • Simple, uncluttered design • Visible & easy rack locating system • No weight on barrels • Static or barrel rolling options • Reg Design No 154262

New Zealand sales and distribution: KAURI NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Ph: 04 476 0105 Fax: 04 476 0161 PO Box 17-385, . Karori, Wellington.

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

23

A W R I

Beyond bentonite

By Ella Robinson, Neil Scrimgeour, Matteo Marangon, Richard Muhlack, Paul Smith, Peter Godden and Dan Johnson The Australian Wine Research Institute, PO Box 197, Glen Osmond, SA 5064.

Managing director Dan Johnson

Until now, bentonite treatment has been the winemaker’s best answer to troublesome haze-causing proteins. Breakthroughs in understanding the structure and properties of those proteins at the AWRI have led to the discovery of a potentially viable and practical alternative. Laboratory, pilot and industryscale trials of proctase have now been successfully completed.

hen wines develop a haze, the culprit is usually protein, particularly when the wines are exposed to high temperatures or after a long time in storage. Winegrapes contain proteins that persist throughout the winemaking process and, if not removed, they can produce an unsightly haze in white, rosé and sparkling wines.

To remove the protein and prevent haze formation, most winemakers use bentonite fining. While bentonite itself is effective, this step in the winemaking process is not selective, as it removes all proteins, not just those that contribute to a haze. It also increases the time wines spend in tank; it can lead to loss of volume and quality; and it creates waste disposal challenges and costs.

A recent study estimated the hidden cost of bentonite fining to be around $1 billion worldwide (AWRI publication #1307). These issues and costs have led researchers around the world to try to find an alternative. Until recently, however, their efforts have been hampered by a lack of understanding: only now do we know why grape proteins form a haze in wines.

(AWRI publication #1187). Unfolding is key to haze formation. Scientists then identified which proteins were causing haze, and how. They discovered that of the pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins, chitinases were the main culprits, since they unfolded irreversibly and aggregated, or clumped together. When other PR proteins unfolded – namely, thaumatin-like proteins (TLPs) that are also responsible for haze formation – the process was reversible; they are much less likely to aggregate over short periods of time.

Researchers discovered the link between protein unfolding, induced by heat, and aggregation by using another technique called dynamic light scattering (DLS) (AWRI publication #1272). They also found that sulfate concentration and the overall ionic strength of wines played a part, as the presence of sulfates and other ions in sufficient quantities can favour protein aggregation.

Today, as a result, wine researchers have reached a much deeper understanding of wine proteins and why they unfold and aggregate. The AWRI has used this knowledge to identify new ways to break proteins down, which could eliminate the need for bentonite.

New techniques, new knowledge

Finding an enzyme in a haystack

The first breakthrough came with the novel application of two laboratory techniques – strong cation exchange (SCX) and hydrophobic interaction chromatography (HIC) – to isolate the haze-causing proteins (AWRI publication #1180). These techniques allowed scientists to collect better quality samples of the proteins in larger amounts, paving the way for new discoveries.

Samples were then analysed using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) to assess, for the first time, their unfolding temperatures and behaviour

For some time, wine scientists have wondered whether the alternative to bentonite could be enzymes that break down proteins. Proteolytic enzymes have been tried before, but with limited success. This is because grape PR proteins are particularly resistant to enzyme attack and the proteolytic enzymes are not sufficiently active under normal winemaking pH and temperature conditions.

Now, wine scientists have adopted a new approach. They have taken an enzyme and put it to work on the proteins after they have unfolded, when they are

Seeing through the haze

W

24

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

At a glance •P roctase treatment has been identified as a viable alternative to bentonite fining in reducing haze in white wines • The treatment targets those specific proteins responsible for haze formation. It builds on research that has revealed new information about how hazecausing proteins behave when exposed to heat • Sensory evaluation has revealed no difference between wines treated with proctase and those treated with bentonite.

• Economically, in-line bentonite dosing may be more cost-effective, but proctase treatment may be cheaper for smaller wineries that cannot afford to invest in the required infrastructure. The economic benefit of proctase, in relation to batch dosing of bentonite, is significant • The AWRI is working with regulatory bodies to ensure that proctase-treated wines do not encounter regulatory hurdles – in Australia and overseas. much more susceptible to enzyme attack.

They have also identified proctase as a lead candidate, due to its activity at wine pH and at temperatures close to the unfolding temperatures of the PR proteins.

For the process to work, the juice must be heated so that the proteins unfold. While some winemakers may be wary of this, trials suggest that shortterm heating does not cause a negative sensory effect in the resulting wine.

Some studies even suggest that heating can lead to the release of important V27N6

HELP YOUR YEAST TO REVEAL THE POTENTIAL OF YOUR GRAPES

A new generation of yeast protection :

Increase yeast vitality

Increase yeast ethanol tolerance

Highest levels of sterols in the Lallemand GoFerm product range.

PATENTED IN EUROPE AND AUSTRALIA

Improves yeast aroma precursor use

Lallemand Australia Pty Ltd: phone : +61 (0)8 8276 1200 email: australiaoffice@lallemand.com Lallemand Oenology: Natural solutions that add value to the world of winemaking / www.lallemandwine.com

A W R I

Figure 1. Total protein content of Chardonnay and Sauvignon Blanc juice samples: T0 (unheated juice (control)); heated, 75°C for one minute; heated + proctase (15mg/L), 75°C for one minute.

Unheated juice + proctase not shown.

flavour compounds. In contrast, however, heating wine can produce negative sensory effects, so proctase treatment should only be applied to juice, not wine.

From lab-scale to pilot-scale The next step was laboratory testing using different concentrations of proctase and juice at different temperatures. Researchers found the best combination to be 15mg/L proctase concentration in juice heated to a nominal

temperature of 70-75oC for one minute. This combination was then tested during the 2011 vintage (AWRI publication # 1444).

The pilot-scale experiment took two juices (one Chardonnay and one Sauvignon Blanc, both from the Barossa Valley) and applied four initial treatments to each juice: • an unheated control • unheated juice + proctase • heated juice + proctase • heated without proctase.

Protein analysis immediately after treatment showed that heating alone reduced protein content by around 40 percent for both juices. When proctase was used, protein was reduced by 85% in the Sauvignon Blanc and 91% in the Chardonnay juice (Figure 1).

The three different juice treatments and the control (untreated) juice were then fermented in triplicate 80L volumes. The wines made from the control juice were divided into two after fermentation, with one half left untreated and the other half fined with bentonite to represent normal industry practice. This resulted in five different treatments for each variety available for further analysis. Protein content results for the wines echoed the juice results closely, with the proctase + heat treatment leading to a 84% and 81% reduction in total protein content in Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay, respectively (Figure 2).

Further analysis showed that the majority of proteins removed by the proctase treatment are those known to contribute most significantly to haze formation (chitinases, in particular).

Bag-in-Box Reborn...

The NEW generation pack from

Tel: +61 2 9698 1355 www.irwinandsheehan.com.au 26

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

A W R I

Figure 2. Average protein content of wines (three replicates): unheated control, no bentonite; unheated + proctase; heated; heated + proctase; unheated (control) + bentonite (Sauvignon Blanc only).

Figure 3. AWRI staff providing onsite support for proctase treatment.

Out of the lab and into the tank farm

Sensory EFFECT With protein removal successfully confirmed, the next step was to check for sensory effect. A triangle test was used to assess sensory differences among treatments, with 47 experienced panellists involved. Wines made from the proctasetreated juices, with and without heating, were not found to be significantly different to the bentonite-fined control wine. This showed that proctase treatment does not produce a sensory effect when compared with bentonite treatment.

With such positive results from the 2011 pilot-scale trial, the AWRI was ready to scale-up again in 2012. The researchers knew that proctase treatment worked well, but they wanted to assess how well it could work in a commercial winery using existing, rather than specialised, equipment.

Two industry partners came onboard to try out the new treatment for protein removal. With the support of AWRI engineers on site, a total of three juice varieties (Riesling, Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay) were treated across the two wineries at a 5000L-scale.

AROMA, COLOUR, FLAVOUR, SPEED & SECURITY!

MaloBacti MLF MaloBacti CN1 Citric acid negative strain, preserves primary fruit aromas

MaloBacti HF2 Colour protective strain, promotes red berry characters in red wines

Fast and ACCURATE results for wine analysis with the Thermo range of Gallery and Arena Discrete Analysers

MaloBacti AF3 Australian isolated strain, promotes dark berry characters in red wines

• Compact design occupies a small footprint and is fully self-contained.

MAXBacti

• Flexible loading capacity up to 45 samples or 30 reagents simultaneously.

500kL large volume concept for reduced MLF costs

• All necessary steps are automated, providing a walk-away time up to two hours.

MaloControl Complete MLF supplement for difficult wines For further information, please contact Kauri NZ Tel: 0800 KAURIWINE AUS Tel: 1800 127 611 NZ Fax: 04 910 7415 AUS Fax: 1800 127 609 Email: winery@kauri.co.nz Web: www.kauriwine.com

V2 7N 6

• Up to 200 results per hour with automatic pre and post dilution capability.

Thermo Scientific Gallery Photometric Analyzer

For more information on this product, contact us by email: daniel.hoger@thermofisher.com www.thermofisher.com.au 1800 333 110 Moving science forward

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

27

A W R I

Figure 5. Average levels of chitinases and thaumatin-like proteins in treated Riesling (RIE), Sauvignon Blanc (SAB) and Chardonnay (CHA) juice and wine samples. Error bars indicate standard deviation across three replicates.

(Riesling) to date. An expert panel of eight experienced tasters assessed the wines for colour and condition, aroma and palate attributes, and provided ratings for acceptability of the wines and the presence of any taints or faults.

The average ratings of the proctase and bentonite-treated wines were identical, with no taints or faults identified. Formal sensory evaluation of the Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay wines is expected to be carried out in the near future.

The heat test conundrum Figure 4. Average protein content of treated Riesling (RIE), Sauvignon Blanc (SAB) and Chardonnay (CHA) juice (j) and wine (w) samples. Error bars indicate standard deviation across three replicates.

This time, the experiment was simplified. For each juice variety, the proctase + heat treatment was compared against the industry standard bentonite treatment. Each juice was split into two parcels, with one parcel heat treated with proctase, while the other parcel acted as the control. The two parcels were then fermented under identical conditions, with the control subsequently fined with bentonite post-fermentation as per typical industry procedures.

After cold stabilisation, sub-samples of each wine were brought to the AWRI for packaging under typical commercial conditions. Juices (pre- and postproctase treatment) and wines (treated and bentonite fined) were analysed for protein content and composition. The total protein content of the samples (analysed in triplicate) is summarised in Figure 4.

In all three juices, proctase treatment

28

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

caused a reduction in protein content from more than 80mg/L to less than 16mg/L, similar to the results achieved following bentonite fining. The AWRI then used high performance liquid chromotography (HPLC) analysis to provide more information about the types of proteins that remained in the juice and wine samples.

The HPLC results (Figure 5) show that while chitinases were present in all of the control (untreated) juices, the proctase treatment successfully removed them and also reduced the concentration of TLPs dramatically. In two out of three varieties, the wine made from the Proctase-treated juice contained lower levels of TLPs than the equivalent bentonite-treated control wine. This shows that proctase is as effective as bentonite in removing proteins.

Formal sensory evaluation has only been carried out on one of the wines W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

To check for protein stability, winemakers currently use a heat test, where a sample of filtered wine is heated at 80oC for six hours and its turbidity is compared with an unheated sample.

This stringent test brings out of solution all proteins from the wine, including those known not to contribute to haze formation. This can lead to a false positive result when proctase treatment has been used and can incorrectly suggest that a wine is protein unstable.

Since proctase is a selective treatment, targetting haze-forming proteins and not other proteins, a new approach is required. In 2011 and 2012, researchers used a modified version of the protein stability test, which involved heating for two hours at 80oC followed by two hours of chilling and subsequent measurement at room temperature (AWRI publication #943). Both the Riesling and Sauvignon Blanc wines made from proctase-treated juice passed this test. However, the Chardonnay wine appeared to be a borderline fail.

To support the adoption of proctase as an alternative to bentonite treatment, the V27N6

A W R I

AWRI recognised the need for a better, more reliable test. Currently, HPLC can characterise the proteins in a wine sample and find out if any haze-forming culprits are still present. This is not a quick or easy test, however, and cannot be carried out by most winery labs. An alternative test is now in development.

The new test will likely involve a lower test temperature, to preserve proteins that do not contribute readily to haze formation. It is hoped that this could become the new industry ‘standard’ test and provide a more rapid analysis of protein stability in all white wines, irrespective of the method used for protein stabilisation.

What about long-term performance?

The AWRI is still gathering data about the long-term performance of wines treated with proctase. For example, the 2011 trial Sauvignon Blanc wines were revisited after one year in bottle, to see if any changes in protein content or composition had occurred during storage.

Turbidity tests showed that the wine produced from the proctase-treated

V2 7N 6

juice was still haze-free after one year of storage, whereas the unfined control had thrown a light haze.

Protein content measurement and heat stability tests showed similar results to those obtained a year earlier, with the only exception being the unheated + proctase treatment, which showed a slight decrease in protein concentration over the year period. This was not entirely surprising, given that this is the treatment most likely to have residual enzyme activity.

The results to date suggest that proctase is an effective, long-term treatment for achieving protein stability in white, wines and might ultimately prove to be a viable alternative to bentonite.

How do the costs compare?

To be economically viable, any alternative to bentonite must deliver cost savings. Therefore, detailed economic analysis was conducted to compare operating costs between proctase and bentonite treatments. For completeness, in-line bentonite addition was also included – this method is used by several large Australian wineries.

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

The study took processing conditions into account (flow rates, temperatures, heat exchanger specifications, etc). It also analysed heating and refrigeration energy, heat exchanger losses, pumping requirements and proctase purchase costs. To compare batch and in-line bentonite addition, wine volume and downgrade losses were included, together with filtration and centrifuge performance, as well as energy and labour requirements. Results are shown in Figure 6 (see page 30).

Further analysis revealed that operating costs are more sensitive to bentonite requirements and heat exchanger performance than to fluctuations in operating temperature and process flow rate. Increasing the cost of the proctase enzyme by a full 100% resulted in an operating cost increase of approximately 1225% under commercial conditions, suggesting that the process is relatively insensitive to proctase cost variability.

The analysis also highlights that juices with high protein levels benefit most from proctase treatment in terms of process efficiency and cost. This makes sense, considering that juices

www.winebiz. com . au

29

A W R I

What is the regulatory landscape for proctase?

Figure 6. Economic analysis of heating + proctase addition, compared with batch and in-line bentonite addition for Sauvignon Blanc, Chardonnay and Riesling juices (treatment cost in cents per litre). or wines with higher protein levels require higher bentonite doses, which carry higher associated costs. This means that the cost differential is more pronounced in high protein juices than it is for low protein juices where a smaller bentonite dose is needed.

In-line bentonite treatment costs were lower when compared with the combination of heat and proctase treatment. This suggests that if suitable equipment is available for in-line bentonite dosing, this option offers some advantages when processing juices or wines with lower protein concentrations. Considerable capital investment is associated with in-line bentonite dosing, however. Consequently, this method is cost prohibitive for all but the largest commercial wineries.

The AWRI is currently seeking clarification on the regulatory status of the enzymes present in proctase from Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ). A review of the Food Standards Code indicates that enzymes of the same class and origin (Aspergillus niger var. macrosporus) as those present in proctase are listed (as Carboxyl proteinases) as permitted enzymes under clause 17 of the Food Standards Code 1.3.3. The AWRI is pursuing formal recognition of proctase with FSANZ, but until such formal registration has been obtained, proctase cannot be used in commercial winemaking for the upcoming vintage.

Once that formal approval has been obtained, proctase will be permitted for wine production in Australia, provided that the finished wine is destined for the domestic market. However, wines treated with proctase are not currently permitted for export to the EU. The AWRI is anticipating working with the OIV (International Organisation of Vine and Wine) to gain approval for proctase-treated wines to be permitted for export to the EU in the coming months.

Regardless of these regulatory hurdles, a number of Australian wineries are set to trial this alternative protein stabilisation technique during the 2013 vintage, now that the efficacy of proctase has been proven on a number of wines at a commercial-scale. Bottled samples of the 2012 trial wines will soon be available for independent assessment by any wine producers who are interested in this alternative approach to protein stabilisation.

Acknowledgements

ENHANCE YOUR WINE QUALITY AUSTRALIA & NEW ZEALAND!

This work is funded by Australian winemakers and grapegrowers through their investment body, Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation, with matching funding from the Australian government. The AWRI is a member of the Wine Innovation Cluster. The authors thank Markus Herderich and Eric Wilkes for their review, and Sharon Mascall-Dare and Rae Blair for their editorial assistance.

Nothing provides a better source of supplementation for yeasts.

References

FermControl • Maximises aromas & flavours • Gives clean & healthy ferments

AWRI publication #1180. Van Sluyter, S.C.; Marangon, M.; Stranks, S.D.; Neilson, K.A.; Hayasaka, Y.; Haynes, P.A.; Menz, R.I. and Waters, E.J. (2009) Two-step purification of pathogenesis related proteins from grape juice and crystallisation of thaumatin-like proteins. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 57(23):11,376-11,382.

• Increases ageing potential • Adds value & saves costs • Reduces copper use

AWRI publication # 1187. Falconer, R.J.; Marangon, M.; Van Sluyter, S.C.; Neilson, K.A.; Chan, C. and Waters, E.J. (2010) Thermal stability of thaumatin-like protein, chitinase and invertase isolated from Sauvignon Blanc and Semillon juice, and their role in haze formation in wine. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58:975–980.

• Minimises additive use • Eliminates DAP

Add FermControl, nothing else!

FermControl is designed as a complete one pouch solution for all fermentations, eliminating the need for any other product(s) to be used whether at rehydration or during fermentation.

For further information, please contact Kauri NZ Tel: 0800 KAURIWINE AUS Tel: 1800 127 611 NZ Fax: 04 910 7415 AUS Fax: 1800 127 609 Email: winery@kauri.co.nz Web: www.kauriwine.com

30

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

AWRI publication #1307. Majewski, P.; Barbalet, A. and Waters, E. (2011) $1 billion hidden cost of bentonite fining. Australian & New Zealand Grapegrower & Winemaker 569:58–62.

AWRI publication #943. Pocock, K.F. and Waters, E.J. (2006) Protein haze in bottled white wines: how well do stability tests and bentonite fining trials predict haze formation during storage and transport? Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 12:212-220.

AWRI publication #1272. Marangon, M.; Sauvage, F.-X.; Waters, E.J. and Vernhet, A. (2011) Effects of ionic strength and sulfate upon thermal aggregation of grape chitinases and thaumatin-like proteins in a model system. J. Agric. Food Chem. dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf104334v. 1–11.

AWRI publication # 1444. Marangon, M.; Van Sluyter, S.C.; Robinson, E.M.C.; Muhlack, R.; Holt, H.; Haynes, P.A.; Godden, P.W.; Smith, P.A. and Waters, E.J. (2012) Degradation of white wine haze proteins by Aspergillopepsin I and II during WVJ juice flash pasteurisation. Food Chemistry 135:1157-1165.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

™

winem a kin g

F E R M E N TAT I O N

Managing H2S production during fermentation - a focus on yeast nutrition

By Ursula Kennedy1 and Dylan Rhymer2 1 University of Southern Queensland. Email: ursula.kennedy@usq.edu.au 2 Ballandean Estate Wines, Granite Belt, Queensland

A Queensland-based study has revealed that supplementation of ferments with commercial nutrients may not always be necessary for complete and successful fermentation.

W

inegrape berries are the source of fermentable sugars and nutrients for yeast metabolism during wine production. The grapes are an important source of one of the most important yeast nutrients - nitrogen.

Fermentation problems may occur if yeasts are subject to stressful conditions, including spikes in temperature and lack of adequate nutrition. Consequences of yeast stress include ferments becoming ‘stuck’ or yeast producing hydrogen sulphide (H2S) (Vilanova et al. 2007). H2S is a pungent aroma compound commonly produced by yeast during the process of fermentation. Described as having an ‘off’ odour of rotten eggs or sewage, the presence of H2S is one of the major wine aroma faults.

Nitrogen is a critical component of proteins and yeast gaining nitrogen from the grape in the forms of the ammonium ion, or by metabolism of grape-derived amino acids. The grape-derived nitrogen sources are often referred to as yeast assimilable nitrogen (YAN), a combination of primary amino nitrogen and ammonium ion concentrations. The lower limit generally accepted for grape or must YAN for successful yeast function is approximately 150mg/L (Spayd et al.

1995).

It is a common practice to supplement ferments with nutrients, including nitrogen sources such as diammonium phosphate (DAP). The addition of nutrients during ferment must also be done with care, as late nutrient addition may result in residual nutrient remaining in a wine after ferment (Bach et al. 2010, Bell and Henschke 2005). This may then increase risk of post-ferment microbial spoilage. Further, some researchers have shown DAP addition during ferment to result in increased H2S production during fermentation (Ugliano et al. 2010).

An industry extension project was carried out in vintage 2011 to further investigate the application of

32

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Figure 1. Nitrogenius® test strips. commercially-available yeast nutrients for management of H2S production during fermentation. This trial, funded by the GWRDC Grassroots Regional Solutions program, aimed to explore whether these supplements, when used as per the recommended guidelines of addition rate and time, were useful in controlling H2S production. The project also sought to utilise a commercially-available test kit for assessment of low level H2S production during fermentation.

Shiraz was sourced from a commercial vineyard in Queensland’s Granite Belt region in March 2011. Fruit was harvested at a TSS of 13.3ºBaumé, with YAN tested to be 128ppm. Then, 400kg of Shiraz was crushed, the must homogenised and split into seven 50kg ferments in closed 100-litre variable capacity tanks, with all bar the control adjusted with DAP to YAN equal to 160ppm.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Ferments were inoculated with Enoferm Syrah, with five ferments also receiving commercial nutrient under the regime of the manufacturer’s recommendation (products ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ’D’). All wines were then fermented at 18-20ºC, and plunged on an eighthourly basis, at which time temperature and TSS were also recorded and H2S generation was monitored using a Nitrogenius® test kit.

Nitrogenius test strips were hung approximately 20cm into the top of each fermentation tank. These strips absorb H2S generated during wine fermentations and were analysed by placement into a clear analytical solution. Absorbed H2S is detected as a solution colour change measured at 670nm (Figure 1). Test strips were changed at each time of plunging, with sub-samples also taken at the time of plunging for later ammonia V27N6

F E R M E N TAT I O N

and primary amino nitrogen analysis.

Test strips were also placed on one vessel’s bung and seal (tube) to test for H2S leakage from vessels.

Wines were assessed for the presence of H2S by a panel of wine judges at the Royal Agricultural Society of Queensland Wine Show in June 2011.

In terms of fermentation performance, there was little difference between any of the treatments with regard to generation of H2S. Two of the commercial treatments showed spikes in H2S production in the final days of fermentation. At the completion of fermentation, no detectable H2S was present in any wine (Figure 2). Sensory assessment supported these findings, with sensory panels detecting no obvious differences in sulfides in any wines produced in this trial. There were also no differences between any of the wines post-ferment in terms of chemical composition.

Analysis of H2S generation (Figure 2), ammonia nitrogen (Figure 3, see page 34) and primary amino nitrogen (Figure 4, see page 34) indicated that in the season in which this trial was conducted, ferments receiving

winem a kin g

Figure 2. Shiraz ferments under different nutrient regimes - H2S generation over time. no addition of nutrient supplement performed as well as those receiving commercial supplements added to the manufacturers’ recommendation. It was noted that the recommended timing for the addition of nitrogen supplements

was actually after ferments had depleted much of their primary nitrogen supply, while at completion, ferments appeared to have utilised ammonia nitrogen, but still had relatively high concentrations of primary amino nitrogen.

Like many of the world’s great wines, we’re made here too.

Maurivin is proud to be a part of Australia’s winemaking landscape.

Our complete range of yeast and fermentation aid products (including ) are developed and manufactured on the same soil as our outstanding vineyards – Australian soil.

At Maurivin we look forward to continuing a tradition of innovation and partnership with Australia’s winemakers and the great wine they produce.

Maurivin_2011_MAIN_7SEPT.indd 1

V2 7N 6

maurivin.com +61 (0)2 9684 8691

8/09/11 2:30 PM

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz. com . au

33

winem a kin g

F E R M E N TAT I O N

Figure 3. Shiraz ferments under different nutrient regimes - concentration of ammonia nitrogen (ppm) over time.

Figure 4. Shiraz ferments under different nutrient regimes - concentration of primary amino nitrogen (ppm) over time.

In conclusion, this trial indicated that supplementation of ferments with commercial nutrients may not always be necessary for complete and successful fermentation, as the ‘control’ in this project with no nutrient added performed as well as other treated ferments. There may be scope to manipulate the timing of nutrient additions to help minimise the stress periods of fermentation, making more nitrogen available for the yeast during these phases, thereby helping to lower the H2S production during the fermentation cycle. Late nutrient additions should be done with caution to avoid residual nitrogen in finished wines.

34

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to thank Kim Larsen and Nick Stuckey, from the University of Southern Queensland, and the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation, Queensland Wine Industry Association and Ballandean Estate Wines for their assistance.

Bell. S and Henschke, P.A. (2005) Implications of nitrogen nutrition for grapes, fermentation and wine. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 11:242–295.

Spayd, S.E.; Nagel, C.W. and Edwards, C.G. (1995) Yeast growth in Riesling juice as affected by vineyard nitrogen fertilisation. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 46(1) 9-55.

REFERENCES

Ugliano, M.; Fedrizzi, B.; Siebert, T.; Magno, B.; Fersini, G. and Henschke, P.A. (2010) Effect of nitrogen supplementation and Saccharomyces species on hydrogen sulfide and other volatile sulfur compounds in Shiraz fermentation and wine. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 57:4948–4955.

Bach, B.; Colas, S.; Massini, L.; Barnavon, L. and Vuchot, P. (2011) Effect of nitrogen addition during alcoholic fermentation on the final content of biogenic amines in wine. Annals of Microbiology 61:185–190.

Vilanova, M.; Ugliano, M.; Varela, C.; Siebert, T.; Pretorius, I.S. and Henschke, P.A (2007) Assimilable nitrogen utilisation and production of volatile and nonvolatile compounds in chemically defined medium by Saccharomyces cerevisiae wine yeasts. Applied Microbial WVJ and Cell Physiology 77(1):145-157.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

Y E AST

winem a kin g

The influence of yeast strains on the phenolic and aromatic qualities of red wines

By Denis Caboulet1, Marie-Agnés Ducasse1, Amélie Roy1, Laurent Dagan2, Céline Fauveau3, Patrice Pellerin3 and Rémi Schneider1,2 1 Institut Français de la Vigne et du Vin, UMT Qualinnov, Domaine de Pech-Rouge, 11430 Gruissan – France.

Email: denis.caboulet@vignevin.com 2 Nyseos SARL, 2 place Pierre Viala, Bâtiment 28 34060 Montpellier cedex 1 - France 3 Oenobrands, Parc Scientifique Agropolis II, Bât 5, 2196 Bd de La Lironde. CS 34603 34397 Montpellier Cedex 5 – France

Researchers from IFV, Nyseos and Oenobrands, in France, have investigated the effects of yeast strains on red wine quality, focussing on colour compounds and aroma molecules in Shiraz and Merlot.

Introduction he impact of yeast strains on the quality of white wines has been studied extensively.

This is because their contribution to wine aroma is crucial and, now, well understood. On the other hand, HCad-130x185-2011.pdf 1 8/11/11 we have a sketchier understanding

of yeasts’ contribution to the quality of red wines. Advances in our understanding of colour composition and the key components of aroma allow this aspect to now be studied in more detail. Experiments carried out in partnership with the IFV (Institut Français de La Vigne et du Vin), 2:07 PM Nyseos and Oenobrands tested seven

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

T

yeast strains on two raw materials: a Shiraz and a Merlot. Choosing to use the flash-détente technique before pressing and clarification allowed for perfectly homogeneous liquid musts to be obtained. The yeast strains were, therefore, the only variable between the various modalities of the assay. ▶

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

www.winebiz. com . au

35

winem a kin g

Y E AST

Table 1. Physico-chemical analyses of the Merlot and Shiraz musts.

Merlot PGI

Shiraz PDO

Potential Alcohol (%vol)

12.76

14.26

Total Acidity (g/l H2SO4)

3.95

4.44

pH

3.35

3.72

Tartaric Acid (g/l)

6.24

6.55

Malic Acid (g/l)

1.46

4.41

Potassium (g/l)

1.86

2.81

Assimilable Nitrogen (mg/l)

82.6

186.9

Anthocyanins ( mg/l)

Wine Parameters

819.36

1527

ITP (DO 280 nm)

44.9

71.73

Colour Intensity

17.61

33.88

Hue

0.345

0.489

Table 2. Calculation of the indices according to Ac absorbances under various conditions (expressed for a dilution factor of 1 and an optical trajectory of 1cm).

Measurement Conditions n°1 : after adding acetaldehyde

Indices

abbreviations

Calculation

Color Intensity Corrected for bleaching with SO2

CIcor

A1420+A1520+A1620

Corrected Pigments at wine pH

PWcor

A1520

Total Polyphenol Index

TPI

A2280

Total Pigments

TP

A2520

Colour due to Copigmentation

CC

A1520-A3520

Pigments unbeachable with SO2

PUB

A4520

n°2 : dilution 1/100 HCL 1M

n°3 : dilution 1/10 solution at wine pH n°4 : after adding SO2 Ac : c = conditions,

= wavelength

The following technological process was used: •m echanical harvesting with onboard sorter •F lash Release (95°C, 50mbar vacuum) •p neumatic pressing • c old decanting (10°C), with the addition of a 2g/hL dose of Rapidase® CB. The clarified musts were divided into 85-litre fermenters and the turbidity adjusted to 250 NTU by adding pre-ferment lees, guaranteeing high homogeneity. Each batch of grapes for both varieties were inoculated with 25g/hL of the following yeasts: Fermivin® (A), Fermicru® 4F9 (B),

Materials and methods Raw materials, preparation and assay monitoring The assay was carried out in the IFV experimental unit in Narbonne Pech Rouge. Two musts were selected after Flash release: a Merlot (80-90 hectolitres per hectare, near Narbonne) Vin de Pays d’OC, and a Shiraz (35hL/ha, Domaine de Pech Rouge - La Clape).

Fermicru® XL (C), Collection Cépage® Merlot (D), NT50 (E), Exotics SPH (F), WE 372 (G), and NT 112 (H) only for the Shiraz.

The Merlot presented initial low assimilable nitrogen (82.6mg/L). Two doses of 15g/hL diammonium phosphate were added at 48 hours and 96 hours.

At the end of alcoholic fermentation, malolactic fermentation was initiated by inoculation with Lalvin® VP41 bacteria. At the end of MLF, the wines were decanted, 5g/hL of sulfite was added and they were stored at 10°C. The same winemaking process was applied to each batch.

The

SMART FOG Smart Fog, the leading manufacturer of dry fog barrel cellar humidifiers, claiming the smallest water droplet size in the industry, is now available in Australia and NZ. • Humidity without wetness

• Reduce wine losses

• Alcohol content control

• Reduce topping costs

• No wetting, no mould, no bacteria, disease & dust free • Simple "plug & play" installation, low maintenance & full automation

BIOCELLULASE W

For improved maceration and settling

BIOPECTINASE 200AL For de-pectinisation and clarification

BIOREDASE

Pectinase/cellulase optimised for colour extraction

BIOCHARD

Pectolytic enzyme optimised to reduce phenolics

DELTAFINE

Isinglass finings for improved clarification

Flavours & Ingredients We offer a full range of food grade flavours, colours and application notes for RTDs and coolers etc.

DELTAGEN Australia Pty Ltd 31 Wadhurst Drive Boronia Vic 3155

For further information, please contact Kauri NZ Tel: 0800 KAURIWINE AUS Tel: 1800 127 611 NZ Fax: 04 910 7415 AUS Fax: 1800 127 609 Email: winery@kauri.co.nz Web: www.kauriwine.com

36

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Phone (03) 9801 7133 Fax (03) 9887 0019 Email : info@deltagen.com.au Web: www.deltagen.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

Y E AST

winem a kin g

Table 3. Residual sugar, sugar/alcohol yield, glycerol and fermentation duration for the various yeast strains in Merlot and Shiraz.

Grape variety

Merlot

Shiraz

code

Residual sugars (g/l)

Sugar/alcohol output ratio (g of sugar for 1 %vol alcohol)

Glycerol (g/l)

Duration AF

Duration MLF

A

0

16.78

6.8

18

27

B

0.34

16.85

7.7

18

40

C

0

16.99

7.9

18

27

D

0

17.48

9.1

20

71

E

0.29

16.99

8.7

21

21

F

0

16.97

7.7

18

16

G

0

16.95

7.9

20

20

A

0.33

16.53

8

14

17

B

0.12

16.66

9.6

14

17

C

0

16.63

9.1

14

17

D

1.54

17.02

9.8

25

15

E

0.17

16.75

9.8

14

17

F

1.12

17.34

15.9

32

12

G

0.15

16.79

10.3

25

14

H

0.18

16.69

9.8

14

36

Measurements and calculation of colour composition indices Colour composition analysis was carried out at the end of alcoholic fermentation

by UV-visible light spectrophotometry, following the adapted protocol of Labarbe (2000). The indices used in this study were calculated (Table 2) as described previously (Wirth et al. 2010, Atanasova et al. 2002) from absorbances measured under various conditions.

Aroma analysis The volatile compounds were analysed at the end of malolactic fermentation.

Various groups of compounds were studied for their possible contribution to the fruity character of red wines: • v arietal thiols, 3-mercaptohexanol and 3-mercaptohexanol acetate that contribute to hints of blackcurrant (Blanchard et al. 1999) • l inear, branched and hydroxylated ethyl esters (Baumes 1998; Pineau et al. 2009) •h igher alcohol acetates (Baumes 1998) • t erpenes, which contribute to aroma complexity (Loscos et al. 2007).

Furthermore, certain fruit-flavour enhancers, such as B-damascenone (Pineau 2007) or fruit-flavour masks, such as 3-isobutyl-2-methoxypyrazine, were also quantified. Lastly, potential in dimethyl sulfide (PDMS) was also assessed, given that DMS, a known fruity-flavour enhancer, is released from PDMS during wine storage (Segurel et al. 2004).

Analyses were conducted by isotopic dilution and GC-MS. Principal component analyses (PCA) Aroma and colour composition were V2 7N 6

analysed by following the principal components. This statistical tool is a method for examining and displaying more effectively properties that explain the variability of a dataset.

Results and discussion Effect of the yeast strain on alcoholic and malolactic fermentations Overall, despite its higher potential alcohol, the Shiraz was more fermentable, most likely due to its higher assimilable nitrogen content. By monitoring alcoholic fermentation kinetics (Table 3), a ranking of very fast (A, B and C) and slower (D and G) yeast strain was established. Batches F and G allowed for the fastest malolactic fermentation for both varieties.

All the traditional wine parameters were monitored. There was not much difference between the yeast strains for volatile acidity and biogenic amine content (which was low in all wines).

On the other hand, differences appeared for glycerol and residual sugar content, and for the sugar/alcohol yield.

• I n all wines residual sugar content was below 2g/L, although slightly higher in the Shiraz wines (richer starting must).

The high assimilable nitrogen content, however, led to fermentations with good sugar/alcohol yield. Yeast D stood out in Merlot, with a sugar/alcohol yield of 17.5.

•Y east A achieved the lowest glycerol content for both varieties.

•T he highest glycerol content was produced by yeast D and E in Merlot, and in Shiraz by yeast F and G. Overall, Shiraz wines were richer in glycerol. It is worth W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.seguin-moreau.fr www.seguinmoreau-icone.com Graeme Little

Mobile: +61 (0)437 060 943 glittle@seguinmoreau.com.au

Dan Eggleton

Mobile: +61 (0)438 824 493 deggleton@seguinmoreau.com.au SEGUIN MOREAU AUSTRALIA Post Office Box 5 Hindmarsh, South Australia 5007 Tel.: +61 (0)8 8406 2000 Fax: +61 (0)8 8406 2001 admin@seguinmoreau.com.au

www.winebiz. com . au

37

winem a kin g

Y E AST

Table 4. Detailed colour composition analysis of Merlot and Shiraz wines at the end of alcoholic fermentation.

Code

Merlot

Shiraz

pH

TPI

CIcor

TP

%PWcor

%PD

%CC 12.1

A

3.4

39

11.1

21.1

33.9

4.1

B

3.37

37

11.8

18.7

39.4

8.9

11.5

C

3.35

38

11.4

19.6

37.5

7

12.9

D

3.3

37

11.7

17.9

39.9

10.6

11.6

E

3.36

38

12.2

18.8

39.7

12.4

10.1

F

3.45

38

10.8

19.8

34.2

7.1

10.1

G

3.37

38

11.2

19.3

36.7

8.6

11.5 5.5

A

4.13

63

13.8

42.7

17.3

4.7

B

4.1

60

15.5

39

21.2

6.5

6.6

C

4.05

62

14.2

40.1

19.5

5.5

6.6

D

3.98

59

11.7

38.4

16.7

5.5

5.4

E

4.14

60

15.4

39

20.7

6.9

5.9

F

4.18

60

15.1

34

22.4

8.9

5.4

G

4.04

62

15.1

39.7

20.6

6.1

6.7

H

4.11

61

14.4

39.6

19.2

6

5.5

Table 5. Yeast acetaldehyde, pyruvic acid and SO2 production in a model environment.

Yeasts

Acetaldehyde (mg/L)

Pyruvic Acid (mg/L)

SO2 (mg/L)

A

Codes

Fermivin

28

n.d

7

B

Fermicru 4F9

44

7

0

C

Fermicru XL

21

11

<20

D

Collection Cépage Merlot

19

9

0

E

Anchor NT50

65

7

0 d.n.a

F

Anchor Exotics SPH

d.n.a

d.n.a

G

Anchor WE372

11

3

0

H

Anchor NT 112

69

4

89

*Data extracted from IFV yeast files. n.d: not detected; d.n.a.: data not available

a

b

Figure 1a and 1b. Principal component analysis of colour composition indices from various yeasts: a - correlation circle, b - projection for the wines from the principal components F1 (82.79%) and F2 (13.47%). noting the very high glycerol content obtained in this grape variety with strain F. Effect of yeast strain on colour composition The results of the colour composition analyses are recorded in Table 4.

The principal component analysis of the colour data is represented in Figure 1.

38

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The first two components (Figure 1a) explain around 96% (F1: 82.79% and F2: 13.47%) of the variability in the dataset.

The projection for the wines on these two axes (Figure 1b) shows that: •F 1 axis is a ‘grape variety’ axis, as it clearly distinguishes between Shiraz and Merlot wines. The positive value of this axis is defined by CI, TPI and TP. This is consistent, given the fact W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

that Shiraz produces more colourful and more polyphenol-rich wines than Merlot.

• F2 axis distinguishes the various ‘yeast’. The positive value of this axis is defined by the percentage of SO2 stable pigments (percent of non-discoloured pigments NDP). Modalities A, B, C, G and E seem to have the same colour in both grape varieties. Modalities D and F show a colour composition difference between Shiraz and Merlot. For both Merlot and Shiraz wines, the percentage of SO2 stable pigments is lower in wines from yeasts A, C and G than B and E. These pigments can be considered as ‘yeast metabolite markers’, as highly reactive anthocyanins may react with yeast metabolites, in particular with acetaldehyde and pyruvic acid.

The pigments resulting from these reactions have a pyranoanthocyanin and carboxy-pyranoanthocyanin structure, respectively. The specific features of these pigments are their yellow/ orange colour and their great stability, especially towards SO2 and pH variations (Cheynier et al. 2006, Rentzsch et al.

2007).

Table 5 compares yeast strains for acetaldehyde, pyruvic acid and SO2 production in model fermentation. Using this data, three types of yeast effect on colour composition can be highlighted: • Highest percentage of NDP is obtained with yeasts that produce large amounts of acetaldehyde and pyruvic acid, but no SO2 (yeasts B and E) • The lowest percentage of NDP is obtained with yeasts that produce very little acetaldehyde and pyruvic acid and no SO2 (yeasts A and G) • The percentage of NDP is also low in yeasts that produce acetaldehyde, pyruvic acid and SO2 (yeasts C and H).

This can be explained by the fact that SO2 combines with the acetaldehyde that did not form pigments by reacting with anthocyanins (Morata et al. 2006).

The yeasts ‘respect’ the colour features of a grape variety, but their metabolites production (acetaldehyde, pyruvic acid and SO2) can impact colour composition (percentage of NDP).

Yeast effect on red wine aroma The Merlot wines in our assay had a low varietal thiol content, close to the perception threshold for 3-mercaptohexanol (3MH, 60ng/L).

Although the thiol content was low, the selected yeast has a major impact in this variety since concentrations ranged from the perception threshold (5ng/L) to almost 90ng/L. It should be noted that as the acetylation rate of 3MH by yeasts remained low, we were unable to detect 3MH acetate in the wines (despite its V27N6

Y E AST

winem a kin g

Table 6. Analyses of the aromatic compounds for the various yeast strains in Merlot and Shiraz.

Merlot

Code

3-IBMP (ng/L)

PDMS (µg/L)

A

0.9

44.4

9.31

Linalool (µg/L)

Nerol (µg/L)

Geraniol (µg/L)

a-terpineol (µg/L)

citronellol (µg/L)

3-mercaptohexanol (ng/L)

3-mercaptohexyl acetate (ng/L)

7.8

1.5

5.6

4

11.2

11.1

nd

B

1.9

41.1

9.70

6.9

1.7

6

4.1

14

73.9

nd

C

1.1

40.2

8.73

8.6

1.8

5.2

4.2

14.1

nd

nd

D

nd

45

7.92

10.1

1.7

5.6

4.8

12.3

E

nd

35.4

12.43

8.8

1.8

4.5

4.4

21.9

53.8

nd

F

nd

56.5

8.74

4

1.7

4

3.9

22.5

nd

nd

G

nd

47.6

9.18

15.5

1.3

4.7

4.2

15.7

nd

nd

51.5

4.87

4.9

2.2

8.6

1

23.7

137.6

71.6

B

54

5.84

4.7

2.4

8.3

1

18.1

152.4

86

C

51.5

6.54

6.5

2.4

9.3

1

21.7

D

58.1

5.44

10.1

2.1

11

1

16.1

E

50.8

4.58

7

2.7

11.5

1

16.8

F

53.9

4.98

3.1

2.8

7.8

1

14.7

223

95.9

G

77.5

5.02

4.7

2.8

9.6

1

28.3

A

Shiraz

-damascenone (µg/l)

low instrumental detection threshold of around 5ng/L).

In Shiraz, the yeast also had a marked effect. Yeast F produced the most 3MH. The acetylation molar rate is higher than in Merlot wines, standing at 28-38%. Both varietal thiols may contribute to hints of blackcurrant and, more generally, are responsible for a fresh, fruity character.

High PDMS degradation was observed in fermentation. Degradation rates varied between yeasts from 96% to 92%. With such degradation, residual PDMS concentration might be too low to generate enough DMS for an aroma enhancer effect. The yeast-plusbacteria pairs with the smallest PDMS degradation rate are F in Merlot, and G

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

in Shiraz. Differences probably result from an interaction between the yeasts’ nitrogen needs and the musts’ nitrogen composition. As recently reported, PDMS is mostly S-methylmethionine, is amino acid derivate, and can constitute a nitrogen source for yeast. When metabolised as a nitrogen source, it does not lead to dimethyl sulfide

www.winebiz. com . au

39

winem a kin g

Y E AST

a

Figure 2. PCA in all wines at the end of MLF and all analyses except for IBMP and varietal thiols. production. DMS produced is highly volatile and eliminated during fermentation (Segurel et al. 2004).

A way to prevent this degradation could be the correction of the nitrogen composition in accordance to the nitrogen requirements of individual yeasts. As yeast nitrogen metabolism is quite complex and exhibits several regulation types, further work has to be performed in order to evaluate the type (inorganic versus complex sources) and the optimal moment of nitrogen addition for each strain.

As expected for both varieties, terpene concentrations are low and are well beneath their perception threshold. There are noticeable differences between the yeasts, mainly in linalool.

Figure 3a and 3b (right). PCA in Shiraz wines at the end of MLF and all analyses except for IBMP and varietal thiols.

There is a very low 3-isobutyl-2-ethoxypyrazine (3-IBMP) content, often beneath the instrumental detection limit (1ng/L), and always beneath the generally accepted olfactory detection threshold (15ng/L) in red wines. It is likely that 3-IBMP does not contribute to wine aroma either directly or via a fruit-masking effect.

Data was processed using statistical multivariate analyses. The first PCA was carried out on all wines at the end of MLF, and for all variables (except for thiols and IBMP, which were either too incomplete or irrelevant).

The graphic outputs for the two main factors, which explain 62% of the variability (Figure 2), clearly distinguish between Merlot

THE ART LIVES ON...

The aim of art is to represent not the outward appearance of things, but their inward significance. â&#x20AC;&#x201D;Aristotle Our barrels are works of art, crafted with expertise and perfection to honour wine.

Partner with Tonnellerie Quintessence to create your masterpiece.

www.tonnelleriequintessence.fr 185x130.indd 1

40

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

8/9/11 9:04 PM

V27N6

Y E AST

winem a kin g

THIS YEAR I WILL USE ONLY THE BEST

b

and Shiraz in accordance with axis 1. The yeast strains used respect the specific features of both varieties in terms of aromatic composition. It is, however, difficult to draw conclusions regarding which molecules would be yeast or variety related, except for methylated ethers and damascenone for Merlot, which is linked to the high norisprenoid and glycoside precursor content in the corresponding must. This composition may be responsible for the significant hints of red berries in the corresponding wines. Shiraz wines seem to differ by their linear ethyl ester and ester acetate content, which correspond to white-fleshed fruits and flowery aroma. It should also be noted that yeast F stands out significantly from the other strains in Merlot and is characterised by very high 2-phenylethanol content; its floral hints may contribute to the aromatic freshness of this wine.

PCAs by grape variety were also carried out in an attempt to better highlight the effects of the yeast strains.

For the Shiraz (Figure 3), dispersion was observed in the different wines, although two of them, F and G, seem to stand out. F is characterised by high ester acetate and 2-phenylethanol content, and G by high ethyl hexanoate content. These components contribute to the fruity and floral character. Nevertheless, these observations need to be tempered by the fact that the map drawn by these first two factors only explains less than 50% of the system’s total variability.

Yeast F also stands out in the Merlot (Figure 4, see page 42), and the corresponding wine appears to be richer in linear ethyl ethers (octanoate and ethyl decanoate), with hints of white-fleshed fruits, and in 2-phenylethanol and 2-phenylethanol acetate, with floral hints.

The specific behaviour of yeast G, which helps boost higher alcohol acetate and hydroxylated ester content, should also be noted.

Enartis Pacific rangE of finishing Products sPEciaLitY WinEMaKing Products tannins

A complete range of the highest quality enological tannins. unico rangE: oaK tannins of unMatchEd QuaLitY for suPErior WinE stYLE! unico #1 It has the most intense vanilla-chocolate-toasted wood scents that you can experience from a tannin. unico #2 It contributes to softness, structure and reduced sensations of harshness in wine.

PoLYsaccharidEs

To enhance the organoleptic quality and chemical stability of all wines. surLÌ round It assures better colour stability and enhances wine structure, balance and aromatic complexity.

Conclusions This study proves that yeasts have a considerable effect in red wines on phenolic composition and colour parameters, especially on the formation of SO2 stable pigments. These derived pigments are the product of reactions between anthocyanins and other components, such as yeast metabolites: acetaldehyde and pyruvic acid.

In terms of effects on wine aroma, although the yeast does ‘respect’ the specific aromatic features of the variety, each strain produces a unique aromatic profile. Some strains stand out more and the differences are made more obvious when the aroma analysis results are processed using a wide range of techniques.

The following has been demonstrated at the end of MLF: V2 7N 6

Enartis Pacific australian Branch PO Box 886 30-38 Tanunda rd.

Nuriootpa 5355 South Australia Ph. +61 (0)8 85 65 72 44 Fax +61 (0)8 85 62 41 70 darkoo@enartis.com www.enartis.com

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Enartis Pacific new Zealand Branch PO Box 4304 39 Edmundson st.

Napier New Zealand Ph. +61 (6)8 43 44 13 Fax +61 (6)8 43 44 39 shirley.joseph@enartis.com www.enartis.com

www.winebiz. com . au

41

winem a kin g

Y E AST

Figure 4. PCA in Merlot wines at the end of MLF and all analyses except for IBMP and varietal thiols.

•E xotics SPH produces higher levels of ethyl hexanoate and 3-mercaptohexanol in Merlot wines, and higher octanoate, ethyl decanoate and 2-phenylethanol content in Shiraz wines. These compounds contribute to the complexity of the fruity notes with a ‘fresh’ character.

• W E 372 stands out as a yeast suitable for producing fruity Shiraz with high ester and 2-phenylethanol content. It also produces significant levels of higher alcohol acetates, which contribute to an exuberant, fruity character of wines (often highly volatile).

Looking at dimethyl sulfide potential, a slight yeast effect can be noted on the degradation of its precursor during alcoholic fermentation. Further work must be performed

in order to study the possible corrective effect of nitrogen addition on this degradation.

References Atanasova, V. ; Fulcrand, H. ; Cheynier, V. and Moutounet, M. (2002) Effect of oxygenation on polyphenol changes occurring in the course of winemaking.

Analytica Chimica Acta. 458 :15-27.

Baumes, R. (1998) Les constituants volatils du stade fermentaire.

Oenologie, Fondements Scientifique et Technologiques. C. Flanzy. Paris, Tec & Doc Lavoisier: 183-202.

Blanchard, L.; Bouchilloux, P.; Darriet, P.; Tominaga, T. and Dubourdieu, D. (1999) Caractérisation de la fraction volatile de nature soufrée dans les vins de Cabernat et de Merlot. Etude de son evolution au cours de l’élevage en barriques. Oenologie 99, 6ième Symposium Interantional d’Oenologie, Bordeaux, Lavoisier Tec & Doc.

Cheap Reliable Effective Cold Storage

Cheynier, V.; Dueñas-Paton, M.; Salas, E.; Maury, C.; Souquet, J.-M.; Sarni-Manchado, P. and Fulcrand, H. (2006) Structure and properties of wine pigments and tannins. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 57(3):298305.

Refrigerated Containers • 10’ 20’ & 40’ for Sale • Hire - Short or Long-term

Loscos, N.; Hernandez-Orte, P.; Cacho, J. and Ferreira, V. (2007) Release and formation of varietal aroma compounds during alcoholic fermentation from non-floral grape odourless flavour precursors fractions. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55(16):6674-6684.

Labarbe, B. (2000) Le potentiel polyphénolique de la grappe de Vitis vinifera var. Gamay noir et son devenir en vinification beaujolaise. Thèse de doctorat. Université Montpellier, France.

Morata, A.; Gomez-Cordoves, M.C.; Calderon, F. and Suarez, J.A. (2006) Effects of pH, temperature and SO2 on the formation of pyranoanthocyanins during red wine fermentation with two species of Saccharomyces.

International Journal of Food Microbiology 106:123 – 129 Pineau, B.; Barbe, J.-C.; Van Leeuwen, C. and Dubourdieu, D. (2007) Which impact for b-damascenone on red wine aroma? Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55(10):4103-4108.

Pineau, B.; Barbe, J.-C.; Van Leeuwen, C. and Dubourdieu, D. (2009) Examples of perceptive interactions involved in specific ‘red-’ and ‘blackberry’ aromas in red wines. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 57(9):3702-3708.

Rentzsch, M.; Schwarz, M. and Winterhalter, P. (2007) Pyranoanthocyanins – an overview on structures, occurrence and pathways of formation. Trends in FoodScience & Technology 18(10):526–534.

Call the experts for the most reliable ex-shipping containers. Delivered where you need it, when you need it.

Adelaide (08) 8447 8800 11 Bellchambers Rd, Edinburgh North

www.irssa.com.au

Installation • Repairs • Sales • Container & Commercial Refrigeration

42

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Roujou de Boubée, D.; Van Leeuwen, C. and Dubourdieu, D. (2000) Organoleptic impact of 2-methoxy-3-isobutylpyrazine on red Bordeaux and Loire wines. Effect of environmental conditions on concentrations in grapes during ripening. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 48(10):48304834.

Segurel, M.A.; Razungles, A.J.; Riou, C.; Salles, M. and Baumes, R.L. (2004) Contribution of dimethyl sulfide to the aroma of Syrah and Grenache Noir wines and estimation of its potential in grapes of these varieties.

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 52(23):7084-7093.

Wirth, J.; Morel-Salmi, C.; Souquet, J.M.; Dieval, J.B.; Aagaard, O.; Vidal, S.; Fulcrand, H. and Cheynier, V. (2010) The impact of oxygen exposure before and after bottling on the polyphenolic composition of red wines. Food Chemistry 123(1):107-116.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

B A R R E L

Humidification – keeping more of the angels’ share in the barrel

HALLS

winem a kin g

Premium Estate Bottlers

By Cathy Howard

Winery humidification technology could help Australian wineries to keep more wine in the barrel and, in turn, profits up.

A

ny wine lost during the production process is a loss in profit. At various points in the winemaking process we lose wine volume, and at each of these points we strive to minimise those losses.

Apart from the occasional and unforeseen human error in the cellar leading to a wine loss, we lose wine through carrying out routine operations such as transfers, filtration and bottling. We also lose wine through evaporation during storage in oak barrels, sometimes referred to as ‘the angels’ share’. This loss can be as high as 9 percent depending on the conditions in the cellar (temperature and humidity), and the length of time the wine is stored in the barrel.

To manage this evaporation loss and to maintain wine quality by minimising the ullage in the barrel, we replace or top up this lost volume regularly with wine of similar quality. This is a significant added cost to production, not only because of the wine volume that has been

Proudly

supporting the

Australian Wine Industry

High Efficiency Solutions.

•

Solutions for the Wine industry Temperature and humidity control systems

ADSGA#1ACA

Water atomising humidifiers for reducing the loss in barrel hall due to evaporation

Powerful solution for logging, and alarming (SMS, Email etc) of critical temperature and humidity points.

Special energy monitoring feature

ir33 universal: wide range of controllers for reliable and accurate vat temperature control

CAREL Australia PTY LTD

PO BOX 6809, Silverwater Bus. Ctr. N.S.W. 1811 - Unit 37, 11-21 Underwood Rd Homebush N.S.W. 2140 - Tel. (+61) 2 8762 9200 Fax (+61) 2 9764 6933 - sales@carel.com.au

V2 7N 6

carel.com

labeling & packaging systems tailored to meet the needs of all sized wineries • Competent, friendly & professional & packaging requirements both before & on site • All Line Speeds 3000 bottles bottles per hour • All pressure sensitive label applications • Cork / Screwcap / Crown Seal / Lux / & WAK cap closure capability • Supply of all dry goods can be arranged - inc. bottles, corks, caps, cartons, dividers, pallets & shrinkwrap if required • HACCP / OH&S accredited • All facilities Food Safety registered • Bottle Sparging available • Australian Certified Organic

For further information contact Premium Estate Bottlers Pty Ltd 121 Strickland Rd Bendigo Vic 3550 Ph 03 5441 8266 Fax 03 5441 8033 Email operations@premiumestatebottlers.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

43

winem a kin g

B A R R E L

lost, but also due to the cost per litre of the replacement topping wine, as well as the labour costs incurred when carrying out the barrel topping operations.

So, what can we do to reduce this volume lost to evaporation, and minimise its effects on our production costs, while still retaining the wine quality benefits of maturing our wines in oak barrels?

Temperature control in the barrel hall is important, particularly in Australia with our relatively mild winters and warm summers.

Many wineries use insulated, air conditioned areas to store their barrels. At Whicher Ridge, we store our barrels stacked three cradles high in an insulated, air conditioned, high roofed, corrugated iron building, with a floor area of 7 metres by 9 metres. The air conditioner runs as required during summer and into autumn, to keep the ambient temperature in our barrel room down to around 18oC. Our Cabernet Sauvignon and Shiraz stay inbarrel for up to 24 months, and our Sauvignon Blanc and Chardonnay stay in barrel for 12 months. We have a total of 40 barrels, which we routinely top up every six to eight weeks.

On average, during the cooler months, we have an average topping volume per 225-litre barrel of 1-1.5L. In the warmer months this is closer to 2-2.5L/barrel. This equates to a loss in volume per barrel of 5% per year. For our

HALLS

reds, this is 10% over the two-year period that the wines are maturing in barrel.

What about controlling the humidity in the barrel room? High humidity minimises the evaporation of wine through the wood because the moisture is available from both sides of the barrel wood, and a relative humidity of around 85% is considered ideal.

To find out more about the humidification systems available in the marketplace, I contacted Carel Australia (www.carel.com) and Ozmist (www.ozmist.com.au). For more than 20 years, spray misting systems to control humidity have been a popular and effective form of cooling and humidification in the US and other parts of the world, including New Zealand where Carel Australia’s partner company Eurotech Ltd is based. The use of these humidification systems has proven successful in reducing evaporation and containing wine losses, but both contacts reported a poor uptake in wineries in Australia.

Misting uses the basic principle of flash evaporation. Water is pressurised to 1000PSI via a pump, then forced through specially designed brass and stainless steel nozzles, where it is atomised into millions of ultra-fine water droplets. The droplets of water flash evaporate when they come into contact with the air, absorbing the heat in the air without any wetting of floors or surfaces.

There are a number of humidification methods available to the wine industry and the methods most commonly used are centrifugal high pressure water spray, and compressed air/water spray. Centrifugal high pressure pumps are used in smaller barrel halls, and compressed air/water are used for the larger areas as the throw of the air/water systems is much greater than other systems. Carel, through its partner company Eurotech NZ, has provided many more air/water humidifiers than centrifugal.

Water lines are generally run through the roof and spaced 6m apart, with the nozzles spaced 550-1500mm apart, depending on the ambient humidity conditions in the room.

There is a 1m clearance above barrels, and the nozzles are angled at 90o to the floor, and mist across the barrels. A humidity sensor probe is positioned in the centre of the room.

The relative humidity levels are controlled electronically by a programmable humidistat.

The desired conditions are programmed into the humidistat, which controls the pump module operation. The controller is set for the minimum humidity required, and is generally programmed at 85% for barrel rooms.

Based on this information, the humidifier will operate until the sensor reaches the humidity required. Humidity spikes are eliminated and losses through evaporation can now be ▶ contained to approximately 2%.

Cooling solutions that work for your business Cold Logic has been providing hire chillers and other cooling products to the wine industry for over 15 years. Our clients include: • Boar’s Rock, Margaret River, Western Australia • Orlando Wyndham Group, Rowland Flat, South Australia • Taylors Wines, Auburn, South Australia • Kirrihill Wines, Clare, South Australia • Jim Barry Wines, Clare, South Australia • Mollydooker Wines, McLaren Vale, South Australia • Australia Vintage - Yaldara, Lyndoch, South Australia We offer very competitive prices on chiller hire and other equipment hire including: • Water Cooled Brine Chillers • Air Cooled Brine Chillers We can put together customised Barrel Store or Finished Goods cooling solutions and hire these over extended periods to help minimise your capital costs.

• Short term - full or part vintage • Long term - multiple vintage contracts We will source other equipment on demand.

South Australia

24 Francis Street, Port Adelaide SA 5015 T +61 8 8240 3333 F +61 8 8240 1455

44

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Victoria

STOCK AVAILABLE • 150 kW Air Cooled Chiller • 280 kW Air Cooled Chiller • 740 kW Air Cooled Chiller • 780 kW Water Cooler Chiller & Cooling Tower • 5 Tonne per day Crushed Icemaker

3 Adina Court, Tullamarine VIC 3043 T +61 3 8318 7900 F +61 3 9330 3429

solutions@coldlogic.com.au www.coldlogic.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

3 Total integrated winery control Control every aspect of your winery operation including temperature, pumpover, plant, power usage, water, barrel halls, waste, fermentation, grape receival and must control via our one attractive interface

Plus many other affordable control and security modules that will save you time, effort and money Also available: The Fermetrol: on-line fermentation monitoring

For more information please contact us at: Web: www.vinwizard.com Phone: Australia 041 614 3902 Phone: New Zealand (03) 572 8511

winem a kin g

B A R R E L

Air in the barrel hall must be circulated to get around every barrel to prevent mould growth, and the fans must run all of the time that there is moisture being put into the hall.

The air conditioning system already in place in the barrel hall would be able to carry out this function. Mould generally grows where the wood is damp, and a relative humidity of 8590% in a breezy atmosphere is not conducive to the formation of mould.

Another requirement is that the barrel room is as well sealed as it can be, to prevent the loss of a chilled, humidified atmosphere.

How much will a humidification system cost? For larger barrel halls, the compressed air and water humidification systems would be $15-20,000 for the equipment, plus installation costs. Smaller systems running with a high pressure pump would start at $3000, plus installation.

Once installed, the running costs include electricity and water use charges. Winery operators would have a feel for the costs of running the refrigeration system, while the humidifier system costs are the water, and the electricity to run either the air compressor or the high pressure pump. System maintenance is fairly standard, as nozzles do not usually block unless the pre-filtered water being used has high calcium levels.

As part of my research for this article, I did some quick calculations for Whicher Ridge

HALLS

Wines. The total volume of topping wine that we used over the past year in our 40 barrels was 490L, and this equates to a rate of loss per barrel of 5% per year. If I work on our topping wine being valued at $4/L, this loss equates to $1950 per year.

If I then look at our labour costs, we would spend around six hours every six to eight weeks carrying out barrel topping operations, including set-up and cleaning. If I conservatively value our time at $30/hour, this is equivalent to $300 per topping operation, which equates to labour costs of $1800 per year.

If we can reduce the volume of wine we are losing from evaporation down to 2% per year, we would be saving $1150 in topping wine costs per year, and if we carried out four topping operations a year instead of six this would save us $600 a year. A total saving in the first year of $1750, and on a system that would potentially cost us $3000 plus installation, would pay for itself in two years.

We are only a small operation, and currently we do all the cellar work ourselves.

In medium to larger wineries, a reduction of 50% in the wine volume losses through evaporation combined with the substantial savings in labour costs due to carrying out less barrel topping operations, could lead to a humidification system paying for itself within the first year.

Conclusions Any wine lost during production is a loss in profit, and losses due to evaporation during barrel maturation are no exception.

Humidification of the air in the barrel hall can significantly reduce this loss. There will be significant savings in production costs, which will pay for the humidification system in a short period of time, and these savings continue over time, every year after installation.

Humidification systems do not lead to the pooling of water on the floor and mouldy damp barrel surfaces. The ultra-fine mist droplets totally evaporate when they come into contact with the air, absorbing the heat in the air. The humidification of barrel halls complements the existing refrigerated cooling systems, as they replace moisture removed by the refrigeration process. The air movement provided by the cooling system fans further assist the barrel surfaces to remain dry. Another benefit that has not been discussed in this article is the improvement in storage conditions for empty barrels, both new and used.

Cathy Howard is winemaker and, together with husband Neil, proprietor of Whicher Ridge Wines, near Busselton, in Western Australia, and has been making wine for the past 18 years. She also consults part time to some wineries in the Geographe region.

WVJ

FOR ALL YOUR WINERY RAW MATERIAL NEEDS IMCD Business Group Filtration

• DE

• Enzymes

• PVPP

• CMC

• Fining Agents

• Perlite Filteraid

• Yeast

• Bentonite

• Kupzit

• Filtration

• Cellulose

• Nutrients

• DAP

• Silica SOL

- Sheets

- Lenticular Filters

• Activated Carbon

• Bacteria

• Propylene Glycol

• Tannins

- Membrane cartridges

- Housings to suite

www.imcdgroup.com

Value through expertise 1 / 372 Wellington Rd, Mulgrave VIC • P: 1300 655 328 • F: 1300 652 533 • E: imcdfl@imcd.com.au

46

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

a good drop needs ideal conditions Are your refrigeration systems ready for the demands of vintage?

Give Oomiak a call to discuss options for pre-vintage service. we know all aspects of the wine manufacturing process we understand the operating environment and deliver our services in line with the demands of the industry our technicians and engineers have spent many years working in the sector qualified and experienced to work with freon, ammonia and secondary refrigerant systems and all major equipment brands

we make it our business to understand yours Oomiak serves up a fine blend of refrigeration engineering know-how and clever design with comprehensive services that cover:

For more information on the above or any of our other products or services, please phone our Customer Support Team on 1300 731 699.

capital projects design and installation customer support plant and equipment maintenance 24/7 critical supplies spare parts and consumables equipment leasing short, medium and long-term consulting services design, energy, safety and efficiency second-hand equipment selection and installation

across Australia and Asia comprehensive refrigeration services

13OO 731 699 customerservice@oomiak.com.au www.oomiak.com.au

winem a kin g

TA R T R AT E STA B I L I T Y

Assessment of CMC-induced tartrate stability over an extended period

By Rodney Marsh1 and Sue Mills2 1 Managing Director, Winechek, Western Australia. Email: rodney@winechek.com 2 Business Manager, IMCD Australia

This article summarises the initial results of a 12-month trial into the effectiveness of sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) on tartrate stability in two Australian wines.

C

MC (sodium carboxymethyl cellulose) was approved for winemaking in Australia in late 2011. There have been a number of studies done overseas to show its effectiveness in imparting tartrate stability in wine, but no published studies on Australian wines, even though some Australian wineries may be using the product. This trial was constructed to assess the performance of CMC on two Australian wines. One white and one red wine were chosen to be studied over a period of 12 months. Six months into the trial we have decided to release some initial results which we think define some key aspects that influence CMC performance and determine wines best suited to their application. At the end of the 12 months, we will publish the total wine and organoleptic results.

The trial Two CMCs were provided by IMCD: a liquid from Erbsloeh (Vinostab 7.5%) and a granule product from Dow Chemicals (Dow C/S Wine 100%). Three dosage rates for each product were suggested

by IMCD: For the Vinostab, 0.75mL/L, 1.0mL/L and 1.3mL/L; For the Dow C/S Wine, 0.05g/L, 0.075g/L and 0.1g/L. Vinostab is represented by VS, and DCS is the Dow material in the tables.

The two wines selected were a 2011 Margaret River Chardonnay and a 2008 Western Australian Cabernet Merlot. It was determined that we should analyse each wine with a control and at each dosage rate prior to chilling, and at three, six and 12 months. Trial samples were stored at -4°C for the entire length of the trial, thus putting the wines under extreme conditions.

Methodology A Metrohm autotitrator helped us to achieve pH and TA measurements.

48

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Figure 1. Control wine (left), CMC addition wine (right).

Alcohol analysis was completed by NIR on an Anton Paar Alcolyser. Glucose and fructose and acetic acid results were determined by enzymatic analysis.

Turbidity measurements were made on a Hach 2100P Turbidimeter.

The industry standard for testing cold stability is by using the Brine reference method (-4°C for three days). This method requires the analyst to observe crystals being formed in the bottom of the bottles. In our experience of more than 10 years, using conductivity to determine cold stability will give more scientific results. Two instruments where chosen: the Erbsloeh KristaTest conductivity to meter to perform the saturation temperature (Tsat) for potassium (K) and calcium (Ca), and the Stabilab to perform the DIT% and ISTC50 analysis.

Tsat tests use conductivity and are based on the ability of wine to dissolve either potassium hydrogen tartrate (KHT) or calcium tartrate (CaT), depending on what test is being performed, at room temperature. The theory is that the more stable a wine, the more KHT or CaT can be dissolved into the wine. Conversely, the less stable the wine, the less KHT or CaT that can be dissolved into the wine.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

The result from the EasyKrista’s reading is referenced to a chart, which indicates if wines are stable or not. This test is useful to determine what instability is present before any addition of CMC. Once CMC has been added to wine, instability can be determined by using a mini-contact process method, by cooling the wine to less than 5°C, adding the KHT, and measuring the change to conductivity. A decrease in conductivity determines that crystallisation in the wine has occurred.

Even though the EasyKrista can help determine the stability after CMC addition, newer technology in the form of a Stabilab has been developed. This instrument has been used to study cold stability post-CMC additions in Europe. The Stabilab test is also based on conductivity measurements, but the difference is they are strictly controlled analyses at -4°C. The DIT%, or degree of tartrate instability, involves chilling bottle-ready wine to -4°C, adding the equivalent of 4g/L of KHT, and measuring conductivity every 10 minutes for four hours in a closed, stirred system to assess the degree of crystal formation.

Results less than 4.8% are considered stable, while results higher than 30% indicate the wine is too unstable for CMC use.

V27N6

TA R T R AT E STA B I L I T Y

winem a kin g

Table 1. White wine results.

BLEND

2011 MR CHARD

BATCH

pH

TA g/L

G/F g/L

ALC % v/v

Acetic Acid g/L

Turbidity NTU

Tsat K

Tsat Ca

COLD Stabilab ISTC50 @-4C

ISTC50 uS change @-4C

Tartrate Stability DIT%

>20.7

>30.3

30.3

CONTROL

3.28

7.6

0.7

13.9

0.23

0.66

unstable

96

VS 0.75mL/L

3.28

7.6

0.8

13.8

0.24

0.63

stable

1

VS 1.0mL/L

3.28

7.5

0.7

13.8

0.23

0.6

stable

2

VS 1.3mL/L

3.27

7.5

0.8

13.8

0.24

0.66

stable

1

DCS 0.05g/L

3.27

7.6

0.7

13.8

0.22

0.74

stable

1

DCS 0.075g/L

3.29

7.5

0.7

13.8

0.22

0.73

stable

1

DCS 0.1g/L

3.29

7.5

0.7

13.8

0.23

0.65

stable

1

Average

3.28

7.5

0.7

13.8

0.23

0.67

The Stabilab ISTC50 (critical tartaric stability index with a 50g/hL KHT addition) test is used to confirm tartrate stability. The test involves dissolving the equivalent of 0.5g/L of KHT into bottle-ready wine at 35°C, then, transferring the wine to a -4°C bath, adding glass beads and measuring conductivity as per the DIT% test to see if crystallisation could be induced, which will show as conductivity changes. Results less than 15uS/cm change in conductivity over four hours indicate stability has been achieved.

It is preferable to see changes as less than 5uS/cm.

V2 7N 6

We chose to use the Stabilab DIT% and ISTC50 as a more accurate measurement of tartrate stability post-CMC addition.

Observations Some preparation issues were experienced with the CMCs. First, the 7.5% suspension of Vinostab was too viscous to pipette accurately and, so, a 1:5 dilution with the test wine was made prior to making the additions. This may not be an issue in a winery situation, as larger volumes will be involved. The Dow C/S Wine granular CMC was particularly hard to work with and, despite the manufacturer stating we could make

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

a higher concentrated solution, we could only manage a 1% solution due to the high shear forces needed to dissolve the granules and the resultant high viscosities of more concentrated solutions. This issue would definitely have effects in the winery situation when preparing solutions for additions to tanks.

Initial wine testing post-addition of the CMCs included routine analysis of pH, TA, alcohol, glucose and fructose, acetic acid and turbidity. Also, four tartrate stability tests were performed on the control wines: Tsat for KHT, Tsat for CaT, Stabilab DIT% and Stabilab ISTC50. ▶

www.winebiz. com . au

49

winem a kin g

TA R T R AT E STA B I L I T Y

Table 2. A new, slightly less unstable white wine; Sauvignon Blanc results.

BLEND

2011 SB

Tsat Ca

COLD Stabilab ISTC50 @-4C

ISTC50 uS change @-4C

Tartrate Stability DIT%

23.3

unstable

17

11.9

BATCH

pH

TA g/L

RS

ALC %v/v

VA g/L

Turbidity NTU

CONTROL

3.23

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.21

0.44

VS 0.75mL/L

3.25

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.21

0.38

stable

1

VS 1.0mL/L

3.25

6.7

0.9

13.8

0.21

0.37

stable

3

VS 1.3mL/L

3.25

6.7

1.1

13.8

0.21

0.37

stable

1

DCS 0.05g/L

3.25

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.22

0.37

stable

2

DCS 0.075g/L

3.25

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.21

0.40

stable

1

DCS 0.1g/L

3.25

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.21

0.38

stable

1

Average

3.25

6.7

1.0

13.8

0.21

0.39

Tsat K

15.8

Table 3. Cabernet Merlot results.

BLEND

2008 WA CABMER

BATCH

pH

TA g/L

G/F g/L

ALC %v/v

Acetic Acid g/L

Turbidity NTU

Tsat K

Tsat Ca

COLD Stabilab ISTC50 @-4C

ISTC50 uS change @-4C

Tartrate Stability DIT%

22.9

>31.9

10.0

CONTROL

3.52

6.0

0.7

14.0

0.43

0.65

unstable

39

VS 0.75mL/L

3.53

5.9

0.7

14.0

0.44

0.46

stable

4

VS 1.0mL/L

3.52

6.0

0.6

13.9

0.41

0.72

stable

1

VS 1.3mL/L

3.51

6.0

0.6

13.9

0.40

0.49

stable

1

DCS 0.05g/L

3.52

5.9

0.7

14.0

0.45

0.51

stable

2

DCS 0.075g/L

3.51

5.9

0.7

13.9

0.43

0.46

stable

5

DCS 0.1g/L

3.51

5.9

0.6

13.9

0.41

0.52

stable

1

Average

3.52

5.9

0.7

13.9

0.42

0.54

All trial addition samples had Stabilab ISTC50 analysis to confirm that the CMCs had conferred tartrate stability postaddition.

From Table 1, it can be seen that no effect to the pH, TA, alcohol, glucose and fructose, acetic acid or turbidity was seen. The control 2011 Margaret River Chardonnay is considered extremely KHT unstable via the Tsat K, DIT% and ISTC50 tests and also very CaT unstable by the Tsat Ca test. However, the CMC dosages appeared to stabilise the wine at this time.

At the three month check, it became obvious that the wine was indeed too unstable for CMC treatment, with all the trial additions showing crystals to some degree, but to a much lower degree than the control wine (Table 2). This prompted us to check with both suppliers of the product to confirm this phenomenon. It was discovered that the actual use of the product in Europe is with wine that is not very young and at a Tsat K of 15-16.

Given this new information, we started our trial again using a Sauvignon Blanc with a Tsat K of 15.8 (Table 2).

Again, it can be seen that no effect to the pH, TA, alcohol, glucose and fructose, acetic acid or turbidity was seen.

The control 2011 Sauvignon Blanc is considered moderately KHT unstable via the Tsat K, DIT% and ISTC50 tests, and also mild to moderately CaT unstable by the Tsat Ca test. Again, the CMC dosages appear to stabilise the wine at this time.

50

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The Sauvignon Blanc controls had tartrate crystals precipitate at three months. Meanwhile, the CMC additions showed no crystals and remained stable by the Stabilab ISTC50 test at both three and six months. We will continue the trial to completion of 12 months.

Red wine results In the red wine, it can again be seen that no effect to the pH, TA, alcohol, glucose and fructose, acetic acid or turbidity was seen. The control 2008 Cabernet Merlot is considered moderately KHT unstable via the Tsat K, DIT% and ISTC50 tests, and also mild to moderately CaT unstable by the Tsat Ca test. Again, the CMC dosages appear to stabilise the wine at this time.

At three months, the red wine was checked and, while the trial addition wines where still stable according to the ISTC50 test, it was observed that a large amount of red colour had been precipitated. As the bottle had been laid on its side while being refrigerated, it was observed in all bottles that the mouth of the bottle was partially blocked by precipitate.

Conclusion At six months, both the white and red CMC addition wines remained tartrate stable.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

In our experience, the preparation issues associated with the dry/granular forms of CMC may cause issues in some wineries, as high shear forces (very vigorous stirring) is required to dissolve the CMC. Liquid forms of the CMC are easier to handle in large quantities. Wineries should weigh up the cost differences. It is important to clean all mixing equipment extremely well after CMC use.

It is recommended to note the supplierâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s information when using the product.

Protein stable wine is required before any CMC additions. CMCs only act to supress potassium tartrate crystals, so it is important to know if the wine is potassium or calcium unstable. Knowing the instability of the wine before any additions would also be useful. As advised by Erbsloeh, care should be taken if adding CMCs prior to bottling. To avoid any filtration difficulties, additions three to four days prior to bottling is recommended.

From our results, young white wines maybe too unstable for CMC use. Analysis like the Stabilab DIT% test needs to be performed to assess wine stability and potential usefulness of CMC to achieve stability. White wines with Tsat potassium values of 15-16 will have a better chance of stability with CMC. When dealing with highly unstable wines, it would be advisable to conduct wine trials and testing to determine suitability. Wineries should do their own tests to determine the dose and stability of wines they intend to use with this product.

Addition of CMC to red wine produces V27N6

TA R T R AT E STA B I L I T Y

winem a kin g

Control wine showing combined tartrate/colour precipitate (left); colour precipitate in CMC addition wine (right). stable wines, but the issue of colour precipitation would require further investigation. If, for example, it was used on rosé, loss of colour would cause problems in a light coloured wine. Bench trials would definitely be required to make an assessment. Our study is seen as a very severe test, but that was the intent. Further research into loss of colour would be

required in this area, as this is outside the scope of this study.

Tartrate stable wines are produced when CMCs are used. It would be advisable for winemakers to carry out appropriate tests and bench trials on their wine prior to implementation to achieve successful results. Longer-term studies will reveal any changes. We will continue our trial

for 12 months and report the findings on conclusion.

References Marsh, R. (2010) Stabilab™ - the new standard in tartrate stability testing. Australian & New Zealand Grapegrower & Winemaker 558:80-84.

Erbsloeh EasyKrista test operating instructions.

For further information, contact Sue Mills at IMCD, smills@imcd.com.au

Incline Drainers

Four models -300, 500, 800, 1000mm

Additionally we tailor-make • Marc removal systems • Receiving bins • Stalk elevators • Belt conveyors • Whole bunch pressing conveyors • Storage tanks

Membrane Presses

4,500 ltr to 66,000 ltr tank capaciy Both closed and slotted shell presses

Destemmers/Crushers There are six models in our MC Series: · MC100 · MC250 · MC400 · MC600 · MC800 · MC1000

10–15 tonne/hr 25–30 tonne/hr 40–50 tonne/hr 50–60 tonne/hr 60–80 tonne/hr 80–100 tonne/hr

28-34 Neptune Terrace • Ottoway • South Australia 5013 Phone (08) 8447 3911 • Fax (08) 8447 1088 • Email fmc@fmiller.com.au For more information on our wide range of products visit www.fmiller.com.au

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

Australian Products for Australian Wineries

Spotlight on Innovative Efficient Products for the Wine Industry

WVJ

51

vi t ic u l t u re

R O O TST O C K S

Rootstock breeding and associated R&D in the viticulture and wine industry

By John Whiting, John Whiting Viticulture. Email: jrwhiting@internode.on.net

The Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation recently commissioned a review of rootstock breeding and associated R&D in the viticulture and wine industry to guide it in determining where the most effective future investments can be made. John Whiting, the author of the review, summarises the report.

A

ttitudes to the use of grapevine rootstocks have changed markedly over the past decade and the wine industry is now more interested in exploring their use. The major impetus for the change in attitude was the extended drought period the industry has recently been through, where the benefits of certain rootstocks shone through in research trials and commercial vineyards.

This is one of the conclusions from a review of grapevine rootstocks in Australia commissioned by the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC), with a view to guiding the most effective future investments in this area.

The review considered progress with research and development into rootstocks since the comprehensive report of May 1994, industry attitudes to existing and potential new rootstocks, gaps in the use and management of current rootstocks, and the status of rootstock breeding, evaluation and commercialisation both in Australia and internationally.

Rootstocks are mostly derived from Vitis species grown in North America that have developed tolerance to grape phylloxera, as well as possessing other characteristics that make them adaptable to a range of vineyard conditions. Rootstocks are widely used around the world, and some regions in Australia are planted entirely on rootstocks.

This demonstrates that their use is not a barrier to commercial vineyard viability.

In the past, winegrape growers in many other Australian regions only considered rootstocks useful for pest-related problems and, if no pests were present, could not justify paying the additional cost for grafted vines. In more recent times, attitudes have changed with many growers recognising the advantages of rootstocks for non-pest related issues and being prepared to pay the cost for good quality grafted vines.

Rootstocks in Australia The adoption of rootstocks in Australia is difficult to quantify due to a lack of planting data. South Australia is an exception, where

52

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

planting data in 2011 indicates 20 percent of vineyards are on rootstock and, in the period 2000-2011, around 40% of all new plantings were on rootstocks. Rootstocks are largely used in hot inland irrigation areas and in regions where phylloxera is present.

The mix of rootstock varieties has changed markedly over a 20-year period.

Data on annual cutting sales from major vine improvement groups shows a change from the top five rootstocks of Ramsey, Schwarzmann, 5BB Kober/5A Teleki, K51-40 and 99 Richter in 1989-1993, to 1103 Paulsen, 140 Ruggeri, Ramsey, 101-14 and 110 Richter during 2007-2011.

These changes make it difficult for suppliers of rootstock cuttings to anticipate and meet variations in demand. It is essential that the wine industry maintains a repository of a wide range of rootstock varieties in a disease-free status from which source blocks can be established as demand fluctuates and as a basis for further rootstock breeding.

As the wine industry evolves and wine styles and varieties change, there will be progressive replanting of existing vineyards rather than planting new greenfield sites.

Replanting will also be driven by the build-up of nematodes, the spread of phylloxera, the removal of under-performing blocks, the availability of new scion varieties and clones, and generational change through improvements in irrigation, trellises and production techniques.

At a glance • Vineyard managers, winemakers, consultants, nurseries, researchers and government agencies consulted for their views on rootstocks.

• Review considered recent progress with research and development into rootstocks, industry attitudes to existing and potential new rootstocks, gaps in the use and management of current rootstocks, and the status of rootstock breeding, evaluation and commercialisation both in Australia and internationally.

• Three main areas where future investment by the GWRDC should be directed for the evaluation, breeding and commercialisation of rootstocks identified: maintaining rootstock (and scion) germplasm vines as ‘high health status’; ensuring the availability of relevant field evaluation information to assist in the selection of rootstocks; developing rapid screening techniques to select rootstocks with appropriate characteristics and introducing or targetting breeding to address any gaps.

Developments with rootstocks There have been some changes in the relationship between rootstocks and particular grape pests since the review of May 1994. With phylloxera, studies have shown the existence of 83 biotypes in Australia, some of which feed on particular rootstocks, but not others in the laboratory and glasshouse. The implications of this response in the field are unclear, but it has been suggested that growers should avoid planting a rootstock that is known to be attacked by the biotype present in the vineyard. Elsewhere, several virulent races of nematode have appeared, which has W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

required a re-evaluation of current rootstocks for resistance to the pest. Rapid screening tests have streamlined this evaluation.

Excess potassium uptake by some rootstocks has been an issue in the past, but refinement of vineyard management techniques has reduced the issue. A large screening process by CSIRO has identified some new rootstocks with lower potassium uptake, and broader commercial assessment is under way. Quite extensive research has been undertaken with chloride and sodium uptake in response to soil salinity, which has clarified the longer-term resilience of V27N6

R O O TST O C K S

rootstocks and identified possible cellular uptake mechanisms for which markers could be developed to assist with rapid screening.

An area of heightened interest from grapegrowers is the ability of rootstocks to confer drought tolerance and to improve the water use efficiency of grapevines (they are not necessarily linked). Field responses of rootstocks to dry conditions have been variable and dependent on the site characteristics and interaction with the scion variety. Some rapid screening techniques need to be developed to assist in the assessment of rootstocks with improved drought tolerance.

There has been an upsurge in young vine decline in grafted vines and this is an area for improvement. While the causal pathogens have been identified, clean grafting material and appropriate nursery practices have yet to be consistently achieved to eliminate the problem. Good quality grafted vines was consistently identified as a motivator for using rootstocks.

A scan of some international institutions showed many were continuing to develop new rootstocks. They have recognised that the growing environment is changing and there is a focus on better rootstocks for drought, grape quality, immunity to phylloxera, fanleaf virus, fanleaf nematode, salinity and virulent nematode populations.

vi t ic u l t u re

The extended drought period the wine industry recently experienced has seen attitudes towards the use of grapevine rootstocks changed markedly with the benefits of certain rootstocks shining through in research trials and commercial vineyards. Photo courtesy: Riverland Vine Improvement Committee. after European producers did so, Australia has only recently become involved in rootstock breeding due to the emergence of other issues that need addressing. The main input so far has been by the CSIRO, which has screened rootstocks for the exclusion of potassium, and the subsequent field evaluation and release of three rootstocks

There are opportunities for collaboration and the introduction of new rootstocks into Australia from other programs.

Rootstock breeding in Australia Despite adopting rootstocks for controlling the effects of phylloxera soon

CROP PROTECTION

NEW OSPREY modular design bird netting machine.

Simply add extra components to suit the size and style of your vineyard.

Order as a FALCON, EAGLE or TREE BUILD.

Performance you demand.

Comfort you deserve.

FROST-STOPPA portable anti-frost wind machine 1-3 H. No planning permit required. External heat can be added.

VINE

3000 Series Tractor 31.4- to 43.2- horsepower* It’s a difference you can tell from the moment you sit down—this is not a tractor as usual. Experience the difference with:

Gilbert Motors Strathalbyn Pty Ltd 34 High St, Strathalbyn p 08 8536 2066

− Choice of 31.4- to 43.2horsepower* (23.4 - 32.2 kW)

JohnDeere.com.au

− Choice of variable transmissions − Two pedal control speed on selected models − Standard power steering − Comfortable operator station

MAINTENANCE

*The

engine horsepower information is provided by the engine manufacturer to be used for comparison purposes only.

Actual operating horsepower may be less.

COLLARD green trimmers, pre-pruners and leaf removers.

BOISSELET undervine weeding/mowing, de-budding and cane sweeping.

Mobile 0408 241 998.

LANGLOIS mechanical vineyard cane stripper 3km/hr.

Tatura Engineering P/L

Contact Alex Carter Ph 0408 241 998 Email acarter@tateng.com.au

www.tateng.com

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

53

vi t ic u l t u re

R O O TST O C K S

after around 20 years. Additional work on evaluating the characteristics of a range of rootstock hybrids has developed a better understanding of their breeding potential.

The implementation of rapid screening methods has sped up the early assessment process, but field evaluation can be slow and only performed in a limited number of sites.

Many growers indicated they preferred to see how rootstocks performed in their locality before deciding what to plant, so a lack of broader evaluation will limit adoption. The commercialisation plan for the CSIRO hybrids was developed with industry and should be revisited, incorporating the experiences with the release of the three new rootstocks.

Industry perceptions As part of the review process, 42 wine industry personnel (vineyard managers, winemakers, consultants, nurseries, researchers and government agencies) were consulted for their views on rootstocks. The responses have been grouped into six main themes.

Germplasm and source blocks The cornerstone of any vineyard is good quality, disease-free vines. Germplasm rootstock plantings need to be true to type, tested for virus and disease and maintained in a healthy state. Such intensive testing and a low turnover of cuttings make them not commercially viable, so wider industry support is required to maintain them.

Multiplication source blocks should be derived from elite plantings and cutting material supplied to the nursery industry through an agreed system of quality assurance. An Australian Grapevine Foundation Planting Scheme has been proposed in the past, but has not progressed.

A more cohesive approach across relevant industry bodies for maintaining and providing germplasm planting material to industry is essential.

Nursery industry This is an important component of rootstock use in Australia, with many growers indicating they place a lot of faith in this sector for providing high quality planting material and as a source of information when selecting rootstocks. Constraints on the nurseries include the provision of potentially diseased cutting material from source blocks, the need to work with differing quarantine regulations between Australian states, the inability to supply particular scion and rootstock combinations, and issues with incompatibility and graftability that add to the cost of grafted vines. Growers are concerned that there are no agreed standards for grafted vines, and scion and rootstock combinations are often limited to what works best for the nursery, not necessarily what best suits the site conditions.

54

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Selecting and managing rootstocks in the field Growers overwhelmingly indicated that local experience with rootstocks would be a prime factor in the selection process.

However, such specific information is quite limited in some regions. Most are looking for rootstocks with more consistent vigour and grape quality across the variation of seasonal conditions. Many indicated they can adequately manage rootstocks, but there are some exceptional circumstances that prove difficult to manage.

into developing and disseminating packages of information may not result in increased adoption of rootstocks at this stage. However, industry needs to be ready to respond with targetted information when the need arises.

Some information on rootstocks should be provided at a steady rate through existing channels and consideration given to testing new forms of presentation to meet the needs of those actively seeking information.

Research and development aspects Many respondents thought there were enough rootstock varieties available, but a more thorough evaluation of each of them was required. This is likely to be a short-term view and confined to individual circumstances. Most surveyed growers identified issues with practically all rootstocks, which suggested there is room for improved rootstocks or at least ongoing research to address those issues.

Further, some respondents recognised that breeding was necessary to fill particular gaps in rootstock capabilities. The drought during the 2000s has prompted a strong interest in rootstocks with increased water use efficiency and drought tolerance, but research on more rapid screening techniques to identify better rootstocks adapted to a range of site conditions is still under way.

There is also an opportunity for old rootstock trials to be revisited to determine the longer-term performance of rootstocks and for a re-analysis of past rootstock, soil and climate information to identify some standard benchmark sites in which to conduct rootstock evaluation.

The review identified three main areas where future investment by the GWRDC should be directed for the evaluation, breeding and commercialisation of rootstocks.

• Maintaining rootstock (and scion) germplasm vines as ‘high health status’ and ensuring that the status is maintained through to the purchaser of the planting material. This activity is not a commercial proposition and needs broader industry support. GWRDC should co-invest with other bodies to ensure the high health status is maintained through source block cutting providers, such as vine improvement bodies and nurseries to the customer.

• Ensuring relevant field evaluation information is available to assist in the selection of rootstocks for vineyard plantings. Growers value local results highly. Regional research trials should be better utilised by local grower groups with the assistance of GWRDC. In the absence of trials, funding should be provided for individual experiences with rootstocks to be documented and shared among local groups. Where significant gaps in knowledge are identified, GWRDC could facilitate the establishment of local trials.

• Developing rapid screening techniques to select rootstocks with appropriate characteristics and, where gaps in rootstock performance are identified, undertake introductions or targetted breeding to address those gaps. Work should initially focus on drought tolerance and water use efficiency in conjunction with GWRDC project CSP 0901. Any further breeding programs require close contact with industry and regular assessments of progress.

The full report is available on the GWRDC website, www.gwrdc.com.au, under Research>Research projects.

Breeding and commercialisation of rootstocks Many respondents took some interest in the CSIRO breeding program, but most noted the lengthy duration of the evaluation and release of rootstocks. New techniques within the breeding program have resulted in the rapid screening of some traits, which can be used for assessing current rootstocks and new hybrids. The CSIRO Breeding and Strategy Plan is based around industry consultation in 2002 and an industry review of the plan would be beneficial to ensure a tight focus is held on breeding objectives. Lessons have been learnt from the initial endeavours to commercialise the release of rootstocks, which will expedite the process in the future.

Information and knowledge management There is a general belief that plenty of information on rootstocks is available, but it is not in the best format for growers to access and understand. Given the current downturn in the market cycle of the industry and limited planting of grafted vines, there is not a high demand for information. Putting effort W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Future investment

Reference May, P. (1994) Using grapevine rootstocks: the Australian perspective. Winetitles, Adelaide.

WVJ

V27N6

Soil good enough to bottle.

Raise a glass to Kocide® Opti,™ featuring the BioActive™ copper technology.

This technology has created a copper that is so active you only need to apply a fraction of the amount of copper than other fungicides to protect against Downy mildew. Which means your soil and the surrounding environment will be better off. What’s more, Kocide® Opti™ has the same fantastic mixing and handling benefits as Kocide® Blue Xtra™ .

DuPont Kocide Opti

To find out more, visit www.hortscience.com.au

ALWAYS REFER TO THE LABEL BEFORE USE. Copyright © 2012 E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates. All rights reserved. The DuPont Oval Logo, DuPontTM, The miracles of science ®, Kocide ®, OptiTM and XtraTM are trademarks or registered trademarks of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company or its affiliates. Du Pont (Australia) Ltd. 7 Eden Park Drive, Macquarie Park NSW 2113. ACN 000 716 469. DP1561/WVJ.

™ ™

®

fungicide

vi t ic u l t u re

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE

Development of a smartphone application to characterise temporal and spatial canopy architecture and leaf area index for grapevines

By Sigfredo Fuentes1,2, Roberta De Bei1*, Cristian Pozo1 and Stephen Tyerman1 1 School of Agriculture Food and Wine and Waite Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, Plant Research Centre.

Waite Campus, PMB 1 Glen Osmond, 5064, South Australia, Australia.

2 Present address: University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment, Victoria 3010 *Corresponding author: roberta.debei@adelaide.edu.au

A smartphone and tablet app has been developed by a team from The University of Adelaide enabling growers to characterise the canopy architecture and leaf area index of their grapevines. The capabilities of the app could see it become an important tool for growers, irrigation practitioners and scientists to assess spatial and temporal growth and canopy architecture dynamics that can be associated with final yield and quality of grapes.

INTRODUCTION

M

onitoring of canopy architecture in grapevines is important for the assessment of growth, vigour and light transmission to the fruit and flowers. Parameters that reflect canopy development can be correlated to yield, grape quality and productivity. One of the most important parameters is leaf area index (LAI), which is defined as total one-sided area of leaf tissue per unit ground surface area (Watson 1947). This parameter is difficult to measure or estimate, since it requires either labour-intensive direct techniques, such as allometry, or expensive instrumentation for indirect estimates.

Allometric, or direct measurements, give very accurate LAI, but it requires stripping the whole canopy and scanning every single leaf to obtain a total one-sided area of leaves per unit area of soil. As such, this method is extremely time consuming and destructive, restricting its use to the calibration of non-destructive techniques. Indirect methods are based on instrumentation that measure light transmission through the canopy in the photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) waveband (SunSCAN, Delta-T Devices Ltd, Cambridge, UK; AccuPAR, Decagon Devices, Pullman, US). Others measure the gap fraction for different zenith angles, such as the LAI-2000 and 2100 (Li-Cor, Lincoln, Nebraska, US) using five zenith angles simultaneously, through a fish-eye light sensor, while the DEMON instrument (CSIRO, Canberra, Australia) measures direct beam radiation from the sun through a directional narrow angle of view (BrĂŠda 2003).

There are advantages and disadvantages of these methods (Fuentes et al. 2008, Macfarlane et al. 2007a, Macfarlane et al. 2007b, Pekin and Macfarlane 2009). Disadvantages include cost of the instrumentation and the know-how required for data capture and analysis. The most versatile and easy-to-use method is digital cover image analysis, which only requires common digital cameras. Image analysis can be performed using Adobe Photoshop (Macfarlane et al. 2007b, Pekin and Macfarlane 2009) or semi-automated and automated analysis programs (Fuentes et al. 2008). This method has resulted in highly comparable results with more established techniques and in different plant species (Table 1). These results are soon to be published in refereed journals.

56

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Table 1. Results comparing the cover photography method with ground-truth methods, such as allometry, Li-Cor 2000 and satellite LAI estimations for forests (MODIS LAI).

Statistical analysis included the determination coefficient (R2), the root mean square error (RMSE) and the slope of the relationship (b).

Species

Comparison Method

R2

RMSE

Slope (b)

Allometry

0.97

11.5

0.99

Li-Cor 2000

0.91

7.39

0.98

Allometry

0.91

8.5

0.98

Grapevine (Merlot) Grapevine (Chardonnay) Apple trees Eucalyptus trees

Li-Cor 2000

0.90

na

1.01

Eucalyptus trees

MODIS LAI

0.89

na

0.96

Monitoring LAI and other canopy architectural parameters is important for assessment of vigour and water demands of grapevines (Williams and Ayars 2005). Growers often seek to alter vigour and growth patterns of grapevines by reducing the amount of water applied. Excessive irrigation will result in increased vigour, which can be measured as higher LAI (Acevedo-Opazo et al. 2010, Esteban et al. 1999, Esteban et al.

2001). Another parameter that can be related to productivity and quality of berries is canopy porosity fraction, which can be increased by reduced water application. Berries with increased sun exposure are generally higher in total soluble solids and phenolic compounds, along with decreased acidity when compared with non-exposed fruit (Bergqvist et al. 2001, Coombe 1987, Coombe and McCarthy 2000, Crippen and Morrison 1986a, Crippen and Morrison 1986b, Iancono et al. 1995).

There is generally considered to be an inverse relationship between vigour and quality of grapes, which has been the main subject for many experimental trials in the past. Furthermore, monitoring canopy cover and LAI has been proposed for grapevines as a way to accurately estimate crop coefficients (Kc) for irrigation scheduling (Williams and Ayars 2005).

This paper describes the development of a novel canopy architecture app (LAICanopyÂŽ) for smartphones and tablet computers using their camera and GPS capabilities.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE

vi t ic u l t u re

App DEVELOPMENT The app basically consists of a program that can be downloaded to a smartphone or a tablet computer to acquire upward-looking digital images (Figure 1) that are analysed using the methodology described in Fuentes et al. (2008). The description that follows corresponds to the beta version, which will be distributed to selected growers and institutions under a beta version agreement between them and The University of Adelaide. This testing will be performed in the 2012-13 growing season.

Algorithms used in the app The algorithms used in the LAICanopy® were: the fractions of foliage projective cover (ff), crown cover (fc) and crown porosity (O), which were calculated from Mcfarlane et al.

(2007b) as:

(1)

(2]

(3) Where lg = large gap pixels; tg = total pixels in all gaps and tp = total pixels.

LAIM is calculated from Beer’s Law. (4) Where k is the light extinction coefficient (0 > k >1).

And, the clumping index at the zenith, Ω(0), was calculated as follows:

(5) The clumping index is a correction factor to obtain effective LAI (LAIe), which is the product of: (6) The clumping index describes the non-random distribution of canopy elements. If Ω(0) = 1, it means that the canopy displays random dispersion; for Ω(0) > or < 1, the canopy is defined as clumped. Since grapevines are trained to obtain uniform rows, this index should correspond to values close to 1. Therefore, LAIM should be close to LAIe. App basic functionality After the LAICanopy is installed and launched, it presents a basic menu with five icons, which can be seen in Figure 2 (see page 58). The ‘home’ page contains basic information about The University of Adelaide and the app. The ‘new’ menu is for new measurements. The ‘settings’ menu allows the user to set up the basic functionality of the app and analysis methodology. The ‘how to use it’ menu contains information about how to use the app to acquire images and to analyse them. Finally, the ‘about’ menu contains information about the development team from The University of Adelaide.

Settings menu The settings menu consists of three options that need to be defined by the user. The first setting option is ‘the gap fraction threshold’. This gap fraction ranges from 0 to 1, or 0-100%. A gap fraction of 75%, as seen in Figure 3 (see page 59) means that if 75% of pixels from the sub-images corresponds to the sky, V2 7N 6

Figure 1. Typical upward-looking image of a grapevine canopy obtained using a camera from a smartphone or tablet PC to be analysed by the app. this sub-image is considered in the ‘large gap’ (lg) count for the calculations in equation 2.

The ‘sub-division’ menu sets up the number of sub-images to be considered for the analysis of gap size within canopies of an image. The minimum sub-division option is 1x1, which will analyse the image as a whole. A maximum sub-division option of 5x5 will sub-divide the image in 25 sub-images. It is recommended to use this maximum sub-division for higher accuracy (Fuentes et al. unpublished). The ‘location service menu’ allows enabling or disabling the GPS capabilities of the device. By disabling this service, geo-location data will not be recorded in the analysis and mapping data to have spatial assessment of a field will not be possible. ▶

Ferment Covers Less Bugs Grapeworks breathable ferment covers keep out insects, birds & contaminates.

Try one this vintage from $19.50 +gst Large range to suit most open fermenters.

Non-breathable covers available.

EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES

National: 03 9555 5500 NSW Sales: 0447 020 313 SA & WA Sales: 0401 560 550 E-mail: info@grapeworks.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

57

vi t ic u l t u re

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE

Figure 2. This figure (left) shows the icon of the app as seen in the iPhone 4S. The figure on the right corresponds to the app and the main menu with the home, new measurement, settings, how to use it and about pages.

New measurement menu When selecting a new measurement (Figure 4), a file name can be input per image. A default date and time will be assigned to an image and analysis if a file menu is not entered. By tapping in ‘photo’, the app will present the options for acquiring images using the frontal

58

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

camera, back camera or file options from the device (camera roll). The file option allows the user to analyse digital images previously obtained either by the device’s camera, or images that have been uploaded to the device from other sources. The light extinction coefficient (k) can be selected in this menu, which

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Figure 3. Settings menu showing options for the gap fraction threshold, image sub-division options and to enable/disable the location services from the device. can be accessed from a table list that can be populated by the user. In the bottom part of this menu appears the current latitude and longitude data. If the ‘no available’ message appears in this section, it could mean that the location

V27N6

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE

vi t ic u l t u re

service in settings is set as disabled, or that there is no service at that particular location from the carrier or phone provider.

Outputs from the app Once individual images have been acquired and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;doneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is pressed, an output screen will show the results, as displayed in Figure 5. The basic results obtained by the app are: i) name of sample or species, ii) calculated LAIM using equation 4, iii) effective LAI calculated using equation 6, iv) canopy cover (equation 1), v) crown porosity (equation 2), vi) clumping index (equation 5), vii) date and time for image acquisition, and viii) map showing location of image acquired.

Mapping options Besides the mapping option from the app, which shows the location for individual digital images and analysis in a map, a comma-separated values file (.csv) can be obtained, which can be uploaded to the Irrigateway webpage from CSIRO (http://www.irrigateway.net/tools/ du). This webpage was created to input drip uniformity data and to map the data using kriging interpolation techniques.

The user can paste the csv file from the

Figure 4. New measurement menu showing file name, image source, light extinction coefficient (k) and location.

Figure 5. Results output page showing the name of tree or specie, calculated LAIM, effective LAI, canopy cover, crown porosity, clumping index, date and time for image acquisition and map showing location of image acquired.

app in the appropriate windows of the CSIRO webpage. Once the form has been completed and submitted, a PDF file is sent

back to the designated email as a report, containing a map showing the spatial variability of the data (Figure 6). Using this

Grow straight up to here without any hand training, hand spraying or hand weeding.

Vines grow naturally straight inside GroGuards without any hand training or pruning. No need to touch the vines until they run along the wire!

What's more, GroGuard's waterproof Zip-Safe seal protects vines from herbicide spray so you can control weeds from a tractor.

GroGuard's legendary strength and reliability are backed by a 3-year guarantee. You can use and re-use each GroGuard on successive plantings.

GroGuard makes vineyard establishment cheaper and easier!

Freecall 1800 644 259 www.groguard.com

GRO winetitle 1211.indd 3

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

14/12/11 11:24 AM

www.winebiz. com . au

59

vi t ic u l t u re

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE

Crippen, D.D. and Morrison, J.C. (1986b) The effects of sun exposure on the phenolic content of Cabernet Sauvignon berries during development.

American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 37(243-247).

Esteban, M.A.; Villanueva, M.J. and Lissarrague, J.R. (1999) Effect of irrigation on changes in berry composition of Tempranillo during maturation.

Sugars, organic acids and mineral elements.

American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 50:418434.

Esteban, M.A.; Villanueva, M.J. and Lissarrague, J.R. (2001) Effect of irrigation on changes in the anthocyanin composition of the skin of cv.

Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L.) grape berries during ripening. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 81:409-420.

Fuentes, S.; Palmer, A.; Taylor, D.; Zeppel, M.; Whitley, R. and Eamus, D. (2008) An automated procedure for estimating the leaf area index (LAI) of woodland ecosystems using digital imagery, MATLAB programming and its application to an examination of the relationship between remotely sensed and field measurements of LAI. Functional Plant Biology 35(10):1070-1079.

Figure 6. Example of spatial variability of LAI mapped using the Irrigateway tool from CSIRO and by uploading data acquired by the LAICanopy® app. tool, not only LAI can be mapped, but also other architectural parameters, such as canopy cover, crown cover, canopy porosity and clumping index.

CONCLUSIONS The LAICanopy app offers a versatile, accurate and inexpensive tool to monitor spatial and temporal variability of canopy architecture parameters and leaf area index within grapevine fields blocks.

Viticultural practitioners and scientists can use this tool with comparable results to other technologies available in the market at a fraction of the price. This app will be available in early 2013, when beta testing will finish.

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors acknowledge the critical contribution from the Wine 2030 program from The University of Adelaide through their annual small grants, which made possible the development of this app.

Iancono, F.; Bertamini, M.; Scienza, A. and Coombe, B.G. (1995) Differential effects of canopy manipulation and shading of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon.

Leaf gas exchange, photosynthetic electron transport rate and sugar accumulation in berries. Vitis 34:201-206.

LITERATURE REVIEW Acevedo-Opazo, C.; Ortega-Farias, S. and Fuentes, S. (2010) Effects of grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) water status on water consumption, vegetative growth and grape quality: An irrigation scheduling application to achieve regulated deficit irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 97(7):956-964.

Macfarlane, C.; Arndt, S.K.; Livesley, S.J.; Edgar, A.C.; White, D.A.; Adams M.A. and Eamus, D. (2007a) Estimation of leaf area index in eucalypt forest with vertical foliage, using cover and fullframe fisheye photography. Forest Ecology and Management 242(23):756-763.

Bergqvist, J.; Dokoozlian, N. and Ebisuda, N. (2001) Sunlight exposure and temperature effects on berry growth and composition of Cabernet Sauvignon and Grenache in the Central San Joaquin Valley of California. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 52:1-7.

Macfarlane, C.; Hoffman, M.; Eamus, D.; Kerp, N.; Higginson, S.; McMurtrie, R. and Adams, M. (2007b) Estimation of leaf area index in eucalypt forest using digital photography. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 143(3-4):176-188.

Bréda, N.J.J. (2003) Ground-based measurements of leaf area index: a review of methods, instruments and current controversies.

J. Exp. Bot. 54:2403-2417.

Pekin, B. and Macfarlane, C. (2009) Measurement of crown cover and leaf area index using digital cover photography and its application to remote sensing.

Remote Sensing 1(4):1298-1320.

Coombe, B.G. (1987) Distribution of solutes with the developing grape berry in relation to its morphology. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 38:120-127.

Watson, D.J. (1947) Comparative physiological studies on the growth of field crops: I. variation in net assimilation rate and leaf area between species and varieties, and within and between years. Ann Bot 11(1):4176.

Coombe, B.G. and McCarthy, M.G. (2000) Dynamics of grape berry growth and physiology of ripening. Australian Journal of Grape and Wine Research 6:131-135.

Crippen, D.D. and Morrison, J.C. (1986a) The effects of sun exposure on the compositional development of Cabernet Sauvignon berries.

American Journal of Enology and Viticulture 37:235-242.

Williams, L.E. and Ayars, J.E. (2005) Grapevine water use and the crop coefficient are linear functions of the shaded area measured beneath the canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 132(3-4):201-211.

VINEYARD CANE RAKES • Very efficient at raking canes and debris • Rake and mulch in one pass • Single or double sided with swing back protection system

An innovative solution for processing pruned canes from the vineyard floor

60

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

SUPERIOR HEDGING SYSTEMS

 Hedger Bar Systems  Cane Rakes  Masts and Mounting Systems Designed and manufactured in AUSTRALIA

by Whitlands Engineering Call 1800 702 701 for a colour brochure/DVD or to find your nearest dealer

• Affordable modular system - add as you go • Available in four lengths and multiple configurations • Medium or heavy duty • Between the post and minimal pruning systems • Easy mounting to tractor with hydraulic masts • Versatile – Use or pruning or trimming • Robust construction, low maintenance

www.whitcovinquip.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

The extra edge in productivity and canopy management

V27N6

pinions News WFA Wine Australia ASVO Richard Smart AWRI Regional Reports Profiles Winemaking Technology Ne

ticulture Marketing Innovation Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Australia Wine

Regional Reports AWRI Profiles Technology

Business ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports A News Viticulture Marketing Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Business Innov

SVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports Winemaking Wine Australia AWRI Regional Reports Varietal Reports News Viticu ey Files WFA Technology Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Opinions Mark News AWRI Technology Viticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profi

Wine Business Varietal Reports Regional Reports Opinions Profiles Regional Reports Varietal Reports Winema ticulture Wine Business Marketing Technology Innovation Key Files Opinions News WFA Wine Australia ASVO Richard Sm WRI Regional Reports Profiles Winemaking Technology News Viticulture Marketing Innovation Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Aust Wine Business ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports AWRI Regional Reports AWRI Profiles Technology Ne ticulture Marketing Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Business Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports Winemaking W ustralia AWRI Regional Reports Varietal Reports News Viticulture Key Files WFA Technology Innovation ASVO Richa mart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Opinions Marketing News AWRI Technology Viticulture Key Files W arketing Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Varietal Reports Region Reports Opinions News ASVO Technology Viticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Varietal Reports Innovation Richard Sm inemaking Wine Business Regional Reports Opinions AWRI Wine Australia Profiles Profiles Regional Reports Varie eports Winemaking Viticulture Wine Business Marketing Technology Innovation Key Files Opinions News WFA Wine Australia AS

AWRI Regional Reports Profiles Winemaking Technology News Viticulture Marketing Innovation Key F pinions WFA Wine Australia Wine Business ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports AWRI Regional Reports A rofiles Technology News Viticulture Marketing Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Business Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Varie eports Winemaking Wine Australia AWRI Regional Reports Varietal Reports News Viticulture Key Files WFA Technolo novation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Opinions Marketing News AWRI Technolo ticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Varie

ichard Smart

SUBSCRIBERS CAN ACCESS AN

ONLINE VERSION OF EACH PRINT ISSUE

eports Regional Reports Opinions Profiles Regional Reports Varietal Reports Winemaking Viticulture Wine Busine

arketing

Technology Innovation Key Files Opinions News WFA Wine Australia ASVO Richard Smart AWRI Regional Repo

News Viticulture Marketing Innovation Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Australia Wine Business AS ichard Smart Varietal Reports AWRI Regional Reports AWRI Profiles Technology News Viticulture Marketing Key F pinions WFA Wine Business Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports Winemaking Wine Australia AWRI Region Reports Varietal Reports News Viticulture Key Files WFA Technology Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking W ustralia Profiles Wine Business Opinions Marketing News AWRI Technology Viticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Innovation AS ichard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Varietal Reports Regional Reports Opinions Ne SVO Technology Viticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Varietal Reports Innovation Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Busine Regional Reports Opinions AWRI Wine Australia Profiles Profiles Regional Reports Varietal Reports Winemaking Viticu Wine Business Marketing Technology Innovation Key Files Opinions News WFA Wine Australia ASVO Richard Smart A Regional Reports Profiles Winemaking Technology News Viticulture Marketing Innovation Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Aust Wine Business ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports AWRI Regional Reports AWRI Profiles Technology Ne ticulture Marketing Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Business Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports Winemaking W ustralia AWRI Regional Reports Varietal Reports News Viticulture Key Files WFA Technology Innovation ASVO Richa mart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Opinions Marketing News AWRI Technology Viticulture Key Files W arketing Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Varietal Reports Region

rofiles Winemaking Technology

NEW â&#x20AC;&#x201C; pdfs of key articles now available to subscribers for immediate download.

Reports Opinions Profiles Regional Reports Varietal Reports Winemaking Viticulture Wine Business Marketing Technolo novation Key Files Opinions News WFA Wine Australia ASVO Richard Smart AWRI Regional Reports Profiles Winema

News Viticulture Marketing Innovation Key Files Opinions WFA Wine Australia Wine Business ASVO Richard Sm arietal Reports AWRI Regional Reports AWRI Profiles Technology News Viticulture Marketing Key Files Opinions W Wine Business Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Varietal Reports Winemaking Wine Australia AWRI Regional Repo arietal Reports News Viticulture Key Files WFA Technology Innovation ASVO Richard Smart Winemaking Wine Australia Profi Wine Business Opinions Marketing News AWRI Technology Viticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Innovation ASVO Richard Sm inemaking Wine Australia Profiles Wine Business Varietal Reports Regional Subscribe by: Reports Opinions News ASVO Technolo ticulture Key Files WFA Marketing Varietal Reports Innovation Richard Winemaking Wine Business Regional Repo W:Smart www.winebiz.com.au/wvj pinions AWRI Wine SOLUTIONS Australia Profiles PROVIDING TO THE WINE INDUSTRY E: subs@winetitles.com.au T: +618 8369 9522

echnology

vi t ic u l t u re

P E STS & D I S E AS E S

Taltarni trial shows insectariums still a sanctuary for beneficial insects in spite of increased chemical inputs

By Matthew Bailey, Vineyard Manager, Taltarni. Email: MatthewB@taltarni.com.au

Since 2007, Taltarni has established three insectariums, or native vegetation corridors, on its vineyard in Victoria’s Pyrenees region to provide a pollen and nectar source for a range of beneficial insects to assist its IPM program and, hence, reduce its use of chemicals and other controls. However, the trying conditions of the 2010-11 season prompted the company to introduce a spray program to bolster its IPM system. But how would this affect the population of beneficials in both the vineyard and insectariums?

History

T

he idea of establishing insectariums within Taltarni’s vineyard blocks in Victoria’s Pyrenees began in 2007 when the first insect shelterbelt habitat was established to harbor and attract beneficial insects with the sole purpose of assisting our Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. The aim was to reduce our chemical inputs and develop a more sustainable future by taking into account the environment and ecosystem within the Taltarni property. Since the establishment of the original insectariums, two more have since been added, strategically placed within the vineyard, as well as

several vegetation corridors leading off further within the vineyard blocks.

Background to trial Coming off the back of the formidable 2010-11 season, a rigid pest and disease program was integrated into our IPM system to reinforce our pest and disease program. With this planned spray program in place, we wanted to gauge the effect these extra chemicals and applications would have on the numbers of beneficial insects and pests within the vineyard.

A trial was set up to monitor and record our findings before, after and during spray applications using sticky traps and field observations.

At a glance • Three vegetation corridors established in Taltarni vineyard in Victoria’s Pyrenees region to attract beneficial insects and assist IPM program • Following challenging 2010-11 season, a spray program was introduced to boost IPM efforts • Trial established to determine the effect of sprays on beneficial populations in vineyard blocks and insectariums • Decline in populations noted in both but rebounded quickly in insectariums

Taltarni’s central insectarium (left) and one of its insectarium corridors, both pictured in July 2012.

62

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

P E STS & D I S E AS E S

vi t ic u l t u re

Table 1. Taltarni fungicide program.

Month

A

S

S

O

O

O

O

N

N

N

N

D

D

D

D

J

M

Spray number

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Growth stage (EL)

3

4

9

11

12

14

16

17

18

23

25

28

31

32

33

37

37

Product

Sulfur @ 400g/100L

Sulfur @ 600g/100L

*

Mankocide DF

Captan 900WG Prosper 500EC

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Switch Rovral Aq (REDS/ SAB)

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

All products applied at label rates and withholding periods adhered

Toxicity rating for beneficial insects (Source: http://cesar.org.au/collateral-manage/chemical.html)

Prosper (Spiroxamine) is very harmful to parasitoid wasps. Sulfur applied even at low rates will have a negative effect on Trichogramma wasps and rates between 400-600g/100L will start to have a negative impact some species of predatory mites (Toxicity: moderately harmful). Roveral Aquaflo (Iprodione) is very harmful to ladybirds and relatively safe on parasitoid wasps (Toxicity: harmless - moderately harmful). Switch (Cyprodinil/Fludioxnil) is relatively safe on parasitoid wasps, predatory bugs and mites (Toxicity: harmless). Captan (Captan) is harmless to predatory mites but has a negative effect on most parasitoid wasps, ladybirds and spiders (Toxicity: slightly - very harmful). Mankocide (Mancozeb/Copper) harmless to Trichogramma wasps, the copper hydroxide component is very harmful to parasitoid wasps and some species of predatory mites. The Mancozeb component is very harmful to a wide range of predatory mites and moderately harmful to ladybirds and some species of parasitoid wasps with effects varying from harmless to moderately harmful. (Toxicity: harmless - very harmful) Legend

parasitoid wasps

Trichogramma wasps <3mm

Thysanoptera Predator thrips (and others)

Diptera (hoverflies/Sciaridae/others)

Coleoptera Ripophoridae/Ripophoridae/others)

lacewings (brown/green)

Hemiptera Predator bugs (Cydnidae/others)

Araneae (spiders)

The insects collected were identified by Drs Linda Thomson and Michael Nash, of The University of Melbourne.

Objective To maintain beneficial insect numbers at levels to still be an antagonistic resource in controlling pests under the effect of additional chemical applications due to extreme weather conditions.

The survey

Figure 1. The average number of beneficial insects collected in every trap from the vineyard blocks, insectariums and control during October.

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Due to the sheer volume of information collected from the survey, this article only highlights the key results. Figures 1, 2 and 3 show averages collected from every yellow www.winebiz. com . au

63

vi t ic u l t u re

P E STS & D I S E AS E S

Legend

parasitoid wasps

Trichogramma wasps <3mm

Thysanoptera Predator thrips (and others)

Diptera (hoverflies/Sciaridae/others)

Coleoptera Ripophoridae/Ripophoridae/others)

lacewings (brown/green)

Hemiptera Predator bugs (Cydnidae/others)

Araneae (spiders)

A vigorous preventive fungicide program consisted of 17 sprays between October-March including 13 applications of sulfur with seven at the highest rate early-mid season. Some of the chemicals applied during the survey included Mankocide (Mencozeb/ Copper) Captan, Prosper, Switch and sulphur (Table 1).

Figure 2. The average number of beneficial insects collected in every trap from the vineyard blocks, insectariums, control and bushland during November.

Survey Results

Figure 3. The average number of beneficial insects collected in every trap from the vineyard blocks (OV), insectariums, control and bushland during November.

October (Figure 1) Vineyard results revealed a low to moderate number of parasitoid wasps with an average of 20 per trap, including an average of 1.5/trap for Trichogramma wasps. Traps in the vineyard blocks collected a large number of Thysanoptera predator thrips and Coleoptera Rhipiphoridae/ Rhipiphoridae (beetles). Araneae (spiders) average counts were twice that of the insectariums.

The central insectarium had a high count of Diptera, with one trap containing 1307, as well as a large population of parasitoid wasps with an average of 80/trap; that’s four times the amount found within the vineyard blocks. Numbers of Hemiptera predator bugs from the insectariums were twice that of the vineyard blocks.

Trichogramma wasps were found on the control site and only 13 parasitoid wasps, but collected a huge amount of aphids. Coleoptera (beetles) counts in the control site were the highest out of all sites. Coleoptera are known to feed on aphids as a food source.

stick trap. The vineyard survey required a larger number of traps to cover the area compared with the insectariums - 83 traps in the vineyard, 14 in the insectariums - so I have referred to averages per trap to allow comparisons between vineyard vs insectarium insect numbers. A brief description of the insects collected and their role within the IPM program can be found under the heading ‘Insect Portfolio’.

November (Figure 2) Parasitoid wasps increased threefold in numbers throughout the vineyard blocks to an average of 62/ trap with a total of 993 collected from 16 traps. Conversely, all the remaining vineyard insect counts dropped off sharply to less than five per trap. This was a dramatic decrease compared with October’s insect counts with the exception of the spider counts which

64

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The months surveyed comprised October 2011, November 2011 and January 2012, coinciding with the IPM program. Traps were left out for seven days and collected and set before, during and after fungicide applications. In addition, a control site was set far away from any vines and one positioned in the neighbouring bushland and surveyed simultaneously during the trial.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

P E STS & D I S E AS E S

vi t ic u l t u re

A green lacewing on a car door (above) and predator shield bugs hatching, both taken near a vineyard block.

A parasitoid wasp (left) and praying mantis capturing a lightbrown apple moth, both found in a vineyard block.

A yellow sticky trap in Taltarniâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s central insectariums (left) and a Coleoptera (beetle) in a vineyard block. increased to an average of 9/trap.

The insectarium also experienced a rise in parasitoid wasps with an average of 228/trap, with a total of 1140 collected from five traps. Trichogramma wasps and spiders increased to an average of 5/trap. Lacewings and Coleoptera doubled compared with the October results while a fall was seen in Diptera compared with October, from an V2 7N 6

average of 340/trap down to 5/trap. Why the increase in parasitoid wasps? This may be due to the parasitoid waspsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; population being well established in October.

The control site collected a total of 74 parasitoid wasps, an increase of almost fivefold compared with October, while the neighbouring bushland collected an even higher amount (185), with the W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

remainder of the insects being Araneae and Coleoptera. Both sites collected no lacewings, little or no Diptera and Hemiptera with only one Trichogramma wasp found consecutively.

January (Figure 3) Insect populations in vineyard blocks experienced both rises and falls. For example, parasitoid wasps www.winebiz. com . au

65

vi t ic u l t u re

P E STS & D I S E AS E S

declined to an average of 30/trap (compared with 62/trap in November), Diptera increased to an average of 13/trap (compared with <5/trap in November). Thysanoptera predator thrips increased twofold, while the Hemiptera, Trichogramma and lacewing average was less than one per trap.

The average number of parasitoid wasps in the bushland declined to 55/trap (compared with 185/trap in November) but numbers were twice that in the vineyards blocks; the control dropped to an average of 20/ trap (compared with 74 in November.

Was the IPM program having less of an effect on the bushland site? Both sites had no lacewings, Trichogramma or Hemiptera, but note these sites had none or very little originally. From none at all previously collected from the bushland, Diptera appeared in January with an average of 21/trap.

The insectariums experienced somewhat healthier beneficial insect populations, with an average of 95 parasitoid wasps collected per trap, the most noticeable decline, while the Trichogramma population doubled that of November. Spider populations increased slightly and the Diptera count increased rapidly from an average of 5/trap to 34/trap. The remainder marginally decreased.

Insect portfolio •T richogramma are minute wasps, less than 0.5mm long. The adult female lays her eggs into moth eggs (LBAM). When the wasp eggs hatch, the larvae devour the developing caterpillar inside the moth egg. The larvae pupate grow into fully formed wasps inside the moth eggs. These turn characteristically black as the wasps develop inside.

• Parasitoid wasps are very important ecologically as predators, parasites and pollinators and vary in size between 0.5-8mm. Wasps, along with ants, have a strong influence in controlling the number of insects and other invertebrates in the environment, while many flowering plants rely on wasps and bees for pollination.

• T hysanoptera (predator thrips) adults and larvae of many species in this family appear to be facultative predators of other small arthropods, in that they feed on both floral tissues as well as on thrips and mites that live in flowers.

• D iptera larvae are predators of many soft body insects such as aphids, scale, thrips, and

66

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

caterpillars (LBAM). You can sometimes see the hoverflies searching for the aphids. Beside nectar, they feed on honeydew produced by aphids. Some species lay eggs near the aphids’ colony with their maggot-like larvae waiting on a feast of aphids.

• C oleoptera (beetles) are the largest, most diverse group of living things. They consume eggs of grasshoppers, aphids, caterpillars (LBAM), other soft bodied insects, pollen, fungi, and whatever else they can find. They supplement their diet with nectar and pollen and can be minor pollinators.

• L acewing larva will, depending on species and environmental conditions, will eat about 150 prey items in their entire life. In some cases, 100 aphids can be eaten in a single week. Adults are crepuscular or nocturnal. They feed on pollen, nectar and honeydew supplemented with mites, aphids and other small arthropods.

• H emiptera (predator bug/Cydnidae/ spined assassin bug/ others) insects are extremely diverse in size, shape and colour. They have one common characteristic in that they have sucking mouths (stylets) to suck juice from plants, insects or other animals.

• A raneae (Amaurodiidae/ Amaurodiidae), although spiders are generally regarded as predatory.

Some juvenile spiders feed on plant nectar. Various species are known to feed on dead arthropods and studies have shown that young spiders have a better chance of survival if they have the opportunity to eat pollen.

For further information visit http:// cesar.org.au/collateral-manage/ beneficials-home.html Environment Approximately 1.5km of the creek that runs through the Taltarni vineyard has been fenced off from livestock with the objective of rejuvenating native vegetation. This spring, 4000 native shrubs and trees will be established within these fenced off creek and water areas within the vineyard/property. This joint project has been taken on by Taltarni, assisted by a grant from the local GWM water authority. This unison project will continue for many years with an estimated 20,000 native shrubs and trees being planted over the next five years.

Summary W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

The survey revealed elevated populations of three to four times more parasitoid wasps in the insectariums compared with the vineyard blocks. But the insectariums did not escape the IPM program, with noted declines in Thysanoptera, Hemiptera, lacewings and parasitoid wasps in January.

The insect populations in vineyard blocks, on the whole, decreased in November, mirroring the intense IPM program, with the exception of parasitoid wasps which increased threefold due to good population growth in October.

In January, numbers of Diptera and Thysanoptera recuperated in January, but the other insects dropped off.

The control site lacked any significant beneficial insect numbers, only capturing a large aphid population, but at the same time revealed good parasitoid wasp counts in November and Coleoptera (beetles) in October.

The bushland survey also showed higher parasitoid wasp numbers than the vineyard blocks in November and January, but still noticeably less than the insectariums and lacked any lacewings and predator bugs.

The best indicator, I believe, is the Diptera (hoverflies/Sciaridae/others) which dramatically reduced in population across all locations in November and picked up in January, mirroring the spray program. It shows that spiders maybe less affected and/or can quickly recoup in population. The survey showed that parasitoid wasps are very resilient and/or they are drawing off the insectariums and established surrounding sheltered vegetation, including grasses. It revealed that the parasitoid wasp population increased in November across all locations and decreased simultaneously in January.

I believe the additional sulfur sprays had noticeable effect on ladybird beetle populations. This may explain their increase in number in warmer seasons (drought) due to less disease pressure.

Conclusion The extra application and additional chemicals applied in the IPM program did have a negative effect on all beneficial insects surveyed within the property and, thus, struggled to repopulate within the vineyard blocks. The numbers on the insectariums reduced slightly as the IPM intensified but quickly rebounded once the IPM program was completed.

Taltarni’s insectariums are truly a sanctuary for beneficial insects beyond WVJ any doubt - a ‘bug’s life’.

V27N6

alternative varieties

vi t ic u l t u re

Italian inspiration for novel Nero d’Avola making

By Brad Hickey, Brash Higgins Wine Co., McLaren Vale, South Australia

McLaren Vale-based Nero d’Avola producer Brad Hickey travelled to Sicily, in Italy, in 2011 to investigate local growing and vinification of the variety. In addition to collecting ideas about how to maximise Nero d’Avola’s potential on home soil, Brad was inspired to use amphorae as a winemaking technique.

W

hen I moved to McLaren Vale six years ago, after a decade spent buying wine for restaurants in New York City, I started thinking about new varieties we could plant on our vineyard that would not only thrive in McLaren Vale, but make for interesting drinking as well. The drought years had been making life hard, even for our Shiraz and Cabernet Sauvignon plantings, and we felt we needed to find some better suited grapes to bring onboard.

Nero d’Avola fitted the bill.

In 2009, Brash Higgins obtained some of the first cuttings of the Sicilian red winegrape Nero d’Avola available in Australia from Binjara Vine Nursery (formerly Chalmers Nursery), in Euston, New South Wales. Nero d’Avola is drought and heat tolerant to a certain degree, ripens late and thrives in its native Mediterranean climate, so it seemed like a good fit for coastal McLaren Vale and our evermounting heat and water issues.

Viticulture 2009-2010 In October 2009, we dedicated a halfhectare research block on our Omensetter

Vineyard to Nero d’Avola. Soils in this block are relatively shallow (40-50cm) red brown clay loam over a deep, soft marl limestone.

In the winter of 2009, we asked Dr Nuredin Habili, of Plant Diagnostics, at the Waite campus of The University of Adelaide, to perform a virus test on our Shiraz rootstock, which was planted in 1997. The results came back affirmative to graft Nero d’Avola.

Field grafting was conducted later, using two buds per vine on the Matura 1 clone from the Matura Group, in Italy. The clones grew exceptionally well, exhibiting great vigour and not needing any irrigation until the first week of December, followed by small amounts on a regular basis until midFebruary. Vines were trained on a single cordon trellis, and the cordon was filled by February 2010. We noted that foliage was prone to powdery mildew.

2010-11 The first fruit bearing year, we pruned the lateral growth hard from the main cordon back to basal buds. Vines grew strongly, with many double buds providing two shoots per node. These were shootthinned back to one shoot per node. A lazy ballerina trellising system was used,

McLaren Vale’s Brash Higgins obtained some of the first cuttings of Nero d’Avola available in Australia from Binjara Vine Nursery (formerly Chalmers Nursery) at Euston, in New South Wales in 2009 and planted half a hectare.

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

67

vi t ic u l t u re

alternative varieties

NERO D’AVOLA

By Peter Dry Viticulture Consultant The Australian Wine Research Institute Background Nero d’Avola (pronounced nero DAHVOLLAH) is widely grown in Sicily, particularly in the provinces of Agrigento, Siracusa, Caltanissetta and Ragusa. It is also grown to a lesser extent in Calabria, where it is known as Calabrese. The variety has been grown for centuries in Sicily and is presumed to have originated from close to the town of Avola, in the south-east of the island. In recent decades, its wines have become more reputed to such an extent that the Italian Wine and Food Society have included it in its top 12 red wine varieties of Italy. Nero d’Avola is the principal variety of the only DOCG wine of Sicily, Cerasuolo di Vittoria, for which it must be 60% of the blend with Frappato. There may now be 19,000 hectares of Nero in Sicily. Synonyms include Cappuciu Nero, Calabrese d’Avola, Calabrese de Calabria, Calabrese di Noto, Calabrese Dolce, Calabrese Nero, Calabrese Pittatello, Calabrese Pizuto, Calabrese Pizzutello, Calabrese Pizzuto, Calabrisi d’Avola and Fekete Calabriai. In Australia, there are currently at least five wine producers—but many more growers.

Viticulture Budburst and maturity are mid-season (approximately two weeks after Chardonnay in Sicily). Vines are very vigorous.

Bunches are well-filled to compact, moderate to large, and yield is moderate to high. In Sicily where irrigation is permitted, a good yield is considered to be 9t/ha. Berries are purplish-black, and small to medium in size. It performs well in a hot, dry climate and has been successful with 1103 Paulsen as a rootstock in Sicily (140 Ruggeri can induce excessive vigour). Traditionally grown as bush vines, Nero d’Avola is now more likely to be trellised. Although spur pruning is often used, basal bud fertility is not high, so cane pruning may also be used. It is susceptible to powdery and downy mildews.

Wine In Sicily, Nero d’Avola is used as a component in blends and for varietal wines, from light easy-drinking styles to big, full-bodied reds. It blends well with other varieties, e.g. indigenous grapes such as Frappato and Nerello Mascalese, or introduced varieties such as Merlot. Wines are well-coloured, medium- to fullbodied with good acidity and tannins and a velvety, smooth taste.

Flavour descriptors include plum jam, dark cherry, raspberry, hazelnut, fresh herbs, spice and chocolate. It has been likened to full-bodied Australian Shiraz.

This is an extract from the manual developed for the Research to Practice on ‘Alternative varieties: emerging options for a changing environment’ (Tassie, L.; Dry, P.R. and Essling, M. 2010). For further information on this and other emerging varieties, contact Dr Mardi Longbottom (rtp@awri.com.au; tel. 08 8313 6600) at The Australian Wine Research Institute to arrange the presentation of this Research to Practice program in your region.

68

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

although this may have contributed too much shading in such a cool and wet season. We double bunch thinned what was a potentially immense crop down to 10 tonnes per hectare. No irrigation was necessary until the beginning of February, and only 0.4mL per hectare was applied all year. A minor bit of sun scorch was also noted on leaf tissue during a particularly hot weekend of 40°C in late January.

Diseases became entrenched with heavier rains and it became obvious to us that Nero d’Avola was prone to powdery and downy mildews, as well as botrytis. These conditions of disease pressure were exacerbated by the wetness of the vintage. All diseased bunches were removed leading up to harvest on 1 May, with regular leaf plucking to open up the canopy. Baumé levels thankfully accelerated from 12.5 to a ripeness of 13.5 during two weeks of warm, dry weather at the end of April. The block was hand picked in three hours, and roughly two tonnes of healthy fruit was collected.

It was not exactly a Mediterranean-style vintage, but we got the fruit ripe with a lot of hard work and a little luck, and just in the nick of time, too, before the even heavier winter rains came.

We did employ a VSP trellis the following year, which offered much better protection from botrytis. The 2012 vintage was a much easier and healthier vintage than 2011, with only powdery mildew becoming difficult to control. The harvest came in almost six weeks earlier as well.

Sicily visit During the past few years, I have been drinking wines from Sicily, the second largest wine region in Italy. However, once we safely grafted the Nero d’Avola material to our Omensetter Vineyard, I knew we had to visit. I travelled to Sicily in August 2011 for three weeks with my viticulturist Peter Bolte (a key contributor to this article), and my partner Nicole Thorpe to see how the Nero d’Avola vines coped during the hottest time of the year. Ironically, compared with the wet 2011 season in McLaren Vale, the 2011 vintage in Sicily turned out to be its hottest and driest in 40 years.

We stayed at COS Winery, in Vittoria, one of the leading wineries in Sicily, and a major high end Nero d’Avola grower and producer.

Today, COS has expanded significantly from its humble origins in the 1980s and now produces approximately 160,000 bottles per year using biodynamic viticulture methods. After touring the COS vineyards and cellars with its talented chef and vigneron Pino Guerrisi, we observed the soils to be almost identical to our Omensetter Vineyard, half a metre of red clay over limestone, reaffirming our belief in the variety’s compatibility to our geology in McLaren Vale. We also noticed relatively thick residues of sulfur and copper on the vines, as well as evidence of downy mildew, which is interesting since it was such a hot, dry growing season. Most of the vineyards were weed free, which seemed unusual for biodynamic farming. Irrigation was only added six weeks prior to harvest.

COS’s range of Nero d’Avola wines are typically perfumed with sweet cherries and a subtle herbaceousness. The palate is fresh and pure with sweet, rounded fruit and a lovely, fresh, spicy cherry character; expressive drinking and a style we wanted to try to emulate in McLaren Vale. For more details, I highly recommend Robert Camuto’s excellent book on Sicilian wine and the people behind it, Palmento: A Sicilian Wine Odyssey.

Amphora One of the most significant ways to affect the taste of the juice after harvest is the vessel in which the wine ferments and ages. COS, and another provocative winemaker we visited in Sicily, Frank Cornelissen, are also famous for using 400-litre clay amphorae, sunk into the ground, for some of their red and white wine fermentations.

COS’s Nero d’Avola-dominant ‘Pithos’, and Cornelissen’s ‘Munjabel’ wines from Etna, using Nerello Mascalese, are made using this ancient technique. Both wines had superb mineral depth and intense aromatics. I found this fascinating and wanted to try the same back

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

alternative varieties

in Australia. After a long search, we had five 200L clay amphora vessels made for us by skilled Adelaide potter, John Bennett, using clays from a local quarry almost identical to our vineyard's soil. The pots were coated internally with bee’s wax as they came out of the kiln.

At harvest, we destemmed the Nero d’Avola grapes and left the juice to undergo a wild ferment on its skins and lees. Once the skins sank and the ferments went dry, we sealed the amphorae for seven months, covered airtight with stainless steel lids.

The idea was to extract as much flavour as possible from the grapes and to provide additional layers of complexity. We basket pressed the wine off skins 210 days later at the end of November, primarily because I could not wait any longer! We let the juice settle naturally and the wine was bottled before Christmas. We produced 112 cases of 2011 Brash Higgins Nero d’Avola, which tasted promising, full of intense savoury

aromatics, like its Sicilian brethren, loads of wild cherries and a mouthwatering acidity, but also with all the orange and lavender aromas that our terroir seems to produce.

Amphora seemed like a good way to not only introduce Nero d’Avola to Australia, a high acid and transparent varietal, but to make a statement. Also, we were just as ready as the Italians to step deep into the past to make a leap forward. I have found amphora wines diabolical, challenging, sometimes ethereal, sometimes scary, but always thought-provoking wines that reflect, as close as possible, the true terroir of the vineyard Conclusion Nero d’Avola is prone to diseases, primarily powdery mildew, but also botrytis in wetter seasons. It appears to be quite a vigorous and heavy cropping variety when it has access to an abundance of readily

vi t ic u l t u re

available water. Our observations of Nero d’Avola’s growth habit, vigour and ripening suggest planting should be considered primarily on relatively bare and shallow like those soils situated in the earlier ripening sub-regions of McLaren Vale. Cultural methods certainly need to be employed to be successful in obtaining a crop of healthy, good quality fruit. Heavy pruning, appropriate trellising, bunch and shoot thinning and leaf plucking will all need to be considered and certainly conducted in vigorous growing seasons.

Nero d’Avola is capable of producing complex wine in a number of styles, and is a prolific producer if yields are not kept in check. Although it is said to be similar to Shiraz, it differs in that it has dustier tannins, higher natural acidity, more savoury elements, and ripens significantly later; all points that can lead to some distinctive flavours and new flavour profiles for the WVJ Australian palate.

Clarification of Grüner Veltliner clonal designation

By John Whiting, John Whiting Viticulture. Email: jrwhiting@internode.on.net

A

n article in the May/June 2012 issue of the Wine & Viticulture Journal (Tassie et al., 2012) queried the clonal designation of Green Veltliner (also described as Gruener Veltliner and Gruner Veltliner in the article).

Green Veltliner 2236 was imported from the Foundation Plant Materials Service (FPMS) at the University of California, Davis (UCD), in 1970 through the Plant Quarantine Service at the Department of Agriculture Victorian Plant Research Institute, Burnley.

Source vines went into a variety of collections at the Department of Agriculture, Irymple, and CSIRO, Merbein, after release from quarantine.

The Department of Health, Plant Quarantine, Accession List of Virus Tested Fruit Varieties in Australia (1983), provides an accession code of IV702236 and the clone was designated FVI4V16/VX/UCD. It was subsequently imported into South Australia in 1985 as accession code IS852236, but the clonal designation was inadvertently changed to FV14V16/VX/UCD (Department of Primary Industry and Energy (DPIE) Accession List 1995).

A list of Foundation Vineyard varieties at UCD, in August 1973, includes the location of two vines of Green Veltliner, I4V15,16. The code refers to the source V2 7N 6

vine location in the Foundation Vineyard at UCD (block I, row 4, vine 15 and 16).

The FPMS labelled the selection as clone 01. The selection had been heat treated for 179 days and was tested on woody indicator vines. It was found negative for leafroll virus (LRV), stem pitting, corky bark and fanleaf.

The FVI4V15,16 vines in the Foundation Vineyard had previously been sourced from a single vine in the West Armstrong vineyard of UCD under the clonal designation of WA4V3 (Foundation Vineyard list, August 1973). The original selection was imported from Germany in 1939 by Professor Harold Olmo.The use of the designation I14V16 in the Tassie et al. article is incorrect. The designation seems to have changed due to misreading or misprinting the original designation: 1. The correct clonal designation FVI4V16 was listed as such in the Department of Health List of fruit imports (1983), the Department of Primary industries (DPI) Irymple collection (1987), the CSIRO Merbein collection (1988) and the Primary Industries Research South Australia (PIRSA) Loxton collection (1996).]

2. In the National Register of Grapevine Varieties and Clones, edited by P. Murphy in 1992, the clone was incorrectly listed as FVI14V16. This W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

incorrect listing was repeated in subsequent editions of the Register.

3. The clone was also incorrectly listed in the DPIE Accession List (1995) as FV14V16 for the selection introduced into South Australia, and the incorrect designation was also documented in the PIRSA Grapevine Germplasm Collection collated by Nicholas and Cirami (1995).

Another selection of Green Veltliner was introduced from UCD as White Veltliner, but later renamed Green Veltliner. It had a clonal designation of WA6V16 and an accession code of IC698121. It was planted in the CSIRO Merbein and DPI Irymple collections.

In the latter collection, it was showing weak growth and symptoms of LRV (pre1989).

Hence, typographical errors have occurred in some listings of Green Veltliner, namely an incorrect clonal designation for its introduction into South Australia in the DPIE Accession List and in the National Register of Grapevine Varieties and Clones from 1992 onwards.

REFERENCES Tassie, L.; Henschke, P. and Coleman, D. (2012) Ensuring trueness to type of some alternative varieties. Report from the pilot Varietal Verification Project – Part 2: What does it mean to the grower?

WVJ Wine & Viticulture Journal 27(3):52-56. www.winebiz. com . au

69

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

More than 12 months ago, we made the decision that this issue of the Wine & Viticulture Journal would be themed around ‘the business of wine shows’. Little did we know that the topic would hot up in the ensuing months, beginning with the debate primarily in the Twittersphere and blogosphere surrounding the change from the 20-point to 100-point system by the likes of the Royal Queensland and Sydney Royal wine shows, and the discussion on the state of the wine show system held in the Hunter Valley in September during the inaugural Len Evans Tutorial Reunion. So, our coverage of wine shows appropriately begins with a summary of the aforementioned Hunter Valley discussion. This is followed by the thoughts of three Australian winemakers on the wine show system in this country and their reasons for entering (or not entering) them. We then approached the organisers of five wine shows – a regional, state, capital city, the national and a variety-specific wine show – to share with our readers how their shows have evolved in recent years and to convey their challenges. We then present an overview of the wine show system in other parts of the New World – namely, New Zealand and the US. Armando Corsi, from the Ehrenberg Bass Institute for Marketing Science at the University of South Australia, brings us up to date on the latest research into the role of gongs in driving consumers' wine purchases and the consistency of wine judging across different wine shows.

The show must go on

By Sam Connew1 and Iain Riggs2 1 Manager - Hunter Node, The Australian Wine Research Institute 2 Chief winemaker/managing director, Brokenwood, Hunter Valley, New South Wales

Held over a weekend at the beginning of September, the inaugural Len Evans Tutorial Reunion began simply as a catch-up of some of the 132 scholars who have passed through the tutorial, timed to coincide with the birthday of Len Evans. However, in the words of the Paul Kelly song, ‘from little things, big things grow…’, this seemed like too good an opportunity to have a talkfest regarding the ‘state of the nation’ with regard to the Australian wine show system.

Background

T

he inaugural Len Evans Tutorial was held in November 2001 in the Hunter Valley. Instigated

by Len Evans AO OBE and supported by the industry, the tutorial has played a key part in training aspirant judges.

Importantly, the 12 scholars who graduated reflect all parts of the modern Australian industry including retailers, writers, sommeliers and educators, as well as the traditional winemaking judge background.

Many tutorial graduates have gone on to be regular wine show judges, moving quickly up through the ranks to become panel and wine show chairs. They are recognised as being the ‘next generation’ of wine show judges and have had considerable impact on encouraging a diverse range of wine styles, particularly with regard to Chardonnay and cool climate Shiraz.

Roughly half of the ex-scholars from the tutorial are not from a winemaking background, and contribute a broader understanding of ‘style’ as opposed to the ‘technical’ approach of winemakers, as well as having a coal-face appreciation of the needs of the consumer.

Also in 2001, the ASVO convened a

70

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

seminar titled ‘Who’s running this show?’ to consider the current and future state of play of the Australian wine show system.

Key stakeholders, including wine show exhibitors, judges, wine show committees and retailers made presentations and a round table discussion was held.

As a result of this seminar, a wine show committee was formed under the auspices of the ASVO. Over a period of time, this group developed some key recommendations focussing on improving the integrity of the wine show system and intending to assist wine show committees in administering some benchmarks for the management of their shows.

Importantly, the ASVO also established the wine show judge register to record details and history of all current wine judges on the Australian wine show circuit.

However, there were many issues discussed in 2001 that had not been addressed, and it was apparent that the zeitgeist was right for a review of where we were at. the reunion All of the capital city wine shows were approached for financial support, as well ▶ as many of the regional shows.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Photo: Kirsten Edwards.

V27N6

Suppliers of a wide range of Quality Products to the Wine Industry Congratulations to Best’s Great Western on winning the 2012 Jimmy Watson. Vinvicta are proud to have supplied the Bucher Vaslin sorting equipment and cross flow filtering. Best’s employ these to produce and finish their fine wines, including the triple trophy winning 2011 Bin 1 Shiraz.

The new Delta Trio for a clean output from your existing destemmer – remove petioles and leaves.

Bucher Vaslin - Cross Flow Filtration Wine and Juice lees Vinvicta services mobile filtration service.

Full range of Quality Vintage Winemaking equipment Optical Sorting, pressing, filtering.

Quality winemaking additives

Ph 1300 360 353 info@vinvicta.com www.vinvicta.com

2/19 Macquarie Drive Thomastown, Victoria 3074 Fax: 1300 360 356

Amcor, your partner in superior wine closures

Setting the global standard in beverage closures Amcor produces a range of Stelvin® Closures for wine and spirit applications.

Supplying some of Australia and New Zealand’s finest wineries, Amcor has a distinct understanding of local market requirements. This is supported by a keen focus on product quality and

brand awareness – all while remaining price competitive. So whether you’re simply after Stelvin® Closures, or a fully integrated packaging solution for your wine or beverage, Amcor really is your one-stop packaging partner.

For more information: T + 61 8 8433 2500 E closures.customerservice@amcor.com or visit www.amcor.com ©Amcor 2012 Creating a new world of packaging

W I N E SH O W S

business & marketing

• c apital city wine shows taking a leadership role with regard to the regional shows in their states • r eviewing the wine show calendar. where to from here?

More than 100 people from various sectors of the wine industry gathered for the wine show talkfest, including wine show representatives and many involved in the Australian wine show system or the Lens Evans Tutorial.

Sponsorship was also received from Dan Murphy’s, as well as support from the ASVO. Len Evans Tutorial (LET) trustee Basil Sellers provided early support to enable the reunion to proceed. Importantly, many of the wine shows also committed to attend, as did many of those who have been involved in the Australian wine show system or the tutorial over the years. With a number of ex-scholars also showing up, more than 100 people committed to the talkfest.

The program for the two days was developed after consultation with the tutors of the Len Evans Tutorial (James Halliday, Ian McKenzie et al.) and a group of ex-scholars who are involved at both a regional and national level with wine shows. After that, it was a question of inviting commentators who were considered as having an interest in the particular topics to participate, as well as conveners and moderators who were able to control the discussion!

The key items to discuss fell out pretty easily: the 100-point judging scale being a case in point. Engaging the consumer was also an important topic, and the issue of wine show structure, which was discussed in 2001, was also revisited. All of this discussion was broken up with a couple of tastings: Tom Carson leading the way on how to judge Pinot Noir (or more to the point, how not to judge Pinot) and the irrepressible Stu Knox, from Fix St James, walking into the devil’s lair with alternative styles and the ‘natural wine’ debate.

Happily, we were able to make changes to the program on the fly, which enabled a panel of representatives from various wine show committees to be present on the Sunday morning.

V2 7N 6

outcomes It was obvious right from the start (and certainly with more than 100 people in attendance) that people still care hugely about the wine show system and its worth. One of the most gratifying outcomes from the weekend was the passion and commitment with which every person spoke, and the openness of the sometimes heated debate.

Discussion centred on exactly why and for whom wine shows are conducted. Is it for winemakers or for consumers, and are we doing a good job of serving both of these stakeholders? Is the key focus of ‘improving the breed’ obsolete? What role do regional wine shows serve? And, what about capital city wine shows?

Whilst there was little consensus on the merits of judging out of 100 or 20, with 100 point scores becoming more commonplace, do medals or points out of 100 mean more to the consumer? How does the LET evolve in the future? How can it be future-proofed financially and from a succession point of view?

Some consensus was reached on the need to progress the following issues: •a system for judge accreditation and remuneration •u sing wine show results to better engage the consumer nationally and internationally •u sing ‘style’ or specialist judges for particular classes • c apping wines to be judged to 100 per day • r eviewing the trophy judging process and how this operates • t he use of new technology to better communicate results for consumers and exhibitors e.g. iPads for scoring, a common portal or app for all wine show results W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

After a meeting for the first time of representatives of the capital city wine shows on the Sunday morning of the reunion, the Royal Agricultural Society of Victoria convened a meeting of representatives of all the capital city shows, which was timed for the end of October, in Melbourne. The proposed agenda included discussion of items such as review and recap of the recommendations from the Len Evans Tutorial session, draft standards of conduct for wine shows, and consumer engagement and communication.

A business proposal and case for involvement has been put to the board of the ASVO advocating using its experience and industry platform to reform a reference group to review and enunciate wine show standards and resurrect the judges register. It was hoped to secure support from the capital city shows of this agenda in October.

Wine Communicators Australia is committed to playing a key role in communicating and maintaining a dialogue in this area through its blogging and webinar platform.

Ex-scholars Jim Chatto and Tom Carson are putting together a proposal for a Len Evans Tutorial alumni association, which will promote the interests of the tutorial, as well as supporting it into the future. Importantly, immediately after the tutorial, a substantial amount of funds over a five-year period were committed by individuals and companies. summary One of the questions asked at the beginning of the weekend with the intention of getting the discussion going was ‘Are wine shows obsolete?’ It was apparent after two days of debate that the answer is not as simple as yes or no. The wine show system in Australia has played a vital part in elevating both the quality and the promotion of wine for consumers domestically and internationally. Changes do need to be made, but this will take the support of all stakeholders and will require a sustained reform agenda, rather than wholesale overnight change.

The authors thank the people and organisations who helped make the WVJ reunion possible. www.winebiz. com . au

73

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

Wine shows: a winery’s perspective We asked three wineries to comment on their reasons for entering (or not entering) wine shows, their expectations in doing so, and their thoughts on the wine show system as it currently stands. Eldridge Estate’s winemaker and proprietor puts forward his views from the perspective of his small Mornington Peninsula winery, which has all but ceased to enter wine shows in recent times, while winemaker and wine judge Corrina Wright, from Oliver’s Taranga, in McLaren Vale, and managing director Erl Happ, of Happs/ Three Hills, in Margaret River, share their opinions as their wineries continue to target certain shows. ‘brand’ out there. Coincidentally, at about this time, one of our wines was awarded a heap of trophies and a gold medal and, then, a week later received a score in another show that indicated the same wine was faulty.

What were your main goals in exhibiting your wines in those wine shows?

To learn about wines and wave the flag so we would become respected and better known.

David Lloyd Winemaker/Proprietor Eldridge Estate Mornington Peninsula, Victoria Have you ever entered your wines in wine shows and, if so, which ones and why?

Most of them over the past 33 years!

I have always made wine on a small scale. Capital city shows were beyond our scale but small shows, such as the Southern Victorian Wine Show, were within the reach of someone making around 100 cases a year. We entered the open class and enjoyed chatting to the judges about faults and whether oak was too prominent, etc. It was also quite enlightening to taste both the top rated wines and the bottom ones, especially if you could ask the judges about their strengths and weaknesses.

When we bought our own small 3ha vineyard in 1995, the show circuit had advanced a bit more, and so did our quantities, so we were able to enter more small regional shows. We entered Rutherglen, Cowra and the Victorian Wine Show, as well as the Southern Victorian and the National Cool Climate Wine Show, in Bathurst, as I recall. At one point, we had sufficient quantity to enter a few state shows.

We thought that after three or four years of doing this that we would have a good understanding of what our patch of dirt could produce, as well as getting our

74

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

top producers chose not to enter, but they did get a great participation rate, including from me. I thought Yattarna got great recognition, but would I be bothered to enter again? I and many people I know will once again ignore the show circuit in future years. Improving the breed is best done in house with your peers without shows.

What are your thoughts on the cost of entering wine shows?

A nuisance

Why don’t you enter wine shows now?

And finally...

I understand what I am doing and I want to produce my style of wine rather than what I see happening more and more, which is styles driven by shows and the perception of styles by the judges and associates.

I have also found that in recent times there has tended to be less access to judges who are busy racing about the country. The big exception is David Bicknell, who is always accessible and very helpful to all.

Twenty years ago, the rave style of Chardonnay was oaky, buttery and alcoholic. Now the rave style is racy acid and low flavour/low alcohol. Both these examples were the darlings of the show circuit of the time. That illustrates what I see wrong with the show system as we have it; there has to be more catering to the middle ground who don’t want fat or lean styles.

What are your thoughts on the current wine show system in Australia?

Medal winners at regional wine shows should only be allowed to enter state shows, and the medal winners from those shows should only be allowed to move on to the national show.

What are your thoughts on the wine show system being the best place to ‘improve the breed’?

I think wine shows have two purposes.

The first is to benchmark and learn about wine faults. The second is for parts of the wine community to drive a style that is perceived as being great. The problem is, each show presents a different snapshot, but the greater world of wine buyers has no concept of that. For example, in the recent James Halliday Chardonnay Challenge held in the Yarra Valley, some W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Corrina Wright Winemaker/director Oliver’s Taranga Vineyards McLaren Vale, South Australia What is your main goal in exhibiting your wines in wine shows?

Learning from other exhibitors, looking at wine styles that are rewarded, V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

tasting outside of my own tasting bench, and camaraderie with other winemakers. Any positive results are a bonus.

Which wine shows do you enter and why?

Our local McLaren Vale Wine Show and the Alternative Varieties Wine Show (AAVWS), as these are the most relevant ones to our wines at the moment. I also enter some of the state shows - Hot 100, Top 100.

Do you exhibit your wines at international shows?

No. Not relevant to our wines and we don’t export much.

How do you choose the wines to be entered?

Depends on the show. Obviously, we only enter the alternatives in the AAVWS. We enter pretty much everything in the McLaren Vale show as it is the most relevant one to us. Sometimes I can’t enter wines as I don’t have enough volume.

business & marketing

How much would the winery spend on entering wine shows in any given year?

What value do you place on one of your wines winning a medal or trophy?

Probably $2000. I spend a lot more judging at shows.

It makes me feel proud of the wines and the vineyards and the team. It isn’t the be all and end all and it may not increase sales massively, but it is a message that you are on the right path.

What are your thoughts on the costs of entering wine shows?

We are probably not really getting much for what we pay. It would be good to get more feedback and comments on the wines. Better media exposure for trophy winners would also be good. I know that you have to promote yourself too,, but it would be great to have the show behind you as well. I am not sure that the agricultural societies have given back to the industry in the past, but I see that is changing.

What do you do to advise consumers of any wins you may have at a wine show?

We send an email out to our mail order customers, put an article in our newsletter, and post Twitter and Facebook updates, but really only for trophy wins.

What are your thoughts on the current wine show system in Australia?

Yes, it needs improving, but I doubt it will ever be perfect: • we need to judge by regions/subregions more • we need to pay judges so that we can get a better cross-section of judges from different backgrounds • we need to expand the pool of strong judges – the AWRI’s Advanced Wine Assessment Course and Len Evans Tutorial are doing much to assist this; more females in particular.

• improve the impartiality (or the perception of impartiality) by not letting chief judges or panel chairs enter shows that they are judging, and taste call-backs blind. ▶

Precise piston driven dosing • Compact unit • Results in minutes •

HI 84500 Sulfur Dioxide Mini Titrator Hanna Instruments understands that small variations in sulfur dioxide content can have a significant impact on the subtle qualities of wine. With that in mind, we designed the HI 84500; a simple, fast and affordable mini automatic titrator designed for testing free or total sulfur dioxide (SO2) levels in wine. It can even test red wines which are often difficult to test with manual methods because the colour changes are hard to see.

The HI 84500 incorporates a precision piston dosing pump for accuracy and repeatability, automatic stirrer control, graphic mode with exportable data and both a high and low range setting. tel: 03 9769 0666 email: sales@hannainst.com.au web: www.hannainst.com.au

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

75

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

• less wines per day (around 100 would be optimum) • better promotion of results and better feedback to entrants • don’t think we really need all of the capital city shows judging the same thing a million times over, but that is probably not up for discussion • trophy taste-offs need to be changed.

We can’t have the middle of the road wine winning, as does happen with the scoring system. Also, it seems pointless to judge a fortified against a Riesling against a Shiraz, etc. We need to change the trophies to regional bests and perhaps the winners of those go to best varieties.

Is the wine show system the best way to ‘improve the breed’ any more?

Yes, but it does have its short comings.

It is always going to be objective and not super relevant to consumers’ tastes. The tastes of winemakers/sommelliers/wine writers are so much more refined and at a completely different level. I think wine shows do have a place in style direction more so, and in learning more about our regions and sub-regions.

Do you exhibit your wines at international shows?

No, too expensive.

How do you choose the wines to be entered?

We enter those we think ‘might’ get up.

How much would the winery spend on entering wine shows in any given year?

Don’t know and I shudder to think.

What are your thoughts on the costs of entering wine shows?

Ridiculous outlay in relation to the return.

What do you do to advise consumers of any wins you may have at a wine show?

We will brag in a newsletter or put a sign on the front gate. Once, we actually put the medals on one single wine because our sales people said we had to do it. It’s a pain to do that and doesn’t seem to make a lot of difference.

What value do you place on one of your wines winning a medal or trophy?

It’s great for morale, but I tell my people not to take it too seriously one way or the other because the system cannot produce a valid result.

What are your thoughts on the current wine show system in Australia?

Erl Happ Managing Director Happs and Three Hills Margaret River, Western Australia What is your main goal in exhibiting your wines in wine shows?

A gong. Our winemaker likes to win the best exhibitor trophy because it reads well on his CV. Which wine shows do you enter and why?

Perth, Mt Barker and Margaret River to support the locals, and Melbourne because of the Jimmy Watson.

76

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

For goodness sake, give the exhibitors more feedback. Let the exhibitors have a decent tasting session so that they might be able to discover something for themselves and let the judges explain their choices. Do they really want to improve the breed or not? Exclude the hangers on who just want to drink the medals. Make the wines go further. Don’t hold the tasting on the day the results are given out and the trophies are announced.

Restrict the tasting to those who really wish to learn.

Have the judges really got confidence in their choices? Are the judges simply stuffed at the end of the tastings and want to go home to bed? Whatever the situation, feedback is abysmal. In any educational situation, where the feedback is as poor as it is in a capital city wine show, the educator would be sacked.

What good is a score out of 20 without a comment to justify that score?

Really, one has to look at the motives of W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

the agricultural societies in running wine shows and the judges in participating to discover why this situation prevails. The exhibitors are being fleeced.

Indeed, the system is a farce. For a producer to improve the breed he or she needs to canvass a broad spectrum of consumers’ opinions in a situation where the wine is carefully assessed against a small number of competing wines in a different context each time it is judged.

Three wine industry personnel doing the job can never cut it. These three cannot represent the populace at large. What is necessary is never attempted unless the producer makes the attempt himself, which is a major logistical exercise in bringing wines and consumers together and it would take a lot of time. Changing the context in which the wine is judged each time (it is judged) takes effort, thought, organisation...an effort to sample properly, reliably and get a valid result in terms of the population of consumers at large, both existing and potential. The science behind it is simple. It’s a sampling and a measurement problem.

Soap companies do it, but not wine companies.

The system selects for judges with hard palates, the last men left standing at the end of a vinous onslaught. Poor buggers, they work very hard. With a bit of clerical support the exhibitors could learn just what diversity exists in the opinions of these wise and talented folk who judge their wines. Would they enter next time?

Perhaps not.

Each capital city wine show duplicates the effort. Do it once and do it well.

Why not get serious about the task? It’s just a simple design problem, not rocket science. If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing well.

Do you think wine shows themselves could do more to promote wine show wins?

Third party endorsement is powerful, but the wealth of endorsements required for all those gold, silver and bronze medals inevitably dilutes the impact. Why not spread the judging out across the year?

Use the time available. Get more publicity, involve more people, educate better.

And finally...

Wine shows represent a lot of effort for very little return, except to the agricultural societies and in bolstering the egos of the judges.

The improvement of wine shows is always possible but I think it is better to start from the beginning and ask, What do we want and how can we best go WVJ about getting what we want?

V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

business & marketing

Wine shows: an organiser’s perspective For a snapshot of how Australia’s wine shows have evolved over recent years and some of the challenges they face, we asked representatives of five wine shows – a regional, state, capital city and the national wine show, as well as a variety-specific wine show – to give us background on their respective events. Those representatives were: Andrew Price, section head, Canberra Regional Wine Show; Victor Nash, director, Victorian Wines Show; Ben White, general manager, agriculture development, and Ann Houlihan, manager, epicure events, Royal Agricultural Society of Victoria for the Royal Melbourne Wine Show; David Metcalf, chair, National Wine Show of Australia committee, for the Dan Murphy’s National Wine Show of Australia; and Julian McLean, general manager, The Great Australian Shiraz Challenge.

Organising body

Location of judging

V: October RM: October NWS: N ovember GSC: October

Canberra Regional (CR): Royal National Capital Agricultural Society Victorian (V): Victorian Wine Show committee Royal Melbourne (RM): Royal Agricultural Society of Victoria National Wine Show (NWS): Royal National Capital Agricultural Society Great Australian Shiraz Challenge (GSC): GASC Pty Ltd

Year of first show CR: Show records indicate that this was in the mid-1990s V: Sometime in the 1980s RM: 1884 NWS: 1 975 GSC: 1994, to showcase nationally Australia’s most planted premium red grape variety and raise consumer awareness

Month held CR: September

CR: E xhibition Park, Canberra V: Mitchelton Wines RM: Melbourne NWS: Canberra, ACT GSC: T ahbilk Winery Cost of entry CR: $ 27.50 (including GST) per exhibit for entries received by the closing date. An additional fee of $10 per exhibit applies to entries received after the closing date. ▶

Winemakers bottling for winemakers With ten winemakers working across six sites, Portavin is close to market and transport hubs, saving time, money and the environment.

Portavin – caring for your wine from tank to shelf

Adelaide Auckland (08) 8447 7555 (09) 582 0090

Margaret River (08) 9755 0500

Melbourne (03) 9584 7344

Perth Sydney (08) 9437 1033 (02) 9722 9400

www.portavin.com.au portavin@portavin.com.au

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

77

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

V: $40 per entry RM: $ 130 per entry NWS: $110 per entry; $120 per late entry GSC: $ 155 per entry Number of wines required per entry CR: Classes 1-19 require 6 x 750mL bottles (or equivalent volume); classes 20-23 (late harvest and botrytis, fortified, white museum and red museum classes) require 2 x 750mL bottles (or equivalent volume) V: Four RM: Five NWS: Four to six depending on class; two for fortified and brandy classes GSC: S ix Number of entries in most recent show CR: 188 V: 700 RM: 3170 NWS: 1300 GSC: 3 71 Scoring system used The judges in this year’s Great Australian Shiraz Challenge get down to business. The Challenge was established by the Goulburn Valley winemakers and is now a stand alone company which operates out of Tahbilk winery.

Winemakers, record keeping need not be a chore With Wine File...

• Winery records are easy to create and maintain • Winery records are completely auditable • Additives can be tracked to the material batch level • Augments HACCP/Standard Operating Procedures • Your NZ WSMP record keeping needs are met • You will be using software that is widely used in Australia, New Zealand and the USA These are just some of the reasons why Wine File is the winemaker’s choice for winery record keeping.

NOW MOBILE

www.winefile.com.au sales@winefile.com.au Tel: +61 02 9807 6077

78

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

CR: 2 0 point V: 2 0 point RM: 2 0 point and 100 point. For the first time in 2012, the RMWS chose to also publish a comparative 100-point score. The 100-point scores published in 2012 were calculated from the judges’ agreed 20-point scores using the following method: (20 point score x 4) + 22 = 100 point score.

NWS: 20 point. The scores of the three panel judges are aggregated to provide a score out of 60.

GSC: 2 0 point Types of commendations awarded CR + V + RM: T rophy, gold, silver, bronze NWS: Trophy, top gold (if more than one gold in a class), gold, silver, bronze GSC: B ronze, silver, gold, trophy for first place, trophy for best Shiraz under $25 Pre-requisites for entry CR: A ll exhibits must be the product of a minimum 85% of fruit grown in the Southern New South Wales Zone or the Shoalhaven Coast or Southern Highlands regions of the South Coast Zone of New South Wales, as defined by the GIC of Wine Australia. Minimum stock held at the time of entry is also required and this varies depending on class.

V: Must be from a Victorian GI, have a minimum quantity of 600L and be bottled RM: Commercially available and finished wine NWS: Premium gold classes – gold from a qualifying show; premium and single vineyard classes – gold, silver or bronze from a capital city royal show or gold or silver from another qualifying show or competition. Minimum volume requirements apply to all classes. All entries must be finished wines.

GSC: W ines entered must be commercially available at the time of judging; no lab labels permitted; must be labelled Shiraz only.

How many people are involved in running the wine show?

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

CR: The running of the show by the Royal National Capital Agricultural Society (RNCAS) is overseen by a section head and committee, which consists of seven volunteers. Planning for the show requires regular commitment throughout the year. During the show period, a team of 10 stewards, three judges and two associate judges volunteer their time to run the show.

In addition, five RNCAS staff provide support at key times of the year to the volunteers who run the section.

V: Nine committee members, about 10 stewards during judging, and 16 judges including associates.

RM: The RASV Agriculture Development Group has an epicure team of five people who work on many competitions and events throughout the year, including the Royal Melbourne Wine Show. The wine show committee comprises 8-10 people from industry and meets during the year to determine the schedule and any other innovations and enhancements to be made to the show. During the whow itself more than 50 people are required from judges to stewards and IT support to make it all happen.

NWS: Royal National Capital Agricultural

business & marketing

The section head of the Canberra Regional Wine Show, Andrew Price, far left, with the panel of judges from the 2012 show (from left) Jim Chatto, Mike Benny, Ben Edwards (chair), Nick O’Leary (associate) and Fergus McGhie (associate).

Society: Seven paid employees have duties associated with the wine show; wine show committee: four volunteers; wine show advisory panel: six volunteers; stewards: eight volunteers; glass washers: eight volunteers from a charitable organisation that receives a donation from RNCAS; working bee to set up and dismantle: 20-30 volunteers.

GSC: Eight

Is there any limit placed on the number of wines that can be received for the show?

CR: N ot at this point in time.

V: No RM: N o NWS: For the premium and single vineyard classes, the requirement to have a qualifying award from another show makes a limit on entries

Introducing Vintage: Winery Business Software Providing Traceability and Eliminating Paperwork Vintage is the ‘all-in-one’ software for increasing efficiency and control in your winery business.

Vintage’s specialist capabilities include:  Vineyard Management  Winery Operations  Factory Automation  Sales & EDI

 Procurement  Warehousing  Financials  Business Intelligence

To find out more contact Sanderson on 1300 736 929 or info@sanderson.com

www.sanderson.net.au V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

79

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

unnecessary. In the commercial classes, exhibitors are restricted to two entries per class.

GSC: No How would you describe the growth in the number of entries to the show over the last 10 years?

CR: The show has continued to grow over the last 10 years and is the only local show which is a qualifier for the National Wine Show.

V: Variable RM: Entries peaked in 2007 with more than 3800 wines entered. Entries are influenced each year by vintage conditions and currently sit between 3100 and 3200.

NWS: E ntries have remained steady in the last few years, subject to vintage conditions, at 1250-1450.

GSC: First show in 1994: 73 entries; has increased gradually since then.

How many are on the judging panel?

CR: Three judges and two associate judges.

V: 16 RM: We have six panels with a total of 24 judges and 14 associates and a chair of judges. There was an increase to seven panels this year to keep the number of wines tasted per day by the panels at an acceptable level. We also have a separate specialist panel to assess the fortified wines.

NWS: Four panels consisting of three judges and two associate judges, overseen by the chair of judges. The fourth panel was introduced several years ago.

GSC: Four Generally speaking, from where are the judges sourced?

CR: Typically, we have a mix of local and national judges, quite often looking to other shows to secure experienced and reputable judges for our panel.

V: They are mainly Victorian based, but we try to also source some from South Australia and New South Wales. Previous judging experience is beneficial in consideration for selection. For new judges, the first step is to be an associate for two years; completing the Advanced Wine Assessment Course is favorable.

The judges are a mix of winemakers, journalists and sommeliers.

RM: The RMWS Melbourne’s prides itself on having an excellent balance of technical judges and style-based judges. Technical judges tend to be winemakers and those who have been through the Len Evans Tutorial or Advanced Wine Assessment Course.

80

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Style-based judges are those from sommelier and retail backgrounds and bring a diverse set of experiences and style preferences to the show.

NWS: Two international judges, currently from Europe and Asia. The other judges are from Australia. There is a mix of winemakers, journalists, sommeliers and retailers. No formal qualification is required but in recent years, preference has been given to Len Evans Tutorial graduates.

GSC: We have had a number of high profile judges including: James Halliday, John Duval, Trevor Mast, Stephen Henschke, Geoff Merrill, Tim White, Sue Bell, Gary Baldwin and Simon Osicka.

How frequently are the judging panelists and chair of judges rotated from year to year?

CR: The judging panel typically works on a three-year rotation, with an offset used to ensure that knowledge of the system is retained within the panel. When it is time for the chair of the panel to retire, he or she nominates his or her successor from the existing judging panel and provides them with guidance on the specifics of the Canberra Regional Wine Show.

V: Judges do not serve for more than three years.

RM: Under chair of judges David Bicknell, panel chairs and senior judges are engaged for no more than five years, with associates rotated through and often doing one or two shows as a steward before joining the judging ranks.

At this year’s show we had 38 people judging the show for the first time, including the chair of judges.

NWS: The chair of judges is appointed for a three-year term. Other judges are rotated regularly, but no fixed term is applied.

GSC: Depends on availability What time commitment is required of judges who sit on the show’s panel?

CR: Three days V: Three days RM: Four days of judging NWS: Four days GSC: Three days Are the judges compensated for their time in any way?

CR: Judges are provided with accommodation, meals and airfares or travel allowance for their commitment to the show.

V: All judges’ expenses are covered; associates need to pay their way, as the show does not have sufficient funds for them. This also helps determine how keen they are.

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

RM: This year the Melbourne Wine Show introduced a per diem for judges and associates to cover their out-of-pocket expenses. In addition, we cover their flights, accommodation, meals and transfers while in Melbourne. This year we introduced a series of special masterclasses for the judges, which were conducted by the international judges and chair of judges to provide the judges with some fun and professional development as part of their time with the show.

NWS: T ravel, accommodation and most meals are paid for judges and associate judges. Judges are paid an allowance to cover incidental expenses.

GSC: O ut-of-pocket expenses Is there a set limit to the number that can be tasted in a day? If not, what would be the average?

CR: T ypically, the panel judges a maximum of 120 wines per day.

V: W e try to use ASVO standards and with the show being judged over three days, no judge would taste more than 150 wines per day.

RM: T he average number of wines tasted per day is 110-140. In 2012 a seventh panel was introduced so the number of wines tasted in a day remained within reasonable limits in most classes; with higher entries in some classes, the number may have increased up to this quota in some cases.

NWS: T here is no set limit, but on average, 120-130 wines per day.

GSC: 1 50 on average How many classes are there and how are they structured?

CR: C urrently we have 23 classes. Most of them are determined by variety and vintage. However, some are based on style.

V: A bout 50 according to vintage and variety RM: 7 2. The schedule is rather complex and changes every year, however, the vast majority of classes are judged by variety and vintage and, then, by region within that class. There are some exceptions, of course, such as blended classes, the fortified and single vineyard classes. However, the single vineyard class is judged by variety.

NWS: 7 7. The premium classes are sorted by variety and vintage. The commercial classes are sorted by style and variety. Aged classes (five years and older) are sorted by style.

GSC: O ne only. Wines are tasted in climatic order, i.e., cooler through to warm. ▶ V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

business & marketing

How many trophies are up for grabs, how are they decided and how long does the process take?

CR: Top gold exhibits in the open classes are eligible for trophies. We have 14 trophies and the wines eligible for these are judged against each other. This can be a fast process or can take quite some time depending on how many wines are eligible.

V: 16 trophies are available which are judged using the standard Borda count method; the process takes about three hours.

RM: 22 trophies are on offer. In 2012, the ‘top’ exhibits of each class were retasted blind by the panel chairs and the chairman of judges to find the top exhibit of each class. Through this extra level of scrutiny the eligible wines for each varietal and blend class trophy were found. The varietal and blend class trophy judging rounds were the final level of scrutiny to ensure only the top eligible exhibits went through to be judged for the major trophies in 2012.

NWS: 26 trophies. Open class trophies are awarded to the best wines in premium and single vineyard (if eligible) classes after a judge-off of the top gold awards. The top wine in a class must be of gold medal standard to be eligible for a trophy. The open class trophies include the best dry red and best dry white wines of the show and the Len Evans Memorial Trophy for best table wine of the show. Trophies are awarded for the best red and best white wines in the single vineyard classes. If the volume of a trophy winning wine meets the relevant premium class requirement, the wine is eligible for the best dry red or best dry white wines trophies and the best table wine of the show.

Wines in class 12 (sweet or medium sweet white table wine) and class 13 (rosé) are not eligible for the open class trophies, but the top gold award in each class automatically receives the trophy for that style. Wines in the commercial, aged, sparkling and fortified classes do not compete against the premium table wine classes for trophies, but compete for the trophy in their respective sections.

Special trophies are awarded to the top wine in each premium gold class: The Semillon Trophy, the Chardonnay Trophy, the Shiraz Trophy and the Cabernet Trophy. A trophy that applies to only one class is awarded by the panel judging the class. The other trophies are decided by a ballot of all judges, including the chair of judges.

Those trophies are judged over four hours at the beginning of the last day of the show.

V2 7N 6

Judging under way at last year’s Dan Murphy’s National Wine Show of Australia.

GSC: 2x: first place: gold medal taste-off and averaged scores; best Shiraz under $25 trophy.

What feedback do exhibitors get about the wines they’ve entered in the competition after the judging has taken place?

CR: Exhibitors are encouraged to seek feedback from the judges about their entries. A forum for exhibitors to seek feedback from judges is available following the presentation of trophies.

V: A number of judges are there for the exhibitors’ tasting; panel chair comments are also made available.

RM: Exhibitors are provided with their judging scores per exhibit. Feedback is provided to exhibitors at the exhibitor tasting by panel chairs and attending judges if requested.

NWS: E xhibitors get a printout of judging scores for their exhibits. An exhibitors’ tasting is held on the day following the presentation dinner.

GSC: Each exhibitor receives a letter detailing their result.

Do you hold a public tasting?

CR: No V: Yes RM: Yes, it was reintroduced this year as the Uncorked event.

NWS: N o GSC: No Are consumers engaged with the show in any other way?

CR: Although there is no public tasting, key people responsible for marketing and stocking local wines are invited to attend the presentation of trophies.

This provides stockists of local wines with an opportunity to liaise closely with W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

winemakers and market the best local wines to their customers.

V: The presentation dinner is promoted to the public in print media.

RM: Not directly, but they can follow the judging process and panel comments via social media. The RASV, in addition to its consumer event Uncorked, also promotes the wine show to a consumer audience via its Trophy Guide publication and at other consumer-based events, such as the Royal Melbourne Show, with winning wines showcased with tastings from the Royal Melbourne Fine Food Deli and via masterclasses conducted as part of the stage program across the 11 days. Award-winning wines are also featured at special dinners developed by the RASV as part of the Melbourne Food and Wine Festival.

NWS: A VIP tasting is held for sponsors and invited guests; the presentation dinner is open to the public.

GSC: Only with press releases and individual participants’ marketing and communication.

What does it cost to run the wine show each year?

CR: Approximately $9500 V: About $70,000 RM: There is a significant investment in people, IT infrastructure, physical space, glassware, storage, event management, printing and marketing communications to conduct the show each year. The RASV is a not-for-profit entity which has been conducting the show for more than 120 years. Due to the infrastructure of the show grounds, which we jointly own and operate with the State Government of Victoria, we can utilise our own property to conduct the show which helps to reduce the www.winebiz. com . au

81

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

external costs of operations. It is a significant undertaking financially and in terms of resources, and we are proud to be able to continue to support and advance excellence in agriculture through winemaking and viticulture.

NWS: About $200,000 GSC: Minimal costs due to sponsor support To what degree do sponsors fund the wine show?

CR: The majority of funds are derived from sponsorship with a smaller proportion being from entry fees.

V: About 30% RM: Sponsorship is an important part of the show and helps the RASV to be able to continually invest and develop the show through marketing and consumer engagement to help profile the exhibitors' winning wines.

The funding is a combination of sponsorship and entry fees.

NWS: 50% GSC: Visy Board is our naming rights sponsor and its contribution is a significant factor in the show’s success. This year’s winning winemaker received more than $20,000 worth of prizes.

How has the wine show performed financially of late?

CR: Thanks to good sponsorship the show currently runs at a profit.

V: Breakeven RM: The wine show continues to be an important part of the RASVs annual activity and the financial performance of the show remains positive. Our focus is to generate an operating surplus for re-investment into future wine show’s and wine industry development. We managed the financial operation of the show responsibly to ensure its long term sustainability.

NWS: The wine show usually makes a surplus.

GSC: Profit If a profit, how are those funds spent?

CR: The wine show is run by a not-forprofit organisation. Any profit from the show goes into consolidated revenue and acts as a ‘rainy day fund’. It also allows for capital works, such as replacement of judging tables and equipment.

RM: The RASV is focussed on being valued by industry and helping industry to better connect with consumer.

Consequently, we have invested in some significant developments over

82

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

recent years which include: publishing the trophy winners pocket guide since 2010; conducting a dedicated consumer event for the first time in 2012; the Jimmy Watson Scholarship, which provides funding for travel to an international wine region/ region for professional development; working with Wine Communicators of Australia to support the Melbourne Wine Show Lunch; introduction of a per diem to assist with judges' expenses; significant IT investment to better manage the competition; costs associated with the awards presentation dinner, which is an invitation-only event; sponsorship of the Len Evans Tutorial in 2012.

NWS: T he surplus is applied to the operations of the RNCAS. GSC: F unds are reinvested in evolving and improving the event.

Does the wine show include a presentation dinner?

CR: No presentation dinner is held, however, we do have a presentation of trophies that includes an exhibitors, sponsors and industry tasting.

V: Y es, $160/ticket RM: Yes, it is invitation only and the cost is carried by the RASV and RMWS. NWS: Yes. In 2012, the dinner will be held in the Great Hall, Parliament House, at a cost of $220 per person.

GSC: Yes, but only for sponsors, winners and the press.

What changes have been made to the wine show of late?

CR: No recent changes have been made, although this is reviewed regularly by the committee to ensure that the classes and structure accurately reflect the needs and trends in the region. The Canberra Regional Wine Show is closely aligned with the National Wine Show. When changes are made at this show, they are also considered by the regional wine show committee.

V: A complete revision of classes took place for 2012. The show was brought into line with Australian Label Integrity Program blending rules. That is, wines previously were required to be of 100% Victorian grapes. In line with LIP rules, wines can now be no less than 85% Victorian grapes. The show has also become consistent with all other major shows in that all wines must be commercially bottled at the time of entry. There have also been reductions to the minimum quantities produced to be eligible, revised down from 1000L to 600L. This was to acknowledge W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

the rising number of small batches of commercial wines being produced today.

RM: Entry requirements in many classes have been reduced to make the show more accessible to smaller producers.

Judging this year was conducted by a regional cluster.

NWS: In 2010, New Zealand wines were excluded from the show. The show is now open only to Australian wines.

Minor changes have been made to class structures to reduce class sizes and the number of wines judges are required to judge. For example, the commercial classes have been divided by style and variety to reduce the size of the classes, and ensure that similar styles are judged together. Volume requirements for the premium classes have been reduced to encourage smaller producers to enter, and single vineyard classes have been introduced.

The catalogue of results has been revised to provide more information to consumers about how wines qualify for the show, how they are judged, the different classes that wines are divided into, and what the results mean.

GSC: Regional/climatic considerations are now applied; cooler areas are judged first.

What are the show’s biggest challenges at the moment?

CR: The last two years have seen unfavourable seasonal conditions, with a range of issues causing lower yields.

This has affected entries at the previous two shows.

V: The last few years have experienced extraordinarily bad management. This became evident to the winemaking public.

The challenge is trying to put this right and regain the confidence of the industry.

Looking at our entries, I think we have moved a long way to achieving this in one year.

RM: The ongoing challenge is improving consumer engagement to the benefit of industry and maximising the value of a trophy award for our industry exhibitors.

We invest in a robust public relations campaign each year with the objective of raising the profile of all trophy winners throughout the year.

NWS: The show must continue to be relevant to the wine industry and consumers.

Because the show is conducted behind closed doors, we need to engage with the public to explain how the show is conducted and why it is important in promoting excellence in wine.

GSC: The increasing number of competing events; we may have to look at consolidating with them to make one WVJ entity!

V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

business & marketing

Wine shows: what’s the score in New Zealand and the US? How does the number of wine shows held in Australia and the way in which they are run compare with those of our New World competitors in New Zealand and the US? For the lowdown on the story across the Tasman, we asked Belinda Jackson, a Marlborough-based wine consultant and a director of Wine Competition Ltd which owns and organises NZ’s Spiegelau International Wine Competition and Marlborough Wine Show. Tim McDonald, who has served as a wine show judge for some 200 US wine competitions over the years and runs his own Napa Valley-based wine industry public relations and marketing consultancy, helped paint the picture on the wine show landscape in the US. New Zealand

T

here are around 15 wine shows held in New Zealand every year.

The Air New Zealand Wine Awards, held in Auckland, is the leading show, probably followed by the Royal Easter Show Wine Awards, also held in Auckland, the two internationals – the Spiegelau International Wine Competition, Marlborough, and the New Zealand International Wine Show, Auckland - and the New World Wine Awards, open only to commercial wines under $25. Belinda Jackson commented that regional wine shows were also developing in importance too.

Jackson said that none of the wine shows fed into each other at this stage, but added that it had been suggested that the Air New Zealand Wine Awards return to being the country’s ‘national show’, at which wines can only be entered if they have won a medal at their regional show. “This has not been publicly mooted to my knowledge, but talked about by some of us,” she said.

Various bodies run New Zealand’s wine shows: the Air New Zealand Wine Awards is run by New Zealand Winegrowers; the Royal Easter Show Wine Show is run by the Auckland Agricultural & Pastoral Society; the New Zealand International is organised by a wine retailer; the New World Wine Awards is run by FoodStuffs (which owns New World supermarkets); Spiegelau is an independent show; and some of the regional shows, such as the Hawke’s Bay Wine Awards, are run by agricultural and pastoral societies, but others, such as the Marlborough Wine Show, are independent.

The cost of entering wine shows in New Zealand start at around $50 per entry, while the number of entries in each show are not capped. Jackson said V2 7N 6

a 20-point scoring system was used in all shows. Regarding the number of wines judges taste in a day, she said some shows were more considerate than others. “For mine (the Spiegelau International Wine Competition and Marlborough Wine Show), not more than 120 – for some others, over 150,” she said.

Jackson said an online database of results from New Zealand’s major wine competitions (www.wineshow.co.nz) was available, which also acted as a portal for wine producers to enter selected wine competitions online.

When asked about the degree to which consumers were engaged with New Zealand wine shows, Jackson said the Air New Zealand Wine Show offered industry tastings and she believed that tickets to a tasting session could also be purchased by the public. “The Spiegelau International Wine Competition has just started public tastings in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch, while the Marlborough Wine Show will hold a tasting in the region,” she said. She could not comment on what other shows offered.

Jackson said the Spiegelau and Marlborough competitions were funded predominantly through entry fees with a little provided by sponsors. “The others, I’d suggest, are the same, though some like the Air New Zealand Wine Awards have significant sponsorships plus whatever funding NZ Winegrowers puts in. The New World Wine Awards would be funded by themselves, as well as entry fees, as a promotional activity.”

Jackson added that the Spiegelau and Marlborough shows had recently begun to sell the unopened bottles not required during the judging process, with the proceeds going to a trust. “This money is then returned to the wine industry via scholarships and grants,” she said.

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

United States There are well over 100 wine competitions held in the US annually and that number is growing every year. “I judge at least 10 per year,” Tim McDonald noted. He said the panels of judges often knew each other and judged together regularly.

The competitions range from state and county fair competitions, to international and regionally-focussed or varietally-focussed, as well as those thematically-focussed, or based on the qualifications of the judging panel (e.g., sommeliers or wine critics).

“In the US, a state or county fair is an annual event held in communities for the purpose of promoting the agriculture of the region through competitive exhibitions. Wine competitions are associated with a few county and state fairs across the country. Examples are the California State Fair, Orange County Fair (Southern California), Indiana State Fair (now known as the Indy International Wine Competition), and Florida State Fair International Wine Competition,” McDonald explained.

He said regional competitions may limit the wines accepted into the competition based on where the wines are produced geographically.

Some examples were the Pacific Rim International Wine Competition, which judges commercially-available wines from a Pacific Rim Country, and the International Eastern Wine Competition, which accepts wines from the eastern states of the US. Smaller regional competitions, such as the North of the Gate Wine Competition, only accepted wines produced north of the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California.

McDonald said the key events on the US wine show circuit were the San www.winebiz. com . au

83

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

Judges at this year’s Marlborough Wine Show (from left) Jim Harre, Patrick Materman and associate judge Emma Jenkins.

Francisco International, Los Angeles International, Critics Challenge International, Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo International Wine Competition, and Dallas Morning News Wine Competition.

The organisations involved in running wine shows in the US comprised wine writers, journalists, state and county fairs, magazines and newspapers.

McDonald said there was not a hierarchy of competitions in the US whereby wines had to achieve certain recognition at one wine show to qualify for entry to another. Regarding the costs involved in entering wine shows in the US, McDonald said most wine competitions charged between US$60 and $100 per entry, with AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ & DEALERS’ JOURNAL between four and six bottles required per entry. In addition, some competitions required winners to donate a few cases to be auctioned NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE for a charity sponsored by the competition or poured at promotional events associated with the wine competition.

FOR MORE READERS AND INCREASED BUSINESS Entries to shows were not capped. “The bigger the better is generally the case,” McDonald added.

Visit www.afdj.com.au today to view your copy online He said few wine shows used a point system for judging, with US shows varying widely on how the wines are scored and winners awarded. “However, almost all shows use medals to represent placement, e.g., platinum, gold, silver, bronze.”

Mostly, judges were limited to between 100 and 150 tastes per day.

McDonald said that although an online database of wine show results like that in New Zealand did not exist in the US, some AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ & DEALERS’ JOURNAL websites existed that tried to pull data together from a variety of sources to provide a somewhat comprehensive list.

He said “great consumer tasting events” followed many of the NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE top wine competitions. Consumers were further engaged with some FOR MORE READERS AND shows through promotions offered by sponsoring newspapers and INCREASED BUSINESS magazines.

AUSTRALASIAN FARMERS’ McDonald said US competitions were primarily funded by entry fees, with sponsors including magazines, newspapers, glassware & DEALERS’ JOURNAL Visit www.afdj.com.au today to view your companies, copy online WVJ and chain retailers.

Now farmers can read Australasia’s leading farm dealers and products magazine

ON LINE

Simply go to

For subscriptions call Cathy on (03) 9888 4822

84

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

t/04d04258/40-12

www.afdj.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

W I N E SH O W S

business & marketing

How important are wine medals and how much can we rely on those who assign them?

By Armando Corsi, Research Associate – Lecturer, Ehrenberg Bass Institute for Marketing Science, School of Marketing University of South Australia. Email: Armando.Corsi@unisa.edu.au

We asked Armando Corsi to summarise what the latest research tells us about the impact of wine show awards on wine consumers’ purchase decisions and the consistency of wine judging results.

M

edals. Awards. In the last 30 years the system of a rating a country’s best wines has been subject to several critiques, but has also been a source of publicity and promotion for both the wineries who submit their wines to these events and for wine judges and journalists, as a never-ending source of material to taste and comment.

Medals and awards in the wine sector have certainly contributed to the popularisation and diffusion of wine, allowing consumers to quickly discern special wines from ordinary ones, thus shortening the time in choosing a wine, and reducing their risk of making a bad choice.

At the same time, more knowledgeable wine drinkers and/or those who always want to ‘think different’ have relied little on these marketing tools, believing they can judge wines better than those that try wines almost every day.

It is true that wine shows, guides and magazines have had some bugs in their system of rating and classifying wines.

Perhaps the best example of this occurred in 2008 when US journalist Robin Goldstein entered Wine Spectator's Restaurant Awards program for the reserve wine list of a Milanese restaurant, Osteria L’Intrepido.

Where was the trick? The restaurant did not actually exist, never did, and, probably even worse than this, the wine list was created from a range of Italian wines which had been poorly rated by Wine Spectator judges. The scandal echoed beyond wine professionals, and together with claims about the objectivity of wine shows, it is not difficult to imagine that wine judges have a substantial amount of work to do to defend their professionalism.

What does scientific research have to say about wine shows? The topic has been analysed by researchers from two main perspectives. First, academic research has observed the role of medals and awards in driving consumers’ choices.

Secondly, researchers have investigated the consistency of wine judges in evaluating wine across different wine shows.

V2 7N 6

The importance of medals and awards on wine purchases Contrary to expectations, there has been little research done on the importance of medals and awards. Interestingly, though, all these studies have been conducted using the same methodology – discrete choice experiments (DCE) – and most of the papers are relative to purchases in a retail environment.

The first study of this kind does not come from a traditional wine-consuming country, but from the Czech Republic, where Orth and Krska (2002) interviewed 69 respondents in local wine shops (vinotekas). Their answers to Likert-scale type questions indicated that medals do not appear to be very important for Czechs, but their answers to a choice experiment confirmed they gave equal importance to price and the presence of awards on labels. The respondents always preferred wines showing no awards the least, and in most cases, wines with gold medals were preferred over those with silver medals.

The first study conducted in Australia was published in 2006 by Lockshin et al. using a sample of 250 Australian regular wine drinkers. The results showed that that low-involved wine consumers tended to react more positively to gold medals on wines sold at lower price points, but the effect decreased as prices rose. Highly-involved consumers relied less on gold medals, but their purchase decisions were somewhat influenced by them at lower prices. Furthermore, for highlyinvolved consumers, the presence of medals only slightly increased the chance of purchase for wines from well-known regions, but they certainly helped low involved wine consumers to choose wines from less known areas.

Moving out of Australia, Atkin et al. (2007) found that when US consumers are unsure about what wine to buy, women were more likely to rely on medals and awards than men in making a wine choice.

To date, the most comprehensive study about the importance of wine labels/awards was published by Dr. Steve Goodman (2009) in the International Journal of Wine Business Research. Goodman’s research was W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

conducted with 15 other researchers from 13 different countries on the elements driving consumers’ choices in a retail environment.

The study applied a particular type of DCE – the best:worst (BW) method – on more than 2500 consumers, finding that medals and awards were, on average, only the eighth out of 13 elements driving consumers’ choices. A few exceptions were in New Zealand – where medals and awards ranked as the third most influencing element - and China and Taiwan – where medals and awards came in fifth place.

It is more difficult to find papers on the importance of wine labels in the on-premise sector, as wine bottles are not generally shown to clients before they make a choice.

The only way wineries could find it useful to promote medals and awards in on-premise venues is when restaurateurs decide to include this information in their wine lists, but we know that this is not a popular option in Australia or overseas. To the best of our knowledge, the only paper that discusses the importance of medals and awards in restaurants was published by Corsi et al.

(2012) as part of a wider study on the elements influencing wine choices via menus. The study was conducted using a representative sample of 1258 Australian wine consumers.

The results showed that grape varietals are key choice drivers, followed by the awards obtained by a wine and its price.

The consistency of wine judges The second research stream focusses on the concordance between wine judges in evaluating wines submitted to competitions.

Since the seminal paper by Orley Ashenfelter (2006), all the authors working on this topic have agreed on the lack of consistency in wine judgments across wine shows. Hodgson (2008) analysed wine judge performance at the California State Fair Wine Competition between 2005 and 2008. Panels of four expert judges - between 65 and 70 judges were tested each year - received a flight of 30 wines using triplicate samples poured from the same bottle. The results showed that only 10 percent of the judges were able to replicate their score within the same medal group, and www.winebiz. com . au

85

business & marketing

W I N E SH O W S

another 10%, on occasion, scored the same wine bronze to gold. However, the study also found that the judges were more consistent with regard to the wines they didn’t like, rather than those they did.

The author also tried to explain the reasons behind these variations, hypothesising that wine evaluation can be influenced by two main factors: 1) the quality of the wine, and 2) the bias of the judge. In 50% of the wine analysed, the variation in wine evaluations was only and exclusively determined by the quality of the wine. However, for the other half of the wines, the biases in the judges’ evaluations influenced the different scores received by the wines.

One year later, Hodgson (2009) published another paper on the consistency of wine evaluations across 13 wine competitions in the US. The data were relative to 2003 and consisted of more than 4000 wines. Of the 2440 wines entered in more than three competitions, 47% received gold medals, but 84% of those same wines did not receive an award in another competition.

In Australia, the only study on the consistency of wine judges has been recently published by Allen and Germov (2011). The authors reviewed the scores received by more than 5000 wines entered in four capital city wine competitions in 2007. The results showed that large wineries are more likely to enter wines in these competitions than

small wineries. Similar to Hodgson (2008, 2009), there was only a moderate degree of agreement between judges in terms of the medals awarded to wines entered into multiple competitions. Disagreement among the judges was most evident in the distinctions between different medal classes, and much less pronounced between wines that received medals and those that did not.

In conclusion, wine competitions are not evil, but they are not the solution to all wine marketing problems either. They have certainly helped the diffusion and popularisation of wine and they facilitate the choice of wine, especially among wine novices. We might also speculate on the fact that the awards received in a wine show might stimulate word-of-mouth and increase the popularity of a wine, but these aspects have not been scientifically studied yet. At the same time, neither producers nor consumers can or should completely rely on this marketing tool, as wine judges’ evaluations have been found to be quite inconsistent across shows, years, and countries. It would be interesting to understand what role ‘official’ wine judges and critics are going to have in the next few years. In a world where websites, blogs and social media are increasingly dominating the scene, does the wine sector need wine shows as we know them now, or should wineries be more in touch with online wine writers and increase their fame and

appreciation through some new forms of webbased wine awards?

References Allen, M. P. and Germov, J. (2011) Judging taste and creating value – The cultural consecration of Australian wines. Journal of Sociology 47(1):35-51.

Ashenfelter, O. (2006) Tales from the crypt: Bruce Kaiser tells us about the trials and tribulations of a wine judge.

Journal of Wine Economics 1(2):173–175.

Atkin, T.; Nowak, L. and Garcia, R. (2007) Women wine consumers: Information search and retailing implications.

International Journal of Wine Business Research 19(4):327339.

Corsi, A.M.; Mueller, S. and Lockshin, L. (2012) Let’s see what they have... What consumers look for in a restaurant wine list? Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 53(2):110-121.

Goodman, S. (2009) An international comparison of retail consumer wine choice. International Journal of Wine Business Research 21(1):41-49.

Hodgson, R. T. (2008) Evaluation of wine judges at a major US wine competition. Journal of Wine Economics 3(2):105–113.

Hodgson, R. T. (2009) An analysis of the concordance among 13 US wine competitions. Journal of Wine Economics 4(1):1–9.

Lockshin, L.; Jarvis, W.; d’Hauteville, F. and Perrouty, J.P. (2006) Using simulations from discrete choice experiments to measure consumer sensitivity to brand, region, price and awards in wine choice. Food Quality and Preference 17(3/4):166-78.

Orth, U.R. and Krska, P. (2002) Quality signals in wine marketing: The role of exhibition awards. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 4:385-397.

Schamel, G. (2003) A hedonic pricing model for German WVJ wine. Agrarwirtschaft 52(5):247-254.

Our purpose is to provide buyers the best choice and sellers the best opportunities when dealing with Australian Bulk Wines.

POST - PO Box 1039 • Kent Town • South Australia 5071 OFFICE - 5 / 5-7 Union Street • Stepney • South Australia 5069 CONTACT - Ph +61 8 8363 5188 • Fax +61 8 8363 6188 • info@austwine.net.au

www.austwine.net.au

86

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

EXPORT

business & marketing

FDA Food Safety Modernisation Act affects wineries

By David Lennarz, Vice President, Registrar Corp*

For some time, wine exporters to the US that run facilities that process, pack or hold wine exported for consumption in that country have been required to register these facilities with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). According to regulations that recently came into force, facilities registered with the FDA will now have to re-register every two years.

C

hanges to food and beverage regulations in the United States are under way that have implications for the Australian wine industry.

Under the new Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernisation Act (FSMA), all food facilities, including wineries, will be required to renew their FDA food facility registration before 31 December 2012 and every two years during the fourth quarter of even-numbered years (i.e., 2012, 2014, 2016, etc.) and consent to FDA inspections.

Facility operators can re-register directly with the FDA via an online form available at www.fda.gov/furls. It is also possible to register by mail, with the relevant forms downloadable from the FDA. The FDA must conduct at least 37,200 inspections between now and 2016, and at least 19,200 each year thereafter, compared with fewer than 300 in 2010, the year prior to the FSMA. This increases the probability each year that wineries will be inspected by the FDA for the next five years. Further, the increased number of inspections means that the FDA will likely identify a greater number of noncompliance issues related to food safety requirements. In addition, the FDA has been granted new authority to impose fees for re-inspection of a food facility. Failing

an inspection could have a disastrous effect on your supply chain, potentially resulting in suspension of your FDA Food Facility Establishment Registration, mandatory re-inspection, heavy fines, or refused shipments.

The FSMA affects many existing regulations and adds a series of new requirements for food manufacturers, including wineries. One of the biggest changes is the rapid increase in FDA foreign food facility inspections. Although wineries are generally considered to be low-risk facilities, the FDA has been increasing the number of winery inspections due to FSMA. The FDA performed 261 wine inspections in 2011-12, and is likely to increase the number of inspections for the coming years, according to an FDA spokesperson.1 The FSMA states that in the one-year period following the date of enactment, the FDA shall perform no fewer than 600 foreign facility inspections. Moreover, in each of the five years following the oneyear period, the FDA shall inspect no fewer than twice the number of foreign facilities inspected during the previous year. By this schedule, the FDA will inspect no fewer than:

Year

Foreign food facility inspections

2011

600

2012

1200

2013

2400

2014

4800

2015

9600

2016

19,200

The renewal will require that registered facilities located outside the US provide an e-mail address for the contact person of the facility and for the US agent.

Further information on the reregistration requirement can be found on the FDA’s website: www.fda.gov/ Food/FoodSafety/FSMA/ucm314178.htm. *Registrar Corp assists businesses with US FDA compliance including food facility registration assistance, US agent services, label reviews and preparation for an inspection. A 24-hour, seven days a week live chat is available to provide immediate answers to regulatory questions (www.registrarcorp.com) or contact Registrar Corp’s Australian office on (08) 7221 1992 or email australia@registrarcorp.com.

1

http://www.winespectator.com/webfeature/show/id/47338

Convert your surplus stock into cash • We can quickly move large quantities of packaged wine to the domestic market.

• We can sell your excess stock quietly without damaging your brand.

• We are not a broker - we will purchase the wine directly from you.

For all enquiries please contact Philip Heyman P 1300 667 602 F 03 9415 9057 M 0418 555 655 E philip@destinywines.com.au

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

87

business & marketing

W I N E I N T E LL I G E N C E

Inside the box

By Richard Halstead Chief Operating Officer, Wine Intelligence. Email: info@wineintelligence.com

The Wine Intelligence team has created what they believe to be the first consumer behaviour model to describe the imported wine drinking population in China.

A

cursory glance at the variety of shapes, sizes, skin colours and, indeed, personalities of the athletes on show at the London 2012 Olympics gave a practical illustration of the marketer’s conundrum: how to market what is effectively the same product to an audience that think, act and care about said product in very different ways?

The work-in-progress that is the market research industry has tried for decades to grapple with this problem, and not always with much success.

We started with the ‘average man’ philosophy of the mid-20th Century American consumer goods industry, which was beautifully demonstrated in the television series Mad Men. Everyone loves product A for the same reason, because we are all more or less the same, and want the same things. Unfortunately, this philosophy began to fall apart from the mid-1960s onwards as people around the world asserted a more individualistic philosophy, and it has arguably continued to retreat until the present day.

The market research industry’s response was logical: to acknowledge that we are not all the same, yet, we probably share some characteristics with people in similar situations to our own. Market researchers then set about proving this with statistics and shopping data, and out of this grew the idea that we can describe a population’s behaviour in terms of identifiable sub-groups who act, think (and perhaps look) the same as each other. Consumer segmentation was born.

Today, we are arguably at the apogee of segmentation culture. Most consumerfacing companies use some form of segmentation to position themselves to consumers, be it the instinctive reaction of a sales assistant to the appearance of someone coming into their shop, to complex models run by the world’s most sophisticated consumer goods multi-nationals, which are often only comprehensible to the ‘techies’ that created them.

88

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The [Chinese] market remains dominated by a segment we are calling ‘prestige-seeking traditionalists’, the ones who basically buy an expensive bottle of wine so that they can enhance their reputations in a business context. Wine drinkers who we might recognise from more mature markets, i.e., those who buy wine because they like drinking it, and use it in a private (at home) and social (at home and out of home) context are still in relatively short supply.

The idea of segmentation has also migrated into politics. Modern political strategists expend quantities of brainpower and money isolating influential swing voters, and then research them exhaustively to find the issues and policies that will galvanise them to vote.

Both commercial and political segmentation research has been turbocharged by the rapid advance of technology, chiefly computing power and databases, which have opened up new avenues in the search for the perfect consumer behaviour model.

Some businesses even claim they can predict what you and I will be spending our money on next week, which is a bit Big Brother-ish, and somewhat hubristic.

Fortunately, the pleasure (and pain) of being in market research is that the boastful certainties that emerge from these segmentation models are often shot down in flames by the natural cussedness and randomness of human behaviour. People just don’t always obey the rules, no matter what the circumstances. Segmentation, therefore, needs to be understood within the context of any predictive science. These days it is closer to a weather forecast than a horse-racing tip, but it remains subject to uncertainty.

The reason that segmentation is on my W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

mind is that along with my team at Wine Intelligence, I have been spending the past few months creating what we believe is the first consumer behaviour model to describe the imported wine drinking population in China.

It has not been easy. Aside from the standard problems with all segmentations described earlier in this article, researching wine drinkers in China presents two further issues. First, the Chinese market for imported wine is in its infancy and is, therefore, inherently unstable. The market remains dominated by a segment we are calling ‘prestigeseeking traditionalists’, the ones who basically buy an expensive bottle of wine so that they can enhance their reputations in a business context. Wine drinkers who we might recognise from more mature markets, i.e., those who buy wine because they like drinking it, and use it in a private (at home) and social (at home and out of home) context are still in relatively short supply.

The second issue is more of a technical research problem that is endemic to China. The principal tool of describing a body of consumers is the quantitative survey, where a large-ish sample of people (normally 1000-2000), designed to be representative of a population as a whole, answer a questionnaire and the results are analysed. Our experience so far in China (where we have been V27N6

W I N E I N T E LL I G E N C E

running surveys for the past three years) is that respondents tend to be far more enthusiastic and positive in their responses than a typical developed world respondent, which makes it difficult to ascertain genuine differences.

Our experience in the Chinese market has taught us that we cannot rely on just one set of data, or indeed one data collection method, to get near the truth.

We wanted to publish our first Portraits China segmentation report in 2010, but quickly realised that we were a long way from being able to describe China’s wine drinkers in a sensible and robust way. Two years later, having run lots more surveys, and having also sat with and interviewed dozens of consumers face-to-face, plus debated the findings extensively with our team of Chinese nationals, we are feeling more confident that we have established a reasonably accurate model of who drinks wine, what they’re drinking, why, and when.

A copy of this report is available for purchase, but following are some edited highlights. We can identify a total relevant population of around 18 million imported wine drinkers, who are city-based and working in professional

or white collar sectors. This is a slight increase on the number of imported wine drinkers we have reported in previous years, but not a quantum leap.

Given that around 30 million cases of imported wine were sold in the past year, it suggests that (a) each drinker is getting through a bit less than two bottles of imported wine each month, or (b) that more wine is being pushed into the Chinese market than is actually being consumed (a fear voiced by a number of suppliers I have talked to recently), and/or (c) we are underreporting the size of the imported wine drinking population.

The drinkers we can identify divide into six discernible segments, which for simplicity can be grouped into three categories. The first includes the high spending, highly involved adventurous connoisseurs (around 9 percent of imported wine drinkers), and the previously mentioned prestige-seeking traditionalists (22%), which between them account for nearly two-thirds of all spend on wine.

The second category is arguably the most interesting: two segments of consumers, social newbies and casualat-homers, who are actually drinking

business & marketing

wine because they like it and it fits with their lifestyle. They represent nearly half of drinkers, but at the moment only a third of spend, partly because wine is still not particularly central to their lives, and partly because they are usually spending their own money as opposed to a company expense account.

The final pair of segments, health sippers and frugal occasionals, drink wine rarely and in small quantities, typically for health reasons or because it is an obligation (such as a toast at an Autumn Festival party).

All of these segments intuitively make sense to us as researchers, and to the key clients for whom this work is being done. What is fascinating is that the picture only became clear when we combined our quantitative data analysis with our interview research. The general lesson: pure quantitative data analysis does not always give you the answer, and it is imperative to apply more critical thinking and common sense to its outputs before asserting any findings.

Portraits China 2012 is available from the Wine Intelligence reports shop. Visit www.wineintelligence.com or email Stefanie@wineintelligence.com for more WVJ information.

The Pacifix Muselet • Plain plaque • Printed plaque • Plaqueless • Plain or coloured wire • Fast delivery • Precision component • Australian made

Graphic Language D

Proudly made in Australia by D.J. Young Pty Ltd

710 High Street Kew East VIC 3102

Telephone: +61 3 9859 4468 Fax +61 3 9819 7357 e-mail: sales@pacifix.com.au

www.pacifix.com.au V2 7N 6

E

S

I

G

N

Is your brand working for you?

Need a new private label? Exporting wine to China, USA or EU? We have vast experience in tailoring brands to suit the target market. Let us help you to boost your profit margins with considered, effective label design.

Call us at Graphic Language Design – we’d love to talk to you!

First Floor, 181 Halifax Street, Adelaide 5000, South Australia T +61 8 8232 3577 F +61 8 8232 3566 E info@gldesign.com.au

communicate. collaborate. create www.gldesign.com.au

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

89

PROFILE

Big rewards in fine detail

By Mark Smith

Bass Phillip Wines founder Phillip Jones continues on his long-term quest for creating the best expression of Gippsland Pinot Noir.

P

hillip Jones is the first to admit that he is extremely fortunate to enjoy ownership of some of the country’s most revered Pinot Noir vineyards.

Although, you might not have heard that being spoken aloud as the man behind Gippsland’s iconic Bass Phillip Wines navigated his way through the unbelievably wet summer of 2011.

Indeed, you can imagine there was a fair bit of cursing and cussing as he tried coping with the incessant demands imposed on him by the season’s dreaded combination of high rainfall and high humidity. Grappling with the forces of nature as you manage vineyards with planting densities as high as 17,000 vines per hectare certainly has a way of taking its toll.

“During the summer of 2011, I was onboard the tractor until 9.30pm or 10pm almost every day,” Jones says as he reflects on the toughest season he has faced since he first planted vines in south Gippsland way back in 1979.

“I ended up with around 83% of a normal crop that vintage, which was quite an achievement for a vineyard run without the use of systemic chemicals.

You have to be prepared to work hard if you want to be the best player in the Pinot Noir game. You can’t afford to compromise on anything in this business,” Jones said.

Working hard and avoiding compromises have been the hallmarks of Jones’s entire career in cool climate viticulture. Far from beginning as a mere flight of fancy, the foundations of his Bass Phillip venture took more than five years of meticulous research and planning.

Oddly enough, Pinot Noir was not his first choice of grape variety.

“Having got into wine and spent a bit of time living and working overseas, I’d become a big fan of red Bordeaux wines,” he explains.

“I knew I could never afford to emulate any of the region’s First Growths, so I set myself the task of producing Australia’s Chateau Ducru Beaucaillou. I ended up visiting the property, and later spent countless hours trying to find out all that I could about its climate and viticulture.

90

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Phillip Jones at work in one of his Gippsland vineyards. He established the first commercial vineyard in the region’s south, in 1979.

I wound up working my way through the archives at the Melbourne University library, where I discovered there was data from Bordeaux dating back to the 1870s. The amount of detail there was incredible!

“So, off I went then, armed with my maps and my compass trying to find places around Victoria that were likely to provide me with the best matches for the 100-plus years of climate data I had obtained from my Bordeaux research.

Eventually, I ended up at Leongatha South. There, I planted seven acres with varieties that were in exactly the same proportions as they were in the vineyard at Chateau Ducru Beaucaillou. I also happened to plant three rows of Pinot W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Noir and five rows of Chardonnay,” Jones said.

It wasn’t long before Jones began to realise his dream of emulating Bordeaux was on the verge of failure. Cabernet Sauvignon, he believed, was absolutely incompatible with his site, both in terms of its rampant viticultural habits and its reluctance to ripen anytime before May in the district’s cool to mild climate.

“We had problems with fungal disease, particularly with mildews, and the weeds here grew like trees,” Jones recalls.

“Pinot Noir, meanwhile, just stood up and asserted itself right from the very beginning. After four or five years, I ended up pulling out the Cabernet family and converted to Pinot.”

V27N6

PROFILE

An engineer by training and, therefore, analytical in thinking deeply about issues, Jones is convinced he made the right decision in committing himself to Pinot Noir production. As a confirmed climate change sceptic, he has no fears about having to go back to Bordeaux varieties at anytime in the future.

Jones has spent more than 30 years refining his theories on what makes Pinot Noir frequently produce such extraordinary wines from the four sites he owns and operates around his home base at Leongatha. In the eyes of some producers, the resulting views mark him as an obsessive lunatic, a viticultural heretic who took 12 years to release his first commercial wines from his adventures with Pinot Noir.

Others see in him a curious mixture of terroir-driven dogma and ‘dog with a bone’ determination to pull off seemingly impossible feats of viticultural brilliance.

Jones certainly has little time for anyone wanting to tell him how to run his vineyards properly. He says experiences have proven to him that it’s not possible to adopt a ‘one size fits all’ approach to viticulture in his part of the world.

Working organically since the early 1990s – and biodynamically since 2006 – Jones sees significant differences in the various growing habits, fruit composition, and wine quality that evolve across his four sites, despite them all being separated from one another by no more than 20 kilometres.

Some of the differences can be attributed to different soil types. Only some. On several locations, they are deeply ferrous soils, with traces of buckshot very much in evidence. Travel a little further north and you find silty components entering the picture. Travel south and there’s mudstone to contend with, which Jones believes produces wines that can be rather abrupt in terms of their finish.

Be that as it may, there is no escaping the high levels of humidity you find persisting around Leongatha during the district’s growing and ripening seasons.

Jones readily muses that fungal diseases were invented in his part of the world.

But when pushed to explain his need to continue to press on there with his endeavours, Jones says that humidity is indeed a double-edged sword that works in favour of thin-skinned Pinot Noir. It enables the variety to retain its delicate, if not decidedly fragile characteristic aromas and flavours. Provide it with warmer and/or drier environments and Pinot Noir loses those extremely volatile elements during the processes of transpiration.

“A lot of the methods that we have V2 7N 6

The Bass Phillip vineyards have been managed organically since 1993 and biodynamically since 2006. developed here over the years are pretty well home-grown,” Jones explains.

“Essentially, they’re what we’ve found happen to work best in the conditions.

The extreme vigour you find throughout central and south Gippsland has pushed us in the direction of near to ultra-close plantings, from 8000 or 9000 vines per hectare to 17,000 vines per hectare. In fact, if we could afford to purchase a vine-straddling tractor from Europe, we’d put many of them even closer together.”

While Jones might be willing to admit there are advantages to be found in working with high humidity, he is no fan of irrigation. You don’t find it in Burgundy or Champagne, he contends, because it works to obscure individual vineyard terroir. It is far better to plant on soils that are highly water retentive and manage your viticulture accordingly.

If you aspire to produce the best or the ultimate expressions of Pinot Noir, you also keep your vines low to the ground – no more than knee high – because it’s down at ground level that you find vineyard humidity at its highest.

Jones’s reflections on traditional winegrowing practices in Burgundy have helped him to formulate quite strident views on several other key issues of modern-day viticulture: clonal selections and vineyard yields. So far as Jones is concerned, the two are inextricably linked.

“Clones were originally a great interest of mine, and I started off with 10 different clones as one of my responses W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

to five different soil types,” he recalls. “I ended up making a close study of their effects and realised that after about 1215 years, clonal selections don’t matter a bean… so long as your cropping levels are below a certain level, and that certain clones are discarded because their behaviour is extreme.

“If you’re seeking small-berried but highly fruitful vines for the highest possible quality wine, you could say some clones are more suited than others, but that can vary from site to site. I often have people ring me up and ask what clones they should plant. My advice to them is don’t ask me, ask your neighbours.

“I mean, of the 12 clones that we use in our four vineyards, I would probably only replant about half a dozen of them on new sites nearby. Having done that myself a few times, I’ve also found out that one of our clones – D2V6 – simply refused to grow on a new site I established just 10 kilometres away from its home.

“What matters most is that the best expressions of Pinot Noir can only be achieved at cropping levels less than three-quarters of a kilogram per vine.

Translated into typical Australian vine densities, that would mean something less than 0.6 tonnes per acre. Working with Pinot Noir isn’t for the faint-hearted if you’re serious about what you’re doing.

I think we’ve probably achieved our best results at about 300g or less per vine,” WVJ Jones said. www.winebiz. com . au

91

re g ion a l repor t

Great Gippsland - punching above its weight

By Mark Smith

The vast GI of Gippsland stretches across 20 percent of Victoria. Although plantings and subsequent wine production in the zone is limited compared with its area, Gippsland growers and winemakers are achieving great things with quality Pinot Noir and Chardonnay.

I

t’s not exactly Texas, but it seems some things are larger than life in Victoria’s Gippsland: the world’s largest earthworms; Australia’s largest expanse of inland waterways; and until recently, the world’s largest trees.

A quick look at a map also shows that Gippsland is one of this country’s largest geographical indications (GI), a fully fledged wine zone that encompasses more than 20 percent of the entire land area of Victoria. It begins within Melbourne’s eastern suburbs and then stretches on past the Strzelecki Ranges to the edge of the Great Dividing Range, and the New South Wales border beyond. Western Gippsland takes in Phillip Island, while the rolling hillsides and lush grazing land that adjoin wet and windswept Wilsons Promontory comprise its southern extremities.

But appearances can be deceptive.

Acknowledged as a serious player in the premium wine quality stakes – with exports earning an average of $20 per litre in sales – Gippsland barely has little league status when the scale of its production is taken into account. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the zone’s 2010 vintage yielded a harvest of just 804 tonnes from 235.4 hectares of bearing vines. Pinot Noir and Chardonnay accounted for its largest volumes of fruit. Shiraz, Cabernet Sauvignon, Sauvignon Blanc, Pinot Gris and Merlot also figured in small but significant amounts.

Some industry analysts contend that so long as Gippsland continues to account for less than 1% of Victoria’s total winegrape production, the image it projects to anyone living beyond its chocolate box panoramas is simply one of unfulfilled promise and failed opportunity.

Don’t believe them. Not much more than an hour’s drive from metropolitan Melbourne, the zone plays host to some of Australia’s most passionate growers and makers of Pinot Noir wines. Among the best known are Phillip Jones, at Bass Phillip; John Ellis, at Bellvale; and Bill Downie, at William Downie. Significant wine show successes and national media acclaim bring other key players into the fold, including Caledonia Australis,

92

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

Cannibal Creek, Lightfoot and Sons, Narkoojee, Nicholson River, Purple Hen and Wild Dog Winery. Together, they underline Gippsland’s capacity to punch well above its weight where it matters most among consumers of premium quality, cool climate wines.

Even so, Gippsland’s wine industry has endured a long and difficult journey through history. In common with many other parts of Victoria, the district produced small volumes of high quality wine during the 19th Century. The earliest historic records credit eccentric police superintendent Edgar Slade with a small vineyard at Alberton, in southern Gippsland. Planted in the 1850s, it was established not far from today’s Waratah Hills Vineyard, at Fish Creek.

Louis Wuillemin’s property at Briagolong was perhaps the first Gippsland vineyard to achieve any significant industry acclaim. Back in 1886, vigneron and author Hubert de Castella wrote glowingly of its enterprise in his celebrated book, John Bull’s Vineyard. At the time, de Castella was a figure of considerable authority and understanding of Australian viticulture.

Almost a quarter of a century earlier, he had bought a portion of Yering – Victoria’s first vineyard – to establish his own renowned St Hubert’s venture in the Yarra Valley.

When de Castella visited Wuillemin on his vineyard travels, he found 14 year-old vines in full vigour, well established and maintained on wire trellises six feet high.

“His vines were covered with beautiful fruit, more advanced there in Gippsland than with us in the valley of the Yarra,” the author observed.

“The abundance of the grapes, the size of the bunches and the quality of the fruit exceeded all I had anticipated…

The high lands of that region are certain to produce perfect wines… well adapted to cold climates, yet wines of ordinary consumption to be drunk at meal times.”

Far from being merely a journal of observations made in the district, John Bull’s Vineyard encouraged Victorians to go and settle in Gippsland. De Castella even outlined a means for achieving it – the W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Nicholson River’s Ken Eckersley was one of several to plant a succession of commercial vineyards in Gippsland in the late 1970s. subdivision of 1000 acres of land into 20 50-acre farms, where each new landholder could cultivate 10 acres of vines and 10 acres of fruit trees.

The advice, however, appears to have fallen on deaf ears. By the outbreak of the First World War, all forms of grapegrowing and wine production in Gippsland had virtually petered out; even Wuillemin’s treasured vines. The district would have to wait until the 1970s before signs of viticulture would once again appear on its landscapes.

Nicholson River’s Ken Eckersley has clear recollections of that era. He planted vines in eastern Gippsland in 1978, eight years after Dacre and Paula Stubbs – who are credited with reviving commercial viticulture in the region - established their Lulgra Vineyard 25km away at Lakes Entrance.

“Those days were naïve but exciting times, with the industry very much fixated with the great wines of Europe,” Eckersley says.

“You were expected to make great wines yourself or you failed. Needless to say, we V27N6

re g ion a l repor t

made lots of mistakes. Over the years, I’ve changed trellises many times, starting with a T-trellis, and then moving on to Geneva double curtain, lyre, Smart-Dyson ballerina, Scott Henry and, finally, VSP.” Cabernet Sauvignon and Riesling were often the varieties of first choice.

Eckersley and Narkoojee’s Harry Friend, at Glengarry, each took a gamble with a thennew white variety called Chardonnay. Both won lavish praise for the district during the 1980s.

“Funnily enough, we didn’t plant the two reds that are now performing best of all, Pinot Noir and Shiraz,” Eckersley muses.

“I thought Pinot Noir was just a rubbish variety,” adds Friend. “It wasn’t until I saw other producers succeeding with it that I gave it a go myself. A very early wine won gold. The vines are still lyre-trellised and the system works well here.”

“I think Pinot Noir and Chardonnay are far and away Gippsland’s best performing varieties,” says recent Gippsland Wine Show chairman David Bicknell. The Oakridge Wines boss has enjoyed three years in the role, and believes he had plenty of opportunity to gauge the zone’s inner strengths and weaknesses.

“Speaking broadly, I think you can say it’s possible to experience two different kinds of climate there, depending on your location. Around Warragul and Leongatha in central and southern Gippsland, you’ve almost got a continental climate, because the sites there are a bit inland. There’s a fair bit of wind to contend with, too. I think Leongatha is a real Pinot Noir hot spot.

There are some fantastic wines coming out of that part of Gippsland.

“Heading east to the sites you find around Bairnsdale and the Gippsland Lakes, it’s more like the Mornington Peninsula. It’s essentially maritime.

Vineyards like Nicholson River are not that far away from the sea. Interestingly, Phillip Island to the south of Melbourne is actually part of the Gippsland GI rather than the Port Phillip zone, where you find the nearby Mornington Peninsula. Phillip Island is clearly maritime. It’s pretty windy in most places. Even so, Shiraz seems to do really well there. I mean, you wouldn’t expect it to work there at all, but there are some excellent Shiraz wines coming out of Phillip Island from Purple Hen Wines.”

Of the 20 grape varieties currently established in Gippsland, most appear to be performing well, according to the wine show chairman. Beyond Chardonnay, Riesling and Viognier are the pick of its white grape varieties. Sauvignon Blanc is described by Bicknell as ‘underwhelming’.

Similarly, Cabernet Sauvignon can disappoint red wine lovers.

“Cabernet Sauvignon is a really tough call,” Bicknell says.

V2 7N 6

Narkoojee’s Harry Friend planted his first experimental vines in 1980 and admits he thought Pinot Noir was “a rubbish variety” until he saw other producers succeeding with it.

Oakridge Wines boss and recent Gippsland Wine Show chairman David Bicknell believes Pinot Noir and Chardonnay are “far and away” Gippsland’s best performing varieties.

“I think it’s a very site specific variety wherever it’s grown in Australia. For some reason, they just don’t seem to get it properly ripe all that often in Gippsland. I think there’s a lesson to be learned there.

That is, if you’ve got a variety that’s not working properly for you on your site, you shouldn’t be afraid of changing things and planting something else.”

Bicknell believes the district is yet to achieve its full potential in relation to sparkling wine production. That seems odd given its acknowledged success with growing Chardonnay and Pinot Noir. Then, there are the remarkable similarities that exist between the red soils and maritime climate of southern Gippsland and those same key features in northern Tasmania around Pipers Brook and Pipers River.

“I think the sparkling wines being W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

produced at the moment are a bit like those found in Tassie during the 1990s,” Bicknell adds.

“Back then, sparkling wine was seen as the fallback position you adopted if all else failed during vintage. You know, if the weather cracked up or you got a bit of disease, people thought, ‘that’s okay, I’ll make it into sparkling’. Top quality sparkling wine fruit has to be managed very carefully all the way through the seasons, from pruning all the way out to harvest.

“It seems to me the best sparkling wines we’re seeing from Gippsland are the younger, fresher styles that haven’t had a lot of time on lees. The fruit is actually being grown in a way that suits that style.

I think that’s really important for a young WVJ viticultural area.” www.winebiz. com . au

93

re g ion a l repor t

With 30ha of Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Shiraz, Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon, Lightfoot and Sons is Gippsland’s largest single viticultural operation. Manager Tom Lightfoot believes there is an upside to Gippsland’s status as a solitary wine zone, rather than having smaller sub-regions like east, west, central and south Gippsland, as it’s easier for people to identify with a single recognisable brand. Photo: Mark Ashley Photography

Gippsland growers in the zone

By Mark Smith

Gippsland wine producers are planning for their time in the sun in terms of being recognised as a quality wine tourism destination, with some fantastic drops to boot.

T

here’s little doubt that one of the biggest problems Gippsland’s cool climate wine industry has had to face during its recent history has been its lack of a critical mass. With so few vines in the ground – around 75 vineyards totalling 250 hectares – and a disproportionate number of very small, family-owned enterprises, it has often lacked the resources it needed to keep pace with developments in similar regions of Australia.

“One of the first things you could say about Gippsland is that it’s a bloody big place,” says Gippsland Wine Show chairman David Bicknell.

“It’s actually classified as a zone according to legislation. There’s no subdivision into regions and sub-regions because there are so few vineyards and wineries. I think it would be better described as a loose collection of sites, rather than a single GI (geographical indication) with any kind of homogeneity.”

Local producers and industry observers alike draw similar conclusions. They often point to the wide diversity in wine styles and grapegrowing practices currently being supported there. Then, there is

94

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

the fact that soil types alone differ widely across the zone, from rich and heavy volcanic loams in western and southern Gippsland to more alluvial, sandy and gravelly loams and light clays over in the east.

Even greater anomalies can be found in studying Gippsland’s climate data and prevailing weather patterns. Bass Phillips’ Phillip Jones says that pundits who favour the zone’s division into west, south and east Gippsland also have it wrong. A century of data has suggested to him that there are at least six different sub-regions sharing similar climates. Many have horseshoe-shaped boundaries that would scare away your average cartographer.

Talk with producers like Rick Lacey (Purple Hen Wines) and Tim O’Brien (Phillip Island Vineyard) and they will tell you industry bureaucrats and mapmakers have found other ways of making things difficult. Their vineyards are zoned within the Gippsland GI. Both operators believe their Phillip Island sites are geographically and geologically more aligned with Mornington and the Port Phillip zone, just a few kilometres away, across Western Port Bay. W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Kirsten and Pat Hardiker, at Cannibal Creek Vineyard, understand their peers’ predicament. The couple’s 5ha North Tynong site is barely 30km east of Warragul and falls within the Port Phillip zone, along with vineyards in the warmer and drier Yarra Valley to the north. They say their close proximity to the Princes Freeway – which brings Gippsland much of its tourist trade – also makes them feel a part of its wine community.

Australia’s ‘flying vine doctor’ Richard Smart has been a vocal critic of the industry’s approach to geographical indications ever since legislation was set up in the 1990s. He calls it ‘irrational’, having too few sub-regions and delineations that are not based on facts of geography or climatology.

“One of the most obvious features of Australia’s GI’s is that there is this enormous variation in the size of zones and regions,” he says.

“One can only assume that this has been a deliberate attempt to include all potential grapegrowing areas. Any student of wine could contrast this approach taken in Australia with that which has evolved over time in the viticultural regions of V27N6

re g ion a l repor t

Picking under way in a section of Wild Dog Winery’s 14ha of vines at Warragul.

Judy and Gary Surman took ownership of Wild Dog in 2005 with the central aim of making it a tourist destination.

Cannibal Creek Vineyard’s Pat and Kirsten Hardiker, whose 5ha North Tynong site falls within the Port Phillip zone, say their close proximity to the Princes Freeway – which brings Gippsland much of its tourist trade – also makes them feel a part of its wine community.

Europe. It seems to me the attempt to make wine regions contiguous may prove in the future to be a fundamental flaw.”

Smart’s views, of course, have their share of supporters and detractors, but few will deny Bicknell’s observations of Gippsland’s vastness.

“People often say to me, ‘wow, that’s a heck of a place to grow grapes,’” he states.

“The problem is that places like east Gippsland are so far away. I’ve actually looked there to buy fruit myself in recent seasons. I know from personal experience that Lightfoot and Sons, near Bairnsdale, have got an incredible site.

But when it takes around nine hours to send someone there and back just to walk around the vineyard for a few minutes to see everything is okay, buying fruit under contract can become very laborious. If the place was located in Tassie, you would have gone from Hobart to Launceston and back again several times in the same amount of travelling time.”

Bicknell and producers similarly add that with vastness comes isolation.

“With no-one else around to talk to you but the cat and the dog, you invent all sorts of things,” muses Phillip Jones.

And while innovation can add depth and diversity to regions still in their formative stages, industry veterans like Narkoojee’s Harry Friend are ready to assert that relative isolation from one’s peers is just not conducive to the kind of mentoring that an evolving wine region needs in its earliest years, especially when there is so much that is unknown or uncertain in terms of its winemaking and viticultural requirements.

Tom Lightfoot agrees. As manager of Gippsland’s largest single viticultural operation – Lightfoot and Sons’ 30ha

the district. Right now, he says tourism is in decline in his part of Victoria. Moreover, he believes he has been a witness to Gippsland actually becoming regarded as something of a black hole in the minds of consumers.

“Many of our successes as a district have been built upon our prime function as the food basket of Melbourne,” Eckersley muses.

“But apart from our world-class cheeses, Gippsland is rarely shown on the packaged produce like fish and green vegetables that is trucked out of the district every day. People in Sydney and Melbourne often don’t know its origins. Our distance from the marketplace has always worked against us. We need to be aware of that.”

Marketing is familiar territory for industry newcomers Neil and Judy Travers.

The couple operated a successful Sydneybased public relations firm before selling up and moving to Fish Creek in 2011. Their 5ha Waratah Hills Vineyard – originally set up by Bass Phillips’ Phillip Jones – is located 15km north of the entrance to Wilsons Promontory National Park, in southern Gippsland.

“It’s true, we haven’t got the brand presence and accessibility to the Melbourne market that the Yarra Valley and Mornington Peninsula have got at the moment, and that’s providing us with some big challenges,” says Neil Travers.

“But what we have got is this pristine natural environment that has lots of water nearby and plenty of rolling green hillsides. Our feeling is that as the market gets more sophisticated and interested in those environmental experiences – and their associated values – then we really are WVJ going to have our time in the sun.”

V2 7N 6

investment in Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Shiraz, Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon – he is quick to recognise the tyranny of distance. More importantly, he believes there is an upside to Gippsland’s status as a solitary wine zone.

“I don’t think that’s a bad thing at this early stage of our development,” he says.

“We’re all in this together, trying to head towards the same goal of raising Gippsland’s profile as a premium producer.

It’s much better than splitting ourselves into smaller sub-regions like east, west, central and south Gippsland. Right now, there are a lot of small producers who are just getting started in marketing their wines. That becomes a lot simpler if people can identify with a single recognisable brand, which is what Gippsland has as a result of its tourism activities.”

Tourism is exactly what Judy and Gary Surman had in mind when they took on ownership of Wild Dog Winery in 2005.

Their Warragul-based operation boasts almost 14ha of vines and a wine portfolio with 20 different products. The couple make no bones about Wild Dog Winery becoming a prime tourist hot spot. Their attractive vineyard cellar door and function centre already sits well on the landscape.

Besides pouring some of the best wines in the district, it will have its own wetland interpretation centre in 2013.

“We don’t think of ourselves as being in the wine industry,” adds Gary Surman.

“If we did, we certainly wouldn’t have 11 grape varieties in our vineyard. We see ourselves as a tourist destination with a winery.”

Nicholson River’s Ken Eckersley says he is not sure whether tourism is a part of the problem or a part of the solution for W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

95

re g ion a l repor t

Place, purity and perfection in high-density Pinot Noir

By Mark Smith

Gippsland producers are a living testament to Baroness Rothschild’s quote, ‘Growing grapes and producing wine is a simple business. It’s only the first 200 years that are difficult’. But as the years roll on, an increasing commitment to making perfect Pinot Noir is being realised.

B

ill Downie looks like a kid in a lolly shop.

You mightn’t see it in his movements as he squeezes through the cramped confines of his close-planted vineyard at Guendulain, in central Gippsland, but he is totally absorbed in his job there.

“I’m fascinated by these plants,” he muses as he pauses momentarily.

“Every day I’m here, I find something interesting.”

In any other location, Downie’s selection of MV6 and Pommard clones wouldn’t draw a second glance from your average vineyard worker. But this two-thirds of a hectare is no ordinary block of Pinot Noir. Its volcanic red clay loams and smattering of ironstone gravels have some of the highest planting densities anywhere in the country. They’re managed organically with the help of a lumbering Clydesdale.

Downie’s Yarragon property holds around 10,000 vines per hectare. But here and there are several discrete plots where the density rises to 17,000 and 20,000 vines per hectare. That’s one plant every 50 centimetres in a north-south direction, and a vine every metre running east to west.

They’re trellis-free, too, in the most densely planted part of the vineyard. Each vine there is secured to a single wooden post that is just 110 centimetres above the ground.

Call it extreme viticulture if you like, Downie is very much at home here. He grew up barely 30 minutes’ drive down the road. He’s used to the district’s tough demands on farming and grapegrowing, and while he says that periodic downpours and high humidity can encourage outbreaks of downy and powdery mildew, they’re not totally insurmountable.

“Pinot Noir likes it when it’s wet and cold,” he explains.

Besides, Downie says he saw plenty of disease while living in Burgundy. In 2001 and 2002, he worked at Domaine Fourrier, in Gevrey-Chambertin. The next three

96

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The first clones planted by John Ellis in his Bellvale Wines vineyard in south Gippsland in 1998 were a mix of MV6 and the then-new Dijon selections 114, 115, and 777. Today, some 10 clones are grown on the 14ha property, with around 50 rows planted on American rootstocks as insurance against phylloxera.

William Downie’s vineyard at Yarragon features some of the highest planting densities in Australia, with several plots rising to 17,000 and 20,000 vines per hectare. Photo: Guy Lavoipierre

vintages were spent in Morey St Denis, at Domaine Hubert Lignier.

“In 2004, I saw growers throw up to 50% of their fruit,” Downie recalls.

“Even in better vintages, you often found evidence of disease. They didn’t seem to mind if it was kept to around 10-20%. We don’t see anywhere near that amount here.

And there are real advantages to be gained from working in this climate. The further south you go in Australia, the cooler and more marginal your viticulture becomes.

I reckon the closer you get to disaster, the closer you get to perfection.”

Downie produces wines from the three districts of Victoria he thinks are best for Pinot Noir – the Yarra Valley, Mornington Peninsula, and Gippsland. Kept separate and labelled according to origin, these

William Downie wines are more different than they are similar, despite their commonality of variety and winemaking.

And that’s exactly as it should be, Downie asserts. His intention is to create singular wines of purity that reflect their unique place of origin. So don’t go asking him what else he plans to grow.

“I’m making only Pinot Noir,” Downie says.

“We take fruit from Berrys Creek and Leongatha, as well as from our own vineyard, and that’s it. We don’t have anything else in mind. I mean, no-one does just one thing in this industry. We really need a few more people to focus on simply producing one variety. To explore it fully in all sorts of meaningful ways, so that its wines provide genuine expressions of

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

re g ion a l repor t

place. I reckon ‘sense of place’ is very, very important. If we were to produce a whole range of different wine varietals, that would only confuse the issue for us.”

Of course, Downie and his growers John Matthews and Andrew Gromotka aren’t the only ones in Gippsland used to working with high density Pinot Noir. The influence of Phillip Jones is all-pervasive. In addition to establishing his four close-planted Bass Phillip vineyards, Jones at different times has been involved in the setting up of Caledonia Australis and Lithostylis (also at Leongatha); Waratah Hills (Fish Creek); Bellvale (Berrys Creek); and Belrose Estate (Dumbalk). It was while working with Jones back in the 1990s that Downie first became aware of the importance of maintaining low bunch numbers per vine in order to produce super premium Pinot Noir.

John Ellis’s vine roots stretch back even further. The former airline pilot established his first vineyard on Long Island, New York, during the 1970s. He and his wife Athena chose Gippsland’s ancient red volcanic soil with its iron oxide nodules as the preferred location for their Australian idyll.

The couple spent 10 years searching for a suitable location before buying a cattle farm at Berrys Creek, near Leongatha, and naming it Bellvale.

Planted in 1998, on the advice of South Australian viticulturist Richard Cirami, the property’s first vines included a mix of ‘industry workhorse’ MV6 and the then-new Dijon selections 114, 115, and 777. Today, some 10 clones are present on the 14ha property. Around 50 rows are planted to American rootstocks as insurance against phylloxera. Spur pruning to around 15 buds per vine invariably yields small bunch sizes. Ellis’s 70 centimetre high cordons are managed via vertical shoot positioning.

Importantly, all vines are dry-grown and arranged in 2.0m by 0.7m rows, to achieve 7100 vines per hectare and the induced plant competition that is associated with high densities.

“Irrigation in my mind is nothing more than glorified hydroponics,” he grumbles.

“The Europeans in many cases forbid irrigation, pointing out that the only way to fully express terroir in a given site is to allow the vines to extend their root systems well down into the earth to access the water table and all of those interesting qualities that are retrieved from minerals and other minute substances.”

Even so, Ellis says he is more a realist than a pedant when it comes to getting his work done. He doesn’t care to remove shoulders from bunches prior to harvest, for example. Drop by during vintage and you will find an ageing Pellenc harvester is included among Ellis’s tools of the trade.

That might be tantamount to heresy among some Pinot Noir producers.

V2 7N 6

Tambo Estate’s Bill Williams.

Purple Hen Wines have won 19 trophies at Australian shows during the past decade, earning a reputation for its Pinot Noir and Shiraz. Part owner and operater Rick Lacey (pictured) says too much emphasis is often placed on the virtues of close planting without taking other factors into consideration.

“The Pellenc probably breaks about 30% of the berries, so there’s a bit of juicing that takes place, but it only needs around one-and-a-half hours to pick two tonnes, so there’s no big delay before fruit reaches the winery,” Ellis explains.

“It’s generally in pretty good shape.

We run it across a vibrating triage table before it goes to the must pump and tank.

I’m not a fan of whole bunch fermentation, and my argument is that you see very little difference between our machine-picked fruit and someone else’s that has been through a de-stemmer and crusher. The system works well for us at our crop level, which is around 3-4 tonnes per hectare.”

Dean Roberts admits he would be pretty happy to see yields like that coming from the ‘Red Dwarf’ vineyard he maintains just down the road from Ellis. The former Yarra Valley vineyard manager has vines planted on red soils that are deep and free-draining, the same as Bellvale.

“They provide a very effective buffer against the effects of high temperature and adverse rain events,” Roberts explains.

“Even so, our Pinot Noir generally contributes less than two tonnes per hectare to our family’s Lithostylis label. We certainly can’t do big crops down here. You just end up with a lot of watery rubbish.”

Of course, like every other wineproducing part of Australia, there is no unified approach to growing Pinot Noir in Gippsland. One of the district’s rising stars in the east is Phillip Island’s Purple Hen Wines, owned and operated by Maira Vitols and Rick Lacey. The couple have won 19 trophies at Australian shows during the past decade and have nailed their wine colours to the masts of Pinot Noir and

Shiraz. Lacey is upbeat about their future with the quixotic red grape of Burgundy, but believes there is often too much emphasis placed on the virtues of close planting without taking other factors into consideration.

“I’ve got a little trial plot under way at the moment and I think inter-vine spacing is irrelevant,” he says.

“In Australian viticulture, we’re taught that to produce premium quality fruit in a cool location, we should have shoot spacings around 65 millimetres. I think that’s too dense for our climate and soils here. If you go to France, you’d be lucky to see them every 100 millimetres. I reckon the keys are the number of buds you have per hectare and the way you space your shoots. The real beauty of the French system of having one metre rows is that they can have very sparse shoots and still get a decent crop loading.”

Tambo Estate’s Bill Williams says he has heard almost all sides of the Pinot Noir debate. Like many other small-scale Gippsland producers, he talks of the need to temper Pinot pedantry with liberal doses of careful planning and practicality.

“Sound viticulture – whether it’s for Pinot Noir or any other cool climate variety – always boils down to matters of site selection,” he says.

“You’ve got to start with a warm site in a cool climate; maximise your sunlight hours during growing and ripening periods; minimise wind effects; find low fertility soils and preferably a north-east facing slope.

As Baroness Rothschild once said, growing grapes and producing wine is a simple business. It’s only the first 200 years that WVJ are difficult.”

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

www.winebiz. com . au

97

SU P E R

WINE S

Penfolds 2008 Yattarna When Penfolds first released its Yattarna Chardonnay in 1998 from the 1995 vintage, the aspiration was to create a white wine to equal Penfolds Grange. The fourteenth release of the wine, from the 2008 vintage, was recently named the best Chardonnay in Australia in the inaugural James Halliday Chardonnay Challenge.

Location of vineyards 89% Derwent Valley, Tasmania, and 11% Adelaide Hills, South Australia The vineyard site The Derwent Valley vineyard lies on the west bank of the Derwent River estuary, near Granton, some 25km north of Hobart. The site has an elevation of around 40 metres above sea level, but higher hills surround the area, offering protection from severe winds. The site slopes to the north, while the soils are free-draining brown, sandy loam over dolerite and sandstone.

The average daily maximum and minimum temperatures are: Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

Min.

7.3

19.1

10.9

11.5

11.7

10.3

8.3

Max.

17.4

19.4

21.9

23.1

22.2

20.7

17

with no disease or sunburn. Grapes are whole bunch pressed to a tank, yeasted and then sent to French oak barriques for the onset of fermentation. The wine is matured in 40-60% new oak for eight months with 100% malolactic fermentation and regular yeast lees stirring.

Price of wine RRP$130 (in Australia, this is cellar door only).

Where sold Markets around the world Recent awards Gold medal, 2011 International Wine & Spirit Competition; regional trophy and gold medal, 2012 Decanter World Wine Awards; bronze medal, International Wine Challenge; James Halliday Chardonnay Challenge Trophy, James Halliday Chardonnay Challenge

The annual rainfall is relatively low, averaging less than 600mm per annum, which is spring dominant. The ripening season is typically moderate and dry. The siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proximity to the moderating influence of the Derwent means that frost is rarely, if ever, a problem.

The vines Yattarna is sourced from a small 0.6ha block of Chardonnay vines planted in 1997. The vines are on own roots and comprise a mixture of clones: I10V1, I10V5 and Penfolds 58. The vines are trellised to a VSP with a planting density of 3200 vines per hectare.

Vine management Pruning is all done by hand, typically leaving 16 buds per vine. Shoot thinning and selective bunch removal are carried out when necessary. Similarly, drip irrigation is applied according to the season and the needs of the vine. Pristine irrigation water is available from the Upper Derwent.

Pest and disease management aims to be as soft as possible, relying heavily upon meticulous canopy management and airflow to reduce disease risk.

A permanent grass sward is maintained in the inter-row.

Average yield of vine 7-8 tonnes per hectare The winemaking process The grapes are handpicked, usually around mid-March, at 12.5-13.0Be, a pH of 3.1-3.3 and an acid level of 7.0-9.0g/L. The fruit must be flavour ripe with no â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;greenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; characters. Generally, we look for limey citrus and grapefruit notes and clean fruit

98

www.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

v a rie t a l repor t

Putting the sparkle in sparkling rosé In keeping with the approaching festive season, this issue’s tasting featured sparkling rosés, 28 in all, ranging from non-vintage examples through to one from the 2003 vintage. The tasting panel identified the top wine or wines from the non-vintage entries, those from the 2012 to 2009 vintages and the 2008 to 2003 vintages (see page 102-106 for the complete results), with the producers behind three of those wines revealing what went into their making.

Josef Chromy Wines in Tasmania’s Tamar Valley.

Jeremy Dineen Winemaker/general manager Josef Chromy Wines Tamar Valley, Tasmania Wine: Pepik NV Sparkling Rosé (RRP$27.00/bottle) VITICULTURE Fruit for the Pepik NV Sparkling Rosé is estate-grown from our vineyard at Relbia, 15km south of Launceston, Tasmania. The vineyard contains 61ha of vines and has an elevation of 85-170m with north and north-east facing slopes.

The soils range from deep, black, selfmulching clay to shallow brown clay with high gravel content.

The mean January temperature for the area is 16.7°C. It receives an average of 679mm per annum, with 94 rains days. The vines enjoy 1050 heat degree days, and 1758 sunshine hours (October-April).

The average age of the vines in the vineyard is 13 years, which are on a mixture of own roots and rootstocks.

The blend for the Pepik is usually Pinot dominant with some Chardonnay.

The Pinot clones planting in the vineyard comprise D2V5, D5V12, G5V15, G8V3, G8V7, H7V15, 115 and 114.

V2 7N 6

The Chardonnay clones are I10V1 and Penfolds.

The vines are trained to Scott-Henry and VSP trellises and have a vine density of 3220 per hectare and 2415 per hectare, respectively. All vines are crown thinned every year. Shoot and/or bunch thinning is carried out depending on the year.

The amount of drip irrigation, which is sourced from our on-farm dam and nearby river, depends on the season.

A permanent sward is grown in the midrows to reduce erosion with farm-produced composts also applied.

The vines are mainly hand cane-pruned with limited mechanical spur pre-pruning carried out.

Botrytis is the biggest disease risk to the vines, which yield an average of 11.5 tonnes per hectare.

WINEMAKING The hand-picked Pinot Noir is whole bunch pressed, giving a free run of usually 500L/tonne and pressings of 200L/tonne.

The hand-picked and/or machine-picked Chardonnay is pressed to 500L/t free run and 200L/t pressings. The pressings are fined separately while the base juices are settled and combined prior to the primary ferment.

Malolactic fermentation is not carried out.

W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Josef Chromy Wines winemaker and general manager Jeremy Dineen.

The juice is cold stabilised, partially heat stabilised and cross-flow filtered.

The secondary ferment is commenced in tank and bottled when the viable cell count has reached its target (tirage ferment approximately 15°C).

The wine is bottle aged for 12-18 months prior to disgorging. The dosage liqueur contains Pinot Noir table wine to ensure a consistent salmon pink colour. It is dosed to contain a final sugar content of ▶ 10-12g/L. www.winebiz. com . au

99

v a rie t a l repor t

Honey Moon Vineyard winemaker Jane Bromley.

MARKETING Our sparkling rosé sits in the Pepik range of more accessible, fun wines but is still marketed as a high quality, bottle fermented, 100% Tasmanian sparkling wine. It is available nationally, predominantly via on-premise and independent retailers. Small quantities are also exported.

The packaging changed approximately two years ago to differentiate it from our table wine in the Pepik range and give the label a higher quality look and feel that is obviously sparkling.

Consumers often expect the wine to be sweet and are usually surprised by the fresher, crisper style.

Jane Bromley Winemaker Honey Moon Vineyard Echunga, Adelaide Hills, South Australia Wine: 2010 Honey Moon Vineyard Rosé Brut (RRP$40.00/bottle) VITICULTURE The Pinot Noir, which is 95% of the cuvée, comes from our vineyard at Echunga, in the Adelaide Hills. This vineyard has an elevation of 420m and has east-west rows that face north on alluvial loam over iron-stone clay.

The site enjoys a continental climate with a high diurnal temperature range.

The mean January temperature is a little cooler than 18.8°C recorded from the nearest climatic station at Mt Barker.

The site is frost-free due to the slope and elevation of the vineyard.

100

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

The Pinot Noir clones planted comprise 114, 777 and 115 which are on own roots. Vines planted in 2004 are used for this wine, which are head trained to a single wire at 90cm. Two moveable foliage wires are utilised to achieve VSP. Summer management includes shoot and bunch thinning.

The vineyard is supplementary drip irrigated using dam water.

A permanent cover of native and perennial grasses in the mid-rows is maintained by slashing.

The vines are spaced 1.5m apart while the rows 2.5m apart and are cane pruned to about 24 buds/vine, giving an average yield of about 4.5kg/vine.

WINEMAKING A typical analysis of the fruit at harvest would be 10.5Be, pH3.05 and TA 8.0g/L. Winemaking is very traditional. Grapes are hand harvested and pre-chilled at 4°C for 24 hours in small bins. They are then whole bunch pressed in a basket press. Only 500L/tonne of cuvée is taken with bentonite, pectic enzyme and SO2 added to the cuvée.

After cold settling the juice is racked to stainless steel fermenters where fermentation is initiated with EC1118 yeast strain. After several days the juice is transferred to old French oak barriques (minimum eight years old), where it completes fermentation at about 18-20°C. During fermentation the barrels are inoculated with a LAB culture for full malolactic fermentation.

The wine remains on lees with occasional battonage until December W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Group sparkling winemaker and operations manager for Clover Hill, Karina Dambergs. when it is prepared for tirage. Post-tirage bottling, the wine is stored at 15°C in a refrigerated warehouse. The wine is released after about 20-24 months on lees and remuaged, disgorged and bottle dressed by hand to order. Dosage is 8.0g/L. The labels have a hand-written panel where the disgorging date and the name of the customer, or a gift greeting to a customer’s friend, are recorded by the winemaker.

MARKETING The wine is marketed directly to customers via the Honey Moon Vineyard website (www.honeymoonvineyard.com. au) and to customers via email order.

The wine is also sold in several premium restaurants around Australia.

Hand remuage, disgorging and bottle dressing are very time consuming, however, many customers like the personal touch that this brings to the wine.

Karina Dambergs Group Sparkling Winemaker & Operations Manager Clover HIll Winery Pipers River, Tasmania Wine: 2008 Clover Hill Cuvée Exceptionelle Brut Rosé (RRP$55/bottle) VITICULTURE The Pinot Noir used in this wine (87%) was from a single block in our Pipers River vineyard in northern Tasmania. This site is particularly cool, with an elevation of about 200m above sea level, and is V27N6

v a rie t a l repor t

Clover Hill’s Pipers River vineyard is a particularly cool site, with an elevation of about 200m above sea level, and is usually harvested for sparkling wines between the third week of April and first week of May, depending on the season. usually harvested for sparkling wines between the third week of April and first week of May, depending on the season.

Due to their proximity to the ocean (the vines have a fantastic view of Bass Strait!) there is usually no frost risk.

The vines were planted in 1992 and are D2V5 clone on own roots. The soil is a rich, volcanic red loam and, due to our high annual rainfall, the vineyard is unirrigated. They are trained on a VSP trellis with a spacing of 1.9 x 1.1m and have an east-west orientation. Half of this section used to be on Scott Henry but the fruit was too shaded, so it was converted to VSP in 2010.

This section, like the rest of the vineyard, is cane pruned. The vineyard is run with a permanent grass sward. The majority of the vineyard is hand-picked, but as the press is onsite, we do some machine picking and load direct to the press. The rosé parcel was machine picked to speed up the maceration process, rather than use enzymes for this.

This section of the vineyard often needs leaf-plucking to alleviate disease pressure and also allow the grapes to develop red fruit characters and avoid green flavours. This is especially true of the part used for the rosé.

The Pinot Meunier component (13%) is also from a single section of the vineyard that is slightly lower (170m). It was

planted in 1989 from material originally sourced from Bests. The management of this section is the same as the Pinot Noir.

Vintage 2008 was warm and dry in Pipers River. Yields were larger than average and these sections yielded about 11t/ha as opposed to 8t/ha. The long, warm season meant lower disease pressure than normal and also attractive, ripe strawberry flavours in our Pinot sparkling base wines.

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

WINEMAKING The Pinot component for the sparkling rosé is usually one of the last blocks picked, and in 2008 it was harvested in the last week of April. The grapes were machine harvested early in the morning and left to soak in half-tonne bins until the desired colour level was achieved. In 2008 this took eight hours. The grapes were then directly loaded into a bag press and only the free run - approximately 500L/t - was used for this product.

The juice was settled overnight, then racked and fined. It was wild-fermented at approximately 16-18°C. After fermentation the wine was chilled and transferred off the gross lees only. At this stage the Pinot Meunier component was blended in to add complexity, spiciness and savouriness and top the tank. This was the first year that Meunier was used in the blend, but it is something that has been continued since. The wine was

batonnaged in tank fortnightly until it was stabilised for tirage.

After tirage, the wine was aged on lees for three years prior to riddling and disgorging. The disgorging liquor used a number of reserve wines, including barrel-aged Pinot and Chardonnay sparkling base aged in an old oak foudre.

It was dosed to a final sugar of 6.5g/L. MARKETING This product was specifically made for the UK market for the first vintage (2005) but has since become more of a domestic product. The Cuvée Exceptionelle wines (the Sparkling Rosé and also a Blanc de Blancs) are only a small make, usually no more than 500 dozen, and are not made every year. For this reason they mainly have an on-premise focus, but are also available in some smaller, independent bottle shops and via mail order. They are always popular wines at our stand at the two annual food and wine events in Tasmania, the Taste Festival and Festivale.

The Cuvée Exceptionelle wines aim to showcase the best sparkling wines that can be produced from our Pipers River vineyard. The aim is for these wines to be world-class and demonstrate the quality of sparkling wine that Tasmania is WVJ capable of producing. www.winebiz . com . au

101

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Effervescent sparkling rosé T

he variation in styles as well as colours in Australian-made, bottle fermented sparkling rosé was evident in the latest tasting by the Wine & Viticulture Journal’.

Karina Dambergs, group sparkling winemaker and operations manager for Clover Hill, Tony Hooper, sparkling winemaker for Orlando Wines, and Kate Laurie, of Deviation Road, in South Australia’s Adelaide Hills, were joined on the tasting panel by research fellow Renata Ristic and oenology student Matt Roussy, both from The University of Adelaide.

Entries to the tasting, which was held at the Waite campus of The University of Adelaide, were received after the WVJ invited sparkling wine producers around Australia to submit rosé styles. While preference was given to wines that had undergone secondary fermentation, we let a couple of moscato styles slip through, while a wine clearly labelled ‘sparkling rosé’ was obviously a sparkling red upon pouring and tasting.

Twenty-eight wines were tasted in total, ranging from dry to off-dry, excluding the two moscato styles.

Karina Dambergs commented that there was an apparent difference between the wines from producers who are making a concerted effort to make a good sparkling rosé and those that are making it simply because “it is trendy or they couldn’t get their crop right”.

“Sparkling wine is a growth category, even more so in rosé styles than white.

Sparkling rosé has come a long way in about the last six years,” said Dambergs.

“The non-vintage wines in the

Tasting their way through the sparkling rosés were panellists (from left) Renata Ristic research fellow, The University of Adelaide; Tony Hooper, sparkling winemaker, Orlando Wines; Karina Dambergs, group sparkling winemaker and operations manager, Clover Hill; Kate Laurie, of Deviation Road, in South Australia’s Adelaide Hills; and University of Adelaide oenology student Matt Roussy. tasting included some solid, well-made commercial styles that would never get up in a wine show. We started to see a decline in quality in the vintage sparkling rosés; perhaps this was due to some of them being smaller runs,” she added.

The tasting panel agreed that of the non-vintage wines in the tasting, the Josef Chromy Wines Pepik was the best in the class, rating it of silver medal quality. In the vintages from 2012 to 2009, the Honey Moon Vineyard 2010 Brut Rosé and Taltarni Tache were regarded as the top entries, while in the 2008-2003 vintages, the equivalent were the Clover Hill 2008 Brut Rosé and 2008 Emersleigh Estate Sparkling Rose.

Kate Laurie and Karina Dambergs get down to business.

jobs .com.au

Incorporating mywinejob.com.au

more jobs more winery positions more viticulture positions more industry positions MORE OFTEN… and listed with DailyWineNews For further information contact Andrew Dawson at jobs@winebiz.com.au or by phoning +618 8369 9500 or post your ad online at winejobs.com.au Post your classified listings on the wine industry’s most trusted website, www.winebiz.com.au created and managed by PROVIDING SOLUTIONS TO THE WINE INDUSTRY

102

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Josef Chromy Wines NV Pepik Sparkling RosÉ Tasmania 12.0% v/v RRP$27.00/bottle Best of non-vintage: Clear, pale salmon pink with a good bead and mousse. Clean, fresh, vibrant and youthful nose with lots of fresh fruit, including strawberry, apple and orange zest, and some yeasty/bready complexity. Palate is lovely and fresh with a dry, high acid that builds and drives the palate length; nice tight, linear structure with a soft, creamy bead, fresh citrus and berry fruits . “A youthful, elegant, pretty style,” said one taster. “A good wine showing integration and developed characters, good acid balance and structure,” said another.

2010 Honey Moon Vineyard Brut RosÉ Adelaide Hills, South Australia 12.5% v/v RRP$39.00/bottle Best of vintages 2009-2012: Clear, medium salmon pink.

Nose initially quite closed but it opened up to reveal a complex, lifted nose with red berry fruits, red apple, rose petal, marzipan, some spice and a slight yeastiness. A dry, textural, long, linear palate with high, slightly chalky acid, lovely balance and good structure. “An aperitif style best served when well chilled,” said one taster. “A great, well-crafted, obvious methode champenoise wine,” said another. One taster thought the wine lacked some fresh fruit.

2010 Taltarni Tache Pyrenees, Victoria 12.5% v/v RRP$27.99/bottle Best of vintages 2009-2012: Clear, very pale salmon in colour.

A slightly reduced, developing, toasty, elegant nose with apple, rose petal and red currant characters with some yeasty creaminess. Palate has some yeasty complexity, good acid structure, some light red berry and citrus flavours, rose petal, cardamom and Red Delicious apple characters. Dry, high, fine powdery acid. Creamy mousse.

“A very elegant, refreshing style, but could benefit from some more red berry characters,” noted one taster. “A wine showing good yeast complexity,” said another.

2008 Clover Hill Brut RosÉ Tasmania 12.5% v/v RRP$55.00/bottle Best of vintages 2008-2003: Clear, pale salmon colour with a copper/orange tinge.

A developed, toasty, slightly honeyed and spicy nose with some red fruits and rose petal characters. Very dry, high acid on the palate, which has great length. Ripe Pinot characters present with a touch of sea spray. Great fruit length and good balance.

2008 Emersleigh Estate Sparkling RosÉ Yarra Valley, Victoria 12.0% v/v RRP$25.00/bottle Best of vintages 2008-2003: Clear, medium intensity in colour with onion skin and orange tints. Clean, developed, slightly honeyed nose with strawberries, rose petal, and a smoky complexity. A dry, highacid, textural, salivating palate featuring light fruit characters, including strawberries, as well as rose petal, spice, dough and oyster shell. Lovely lingering length.

Sparkling Rosé V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz . com . au

103

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Bimbadgen Estate NV Sparkling RosÉ Hunter Valley, New South Wales 12.5%v/v RRP$20.00/bottle Clear mid-pink to strawberry in colour with a slight orange hue; a light mousse with large bubbles. A honeyed, medium intensity nose that is very fruitdriven, with red berry characters with some caramel, toffee, mocha and toffee hints. Palate is medium to full-bodied, soft and sweet with good acid balance and a creamy mousse on the finish; youthful and fruit driven.

Good commercial style.

Cassegrain NV Stone Circle Sparkling RosÉ Port Macquarie, New South Wales 12.5% v/v RRP$14.95/bottle Deep crimson pink in colour, - quite a deep red for a rose, noted one taster – with a slight haze and lots of mousse. A clean, youthful, medium-tofull intensity nose featuring red currants, raspberry leaf, strawberry, some spice and slightly vinous notes. Palate is rich, full-bodied and off-dry with a sweet mid-palate. Light fruit flavours evident, as well as Fruit Tingle, floral and Ribena characters. Medium bead.

“More a still rosé style than a sparkling,” noted one taster.

Balgownie Estate NV Premium Cuvee Yarra Valley, Victoria 12.5% v/v RRP$21.00/bottle Clear salmon to onion skin in colour with orange tints and a good mousse. Sweet berry fruits on the nose, as well as some light yeast characters, creaminess and hints of lychee and rose. Creamy, spicy palate is dry with medium acid that builds; sweet mid-palate; good balance, some complexity. One taster described the wine as tasting “more developed”. Good length with slightly drying finish.

Charles Melton Wines NV Methode traditionale Brut Peche Barossa Valley, South Australia 13.0% v/v RRP$30.00/bottle Mid-red in colour – very dark for a rosé. Ripe berry fruits on the youthful nose which is clean and has medium intensity. Off-dry, yeasty palate with medium acid, good flavour and balance.

Finishes long but slightly bitter.

Well made with good flavour.

Deviation Road NV Altair Sparkling RosÉ Adelaide Hills, South Australia 12.0% v/v RRP$28.00/bottle Clear and medium salmon to onion skin in appearance. A fine bead. Nose is youthful, has a medium intensity and features spice, sweet strawberry, floral and red apple characters with slight herbal/raspberry leaf notes. Palate is dry with medium to high acid and has great length. “A clean and fresh wine with good acid and structure,” described one taster.

Sparkling Rosé 104

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Geoff Hardy NV Handcrafted Sparkling Salmon

Frogmore Creek NV 42 Degrees South Premier Cuvee

Centennial Vineyards NV Brut RosÉ

Tyrrell’s Wines NV Arabella Sparkling RosÉ

Grant Burge 2012 Moscato Rosa Frizzante

Adelaide Hills, South Australia 13.0% v/v – cork RRP$20.00/bottle

Tasmania 12.5% v/v RRP$28.00/bottle

Southern Highlands, New South Wales 12.5% v/v RRP$28.00/bottle

Hunter Valley, New South Wales 11.9% v/v RRP$19.99/bottle

Barossa Valley, South Australia 8.0% v/v RRP$16.95/bottle

Pale onion skin in colour; good mousse. Medium intensity, slightly developed nose with sweet berry, flint, orange zest, apple, straw, bread crust and soft raspberry characters. More red berry fruit evident in the mouth, as well as apple and straw; slight residual sugar; high acid and a good, soft bead. Nice acid finish.

“Attractive, lighter style of rosé; quite drinkable,” said one taster.

Another thought it lacked a bit of fruit and complexity.

Interesting colour: very bright, pale strawberry red. Youthful, intense, sweet and spicy nose with lovely berry fruit. Berry fruit also evident on the palate, which is sweet but in balance; some spice, strawberry lollies and creaming soda characters also evident. “Palate is very round and soft for a sparkling style,” one taster commented. “Lovely wine but more of a full-bodied wine than a sparkling,” said another taster.

Very pale strawberry red in appearance; good mousse.

Sweet, floral and muscat-like nose with orange blossom, rose petal and a clove/cinnamon spice. Sweet palate with high powdery acid and creamy mousse. Great fruit intensity with floral and muscat-like notes; lingering acid. Great fruit/acid/ sugar balance for a sweeter style.

Onion skin in colour with an orange hue; good mousse.

Characters of confectionary, geranium, raspberry leaf and some red berry fruits on the nose, which is toasty and starting to show development. Rich, creamy, off-dry palate, which is also showing some development.

Medium acid and medium palate length. Lack some freshness and vibrancy.

Salmon pink in colour, which has medium intensity. Nose is clean, fresh, youthful and sweet with red berry fruits and floral characters and a hint of confectionary. Palate is also clean, fresh and lively; off-dry with medium acid and length. A rounder style with a creamy mousse. Good balance for a sweeter style; a good commercial style for those after a fruity rosé.

Sparkling Rosé V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz . com . au

105

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Cleggett Wines 2011 Sparkling Bronze Sparkling Cabernet Sauvignon Malian

Angullong 2011 Sparkling RosÉ

Langhorne Creek, South Australia 11.5% v/v RRP$15.00/bottle

Pale strawberry red in colour with a slight orange hue. Clean, youthful, lifted nose with some red fruits, including strawberry, musk and floral characters.

Off-dry, full-flavoured palate with medium acid and similar fruit characters to the nose; some sweetness, but has some acid and texture to balance.

Onion skin in colour with red tints; good mousse. A clean, youthful but slightly subdued nose featuring red currant, sweet plum and red berry fruits.

A dry, soft, well-balanced palate with some noticeable residual sugar. Medium length. Lacks some complexity.

Orange, New South Wales 12.5% v/v RRP$20.00/bottle

Foxeys Hangout 2011 Sparkling RosÉ Mornington Peninsula, Victoria 12.5% v/v RRP$35.00/bottle Salmon colour with slight orange tints and haze; good mousse.

Fresh fruit nose featuring Golden Delicious apples, white blossom and dried strawberries with some creaminess. Palate is balanced and has good texture and mouthfeel and refreshing acid. Some fresh fruits evident with some toasty oak hints.

Slight phenolic grip on the finish. “A nice style, would be interesting to see it with slightly more dosage to fill out the frontto-mid palate,” commented one taster.

Tempus Two Moscato Rosa

Tynan Wines 2010 Sparkling RosÉ

Hunter Valley, New South Wales 10.0% v/v RRP$14.99/bottle

Orange, New South Wales 12.0% v/v RRP$40.00/bottle

Medium salmon in colour. Fruity, aromatic nose with tropical aromas, including passionfruit and lychee. Dried orange peel and violet/geranium also apparent. Very sweet palate with medium to high acid.

Muscat, cooked strawberry and orange/marmalade and spicy characters. “A clean, fresh and aromatic moscato-style wine,” noted one taster.

Pale salmon to onion skin in appearance. Ripe red fruits, strawberry blossom, fresh hay, dough, rose petal and toasted oak characters on the nose, which is showing development.

Rich, creamy palate which is soft, has good structure and flavour, and tight acid with raspberry, rose petal and spice characters; good length. “Great, dry Champagne-style,” said one taster.

Sparkling Rosé 106

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Castagna 2009 Sparkling Allegro Beechworth, Victoria 13.5% v/v RRP$45.00/bottle Orange to onion skin in colour.

Toasty and developing nose, with chalky/mineral notes, stone fruit, apple, spice/sandalwood and a VA lift. Very dry palate, which is complex and developed and has high acid; the acid and phenolics build on the palate. Good flavour and weight. Slightly bitter and drying finish.

Forester Estate 2009 Georgette Sparkling RosÉ

Rosnay Organic Wines 2009 Sparkling RosÉ

Margaret River, Western Australia 12.5% v/v RRP$29.99/bottle

Cowra, New South Wales 11.0% v/v RRP$20.00/bottle

Onion skin in appearance with red tints. Toasty and developed nose of medium intensity featuring ripe red fruits, including strawberry, and bread crust. Fruit on the palate starting to fade but still evident, including red fruits, such as strawberry.

Palate has good weight, balance and developed flavours.

Onion skin in colour with red tints; good mousse. Strawberry, toffee, caramel, hay and fresh white bread characters on the nose. Good fresh fruit flavours in the mouth, although starting to fade, as well as subtle yeast characters. Good weight and balance.

Lark Hill Methode Champenoise Sparkling Pinot Noir Canberra District 12.5% v/v RRP$30.00/bottle Pale red with brick tints in colour.

The nose of this wine is still quite fruity with spicy, talcum powder/ sandalwood and muscat-like notes. Spice and developed/ aged characters evident on the palate, as well as ripe red fruits.

“Very savour tannins in the front palate,” noted one taster. “Nice flavour with a lively acid finish,” said another.

Padthaway Estate 2006 Eliza Sparkling RosÉ Padthaway, South Australia 12.8% v/v RRP$26.00/bottle Orange to onion skin in colour; good mousse. Strawberry, sweet cherry, dried flowers, hay/ straw and chamomile tea on the nose with toffee hints. Slightly sweet palate with medium acid, strawberry, chamomile tea, tobacco leaf and toffee. Perhaps past its best for a sweeter/ fruitier style.

Sparkling Rosé V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz . com . au

107

TAS t I N G N O T E S

Bishop grove 2006 Chris Sparkling RosÉ Hunter Valley, New South Wales 13.0% v/v RRP$23.60/bottle Despite what is stated on the label, this wine is not a sparkling rosé but a sparkling red and is, therefore, not in this class.

Blue Pyrenees Estate 2005 Brut Sparkling RosÉ

Mt William Winery 2003 Jorja-Alexis Sparkling Pinot RosÉ

Pyrenees, Victoria 13.5% v/v RRP$24.00/bottle

Macedon, Victoria 13.0% v/v RRP$45.00/bottle

Salmon in colour with slight onion skin notes and bronze/ copper hues. Developed and sweet nose featuring pineapple, strawberry, boiled lolly and sandalwood. Similar characters on the palate which is soft, supple and slightly sweet. Good acid and structure.

Salmon in colour with slight onion skin/orange notes. Clean but reduced nose. Palate is round and tight with some light red fruits, good structure but slightly sour acid. Lack some fresh fruit.

Sparkling Rosé 108

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

2 0 1 2 index

Index to articles from Volume 27 of the Wine & Viticulture Journal ALTERNATIVE VARIETIES Clarification of Grüner Veltliner clonal designation John Whiting, November/December 2012, p69 Ensuring trueness to type of some alternative varieties. Report from the pilot Varietal Verification Project – Part 2: What does it mean to the grower?

Libby Tassie, Prue Henschke and David Coleman, May/June 2012, p52-56 Garganega – an enticing variety with fruit, flavour and finish Robin Day, September/October 2012, p63-64 Italian inspiration for novel Nero d’Avola making Brad Hickey, November/December 2012, p67-69 Italy’s Fiano - which one do we have in Australia?

Libby Tassie, Antonella Monaco, Anna Schneider and Jean-Michel Boursiquot, May/ June 2012, p57-61.

Negro Amaro – a worthy alternative red in the right homoclime Andrew Cottell, July/August 2012, p64-65 Olssens continue on learning curve with Carmenere Kevin Olssen, January/February 2012, p63-64 Time on the vine valuable for golden Petit Manseng Peter Rogers, May/June 2012, p62-63 Western Australia winning with Arneis Pippa and Mark Cumbers, March/April 2012, p67-68 AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY OF VITICULTURE & OENOLOGY (column) A successful seminar and the ASVO Awards for Excellence Paul Petrie, September/October 2012, p11 New editor for the ‘yellow journal' Paul Petrie, July/August 2012, p14 Positive results from recent winemaking seminar and AGM Paul Petrie, January/February 2012, p11 Revamped newsletter and seminar among current ASVO projects Paul Petrie, March/April 2012, p9 Seminar news and collaboration with the Wine Industry Suppliers Australia Paul Petrie, May/June 2012, p11 AUSTRALIAN WINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE REPORTS Aged Riesling and the development of TDN Cory Black, Leigh Francis, Prue Henschke, Dimitra Capone, Samantha Anderson, Martin Day, Helen Holt, Wes Pearson, Markus Herderich and Dan Johnson, September/ October 2012, p20-22, 24-26 Beyond bentonite Ella Robinson, Neil Scrimgeour, Matteo Marangon, Richard Muhlack, Paul Smith, Peter Godden and Dan Johnson, November/ December 2012, p24, 26-30 V2 7N 6

Managing eucalyptus aroma Dimitra L. Capone, I. Leigh Francis, Markus J. Herderich and Daniel L. Johnson, July/August 2012, p22-27 Opportunities to improve winemaking profitability Vince O’Brien and Dan Johnson, January/ February 2012, p18-21 Quality in a cool climate – maceration techniques in Pinot Noir production Robert Dambergs, Angela Sparrow, Anna Carew, Neil Scrimgeour, Eric Wilkes, Peter Godden, Markus Herderich and Daniel Johnson, May/June 2012, p18, 20-26 Ten years of transformation. Reflecting on the technical advances in the wine industry over the past decade. Peter Godden and Dan Johnson, March/April 2012, p22, 24-26 BARREL HALLS Humidification – keeping more of the angels’ share in the barrel Cathy Howard, November/December 2012, p43-44, 46 BOTTLING, LABELLING & PACKAGING Innovations in bottling Anon. January/February 2012, p30-32 Is the wine industry next in line after tobacco to fight health warning legislation?

Stephen Stern, January/February 2012, p6567 BUSINESS Review of recent vineyard and winery sales Sonya Logan, May/June 2012, p64 Strategies for enhancing vineyard asset values Greg Quinn and Paul Fenn, May/June 2012, p66-67 CANOPY MANAGEMENT Development of a smartphone application to characterise temporal and spatial canopy architecture and leaf area index for grapevines Sigfredo Fuentes, Roberta De Bei, Cristian Pozo and Stephen Tyerman, November/ December 2012, p56-60 Leaf removal and harvest timing effects on Shiraz wine composition and assessment John Whiting, May/June 2012, p44-47.

CLOSURES Impact of different closures on intrinsic sensory wine quality and consumer preferences Paulo Lopes, Isabel Roseira, Miguel Cabral, Cedric Saucier, Philippe Darriet, Pierre-Louis Teissedre and Denis Dubourdieu, March/April 2012, p34-41 Oxygen management during wine bottle ageing by means of closure selection.

Current trends and perspectives W i n e & V i t i c u ltur e Jo ur n a l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

Maurizio Ugliano, Jean-Baptiste Dieval and Stephane Vidal, September/October 2012, p38-43 US consumers nearing closure over the influence of seals in wine purchasing decisions Anon. July/August 2012, p74-75 EDUCATION Behind a Master of Wine qualification Sonya Logan, May/June 2012, p74-75 EXPORT Baseline distribution metrics for Australian wine entering the Chinese market Johan Bruwer, Martin Hirche, Chang Liu, Hao Yang, Xiaocen Chen and Supasit Peanchitlertkajorn, May/June 2012, p69-71 Out of Africa: highlights of a new wine market Mark Rowley, May/June 2012, p72-73 FERMENTATION Breeding for success: yeast strain development at the AWRI Paul Henschke, Jenny Bellon, Chris Curtin and Paul Chambers, May/June 2012, pg35-39 Managing H2S production during fermentation - a focus on yeast nutrition Ursula Kennedy and Dylan Rhymer, November/December 2012, p32-34 The influence of yeast strains on phenolic and aromatic qualities of red wines Denis Caboulet, Marie-Agnés Ducasse, Amélie Roy, Laurent Dagan, Céline Fauveau, Patrice Pellerin and Rémi Schneider, November/ December 2012, p35-42 FILTRATION Filtration of grape juice sediments: a new application for cross-flow filters Patrik Schonenberger, Davide De Giorgi and Julien Ducruet, March/April 2012, p28-33 INDUSTRY EVENTS The latest innovations from SIMEI Tony Hoare, January/February 2012, p38-40, 42-43 Some highlights from the 8th International Cool Climate Symposium Sonya Logan, March/April 2012, p42-47 Outlook Conference delivers message that there is still work to be done but there is good cause for optimism Sonya Logan, November/December 2012, p19-23 IRRIGATION Dissecting the Draft Murray Darling Basin Plan Waterfind, January/February 2012, p55-57 The National Water Initiative – financial implications for growers Ben Craw and Paul Fenn, July/August 2012, p73 www.winebiz. com . au

109

2 0 1 2 index

MARKETING & SALES

PESTS & DISEASES

REFRIGERATION

Regional profiling: the McLaren Vale experience Toby Bekkers, July/August 2012, p61-63 Taxes are going up: what are we going to drink in the future?

Armando Maria Corsi and Larry Lockshin, March/April 2012, p69-70 The impact of customer satisfaction on loyalty. How does it affect customers’ repurchase behaviour for Australian wine?

Anna Pullen and Tony Spawton, September/October 2012, p69-71 The sales impact of regional and environmental in-store promotions Armando Corsi, Simone Mueller Loose and Larry Lockshin, September/October 2012, p72-76 Why being good enough isn’t good enough Robin Shaw, September/October 2012, p66-68 Wine Australia’s social media success secrets Mark Rowley, March/April 2012, p74-75

A biological control system for botrytis Dean Metcalf, September/October 2012, p56, 58 Botrytis decision support: online tools for predicting seasonal risk of botrytis bunch rot Rob Beresford, Kathy Evans and Gareth Hill, September/October 2012, p46-48, 50, 52 Current status of grapevine trunk diseases in Australia Mark Sosnowski and Trevor Wicks, March/ April 2012, p21 Pre-flowering defoliation effects on fruitfulness in the subsequent season Mark Krasnow, September/October 2012, p53-55 Taltarni trial shows insectariums still a sanctuary for beneficial insects in spite of increased chemical inputs Matthew Bailey, November/December 2012, p62-66

What’s old is new again in refrigeration efficiency Mark Holden, January/February 2012, p22-25

NUTRITION New technology to improve post-harvest nutrition management Anon. July/August 2012, pg54-55 OAK When size matters: large format oak – why use it?

Cathy Howard, July/August 2012, p28-30, 32 OPINION COLUMN Adopt, adapt or innovate?

Peter Hayes, May/June 2012, p8 A word on the Federal Government’s Clean Energy legislation David Bruer, January/February 2012, p8 Selling the screwcap Bruce Tyrrell, John Forrest and Philip Reedman, March/April 2012, p8 Vine improvement in Australia at a crossroad Kym Ludvigsen, July/August 2012, p8, 10-11 WGGA and WFA respond to GWRDC 5-year plan Lawrie Stanford and Paul Evans, September/October 2012, p8-9 ORGANICS/BIODYNAMICS Organic viticulture research at The University of Adelaide Luke Johnston, Chris Penfold, Petra Marschner, Ben Pike and Irina Santiago, January/February 2012, p51-53 OVERSEAS Hot winegrape production: Italian lessons Mark Downey and Pietro Scafidi, September/October 2012, p59-62

110

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

PRECISION VITICULTURE Case study of vigour-based zonal vineyard management and phenolic variation in wine Nathan Scarlett and Keren Bindon, May/ June 2012, p41-43 Precision management technologies prove their value in selective harvesting in Australia’s major production regions Mark Krstic, July/August 2012, p34-36 PRESSING Basket case! Does a basket press really deliver higher quality wine or is it just marketing hype?

Forum: Howard Anderson, David & Josh Norman, Tim Geddes, May/June 2012, pg29-33 PROPAGATION A comparison of handling methods for production of bench-grafted grapevines Brady P. Smith, January/February 2012, p5862 Grapevine propagation best practices – Part 1 Brady Smith, Helen Waite, Nick Dry and David Nitschke, May/June 2012, p48-50.

Grapevine propagation best practices – Part 2 Brady Smith, Helen Waite, Nick Dry and David Nitschke, July/August 2012, p49-51.

REGIONAL REPORT Canberra District September/October 2012, p82-86 Coonawarra May/June 2012, p81-82 Gippsland November/December 2012, p90-97 Swan Valley January/February 2012, p80-85 Tasmania March/April 2012, p83-87 Yarra Valley July/August 2012, p79-84 RICHARD SMART (column) Australia at the crossroads: will regionality help?

November/December 2012, p16-18 China – emerging market or competitor?

July/August 2012, p18-20 Climate mapping in Tasmania to encourage vineyard investment September/October 2012, p17-18 England’s sparkling future beckons May/June 2012, p16-17 Evaluating the data and discussion in Wine, Terroir and Climate Change January/February 2012, p15-16 Grapevine trunk diseases: a new global vineyard threat?

March/April 2012, p18-20 ROOTSTOCKS Genomics: the key to safeguarding sustainable winegrape production Matthew Gilliham, July/August 2012, p52-53 Rootstock breeding and associated R&D in the viticulture and wine industry John Whiting, November/December 2012, p52-54 STABILISATION Assessment of CMC-induced tartrate stability over an extended period Rodney Marsh and Sue Mills, November/ December 2012, p48-51

PROFILE

SUPER WINES

Dorham Mann January/February 2012, p78-79 Andrew Hood March/April 2012, p81-82 Bruce Redman May/June 2012, p79-80 Tony Jordan Matt Byrne, July/August 2012, p77-78 Ken Helm Mark Smith, September/October 2012, p80-81 Phillip Jones Mark Smith, November/December 2012, p90-91

Angove Family Winemakers 2006 Vineyard Select Clare Valley Riesling September/October 2012, p87 Bindi Block 5 Pinot Noir March/April 2012, p88 Gatt 2009 High Eden Shiraz July/August 2012, p76 Kingston Estate Wines Echelon Petit Verdot January/February 2012, p86 Penfolds 2008 Yattarna November/December 2012, p98 Scott 2011 Fiano May/June 2012, p88

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

2 0 1 2 index

SUSTAINABILITY A measured approach to sustainable farming Toby Bekkers, January/February 2012, p44-47 Sustainability in viticulture: assessment and adoption Irina Santiago, Johan Bruwer and Cassandra Collins, January/February 2012, p48-50 Vineyard sustainability – a case study from Queensland Ursula Kennedy, January/February 2012, p54 WFA investigates Entwine extensions to give regional focus Beverley Prideaux, March/April 2012, p64-66 TONY HOARE (COLUMN) Ethical and free trade branding for wine: harvesting the benefits July/August 2012, p59-60 Life as a small to medium wine producer – sans the rose-coloured glasses September/October 2012, p12-16 Right variety – right place – right time!

March/April 2012, p57-58 TONY KEYS (column)

Seed ripening in King Valley Merlot vineyards Erika Winter and Stephen Lowe, March/April 2012, p61-63 The nation’s vineyard – 40 years of evolution Mark Rowley, January/February 2012, p74-75 Vineyard redevelopment – who’s doing what and why?

Kym Ludvigsen, Liz Riley and Jim CampbellClause, March/April 2012, p52, 54-56 Vineyard scoops annual trophy pool Mark Smith, July/August 2012, p56-58 WINEMAKERS’ FEDERATION Of AUSTRALIA (column) Big potential in small Budget asks Stephen Strachan, March/April 2012, p10 Coordinated approach to trade brings results Tony Battaglene, July/August 2012, p13 Label campaign sends important message Paul Evans, November/December 2012, p12 Merger seeks better alignment and efficiency Stephen Strachan, May/June 2012, p10 Positive response to new tourism strategy Robin Shaw, January/February 2012, p9 Regions the key in Entwine Australia review Damien Griffante, September/October 2012, p10

Gongs, comments and egos November/December 2012, p13-15 Technology vs tradition: which will support the future of the Australian wine industry?

An anatomy of a one-sided debate May/June 2012, p12-15 Did things go wrong or are they just evolving? Applying 2020 hindsight to Strategy 2025 January/February 2012, p12-14 The dance of brand myth-creation March/April 2012, p12-17 Wine writers – past, present and future July/August 2012, p15-17

WINEMAKING

VARIETAL REPORTS

WINE AUSTRALIA (column)

$50+ Pinot Noir March/April 2012, p89-91 Fiano May/June 2012, p89-91 Petit Verdot January/February 2012, p87-89 Savagnin September/October 2012, p88-90 Sparkling rosé November/December 2012, p99-101 Touriga Nacional July/August 2012, p86-89

A renewed focus on Australian wine consumers Aaron Brasher, January/February 2012, p10 Breaking down the barriers: addressing market access challenges for exporting Australian wine Steve Guy, November/December 2012, p10-11 Good response to new market programs structure James Gosper, July/August 2012, p12 No-fuss transition to new export approval process Steve Guy, May/June 2012, p9

VITICULTURE

A snapshot of processing trends in Australia’s larger wineries Anon. July/August 2012, p38-39, 41-43 Managing oxygen in a small winery. Why tank size may be the key to excessive oxidation in small wineries Curtis Phillips, September/October 2012, p3437 What’s new in winery toys? New technology for SME wineries Cathy Howard, September/October 2012, p2931, 33

WINE & HEALTH

Australian experience with biochar application and research Sonya Logan, March/April 2012, p51 Biochar in viticulture Hans-Peter Schmidt, March/April 2012, p48-50 Current vine planting trends in Queensland Ursula Kennedy, March/April 2012, p59-60 Hot and getting hotter – how will a warming climate affect warm climate viticulture?

Everard J. Edwards, Dale Unwin, Marica Mazza and Mark O. Downey, July/August 2012, p44, 46-48

$50+ Pinot Noir March/April 2012, p92-95 Fiano May/June 2012, p92-96 Petit Verdot January/February 2012, p90-95

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

Alcohol and human health – sorting out the facts Creina Stockley, January/February 2012, p68-69

WINE & VITICULTURE JOURNAL TASTINGS

Savagnin September/October 2012, p92-97 Sparkling rosé November/December 2012, p102-108 Touriga Nacional July/August 2012, p90-92 WINE EXPORTING Emerging Asian markets Mark Rowley, September/October 2012, p78-79 How to protect your brand from being ‘ripped off’ in China John B. MacPhail, March/April 2012, p77-80 Profile of small exporters Mark Rowley, July/August 2012, p66-67 WINE INTELLIGENCE (column) How do you judge a book, then? Consumer perceptions of wine labels Richard Halstead, January/February 2012, p76-77 Inside the box - the first consumer behaviour model to describe the imported wine drinking population in China Richard Halstead, November/December 2012, p88-89 Time to move the digital conversation on Richard Halstead, March/April 2012, p71-73 To adapt or not adapt…that is the China question Richard Halstead, July/August 2012, p68-69, 71 True innovation wards off complacency Richard Halstead, May/June 2012, p77-78 WINE SHOWS How important are wine medals? And how much can we rely on those who assign them?

Armando Corsi, November/December 2012, p85-86 The show must go on Sam Connew and Iain Riggs, November/ December 2012, p70, 73 Wine shows: a winery’s perspective Forum: David Lloyd, Corrina Wright, Erl Happ, November/December 2012, p74-76 Wine shows: an organiser’s perspective Forum: Andrew Price, Victor Nash, Ben White, Ann Houlihan, David Metcalf, Julian McLean, November/December 2012, p77-82 Wine shows: what’s the score in NZ and the US? Anon. November/December 2012, p83-84 Wine shows can give exhibitors more than medals Maame Yaakwaah Blay, Anthony Saliba, Jim Hardie, Tom Carr and Hildegarde Heymann, January/February 2012, p70-73 WINE TASTING Prevention of tooth erosion and sensitivity in wine tasters Sarbin Ranjitkar, Roger Smales and Dimitra Lekkas, January/February 2012, p34-37 WINERY WASTEWATER Closing the loop on winery wastewater – a regional reality?

Sonya Logan, January/February 2012, p26-28 www.winebiz . com . au

111

Wine Industry Personnel WID Online Phonebook www.winebiz.com.au/widonline • Searchable

• Easy to use

Search parameters: first name AND/OR surname

Results found

Click ‘view’ to access required record

Examples of records

To purchase:

Visit: www.winebiz.com.au Call: +618 8369 9500 Email: orders@winetitles.com.au

PRODUCTS & SERVICES

Vivando considered safe for IPM programs

N

ewly-registered fungicide Vivando has been declared safe to beneficial insects by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority.

Vivando also doesn’t have a grazing withholding period which means vineyards treated with the fungicide can be grazed.

Crop Care horticulture business manager Kerrie Mackay said Vivando was the first commercial fungicide in the world to be developed from the benzophenone group of fungicides (Group U8).

“Its active ingredient, metrafenone, has proved to be highly active against grape powdery mildew, adding another effective option to spray programs, and an alternative to help grapegrowers to manage strobilurin resistance.

“Metrafenone works several ways against powdery mildew. Providing more uniform protection of both leaves and berries, Vivando is ideal for use during the critical period from 10cm shoot length and during the five weeks after fruitset to protect young berries when they are most susceptible, and when potential for loss is greatest.

Powdery mildew-affected winegrapes.

“With its active protective vapour phase, Vivando remains present in the airspace around clusters immediately after treatment, and for up to 14 days after treatment, in sufficient concentration to protect the clusters from powdery mildew attack.”

Crop Care recommends applying Vivando as part of a protective schedule, with the number of applications limited to no more than two consecutive sprays 7-10 days apart, before changing to an alternative fungicide group, and applying no more than four applications of Vivando each season.

A unique new yeast nutrient that favours aromatic ester production Oenobrands has released a new wine yeast nutrient, Natuferm®, which is particularly rich in amino acids known to be aromatic ester precursors.

The company says that when used under suitable temperature and turbidity conditions in association with a yeast strain selected for its ability to produce aromatic esters, Natuferm can significantly increase the sensorial quality of white, red and rosé wines.

Its contribution to the aromatic expression of wines and its positive impact on fermentation have been demonstrated in comparative trials both in research institutes and in wineries,

the company added. Exclusively composed of autolysed yeast, Natuferm offers a unique source of nutrition that enhances yeast viability with its high concentration of organic assimilable nitrogen and trace elements. It can only be added during the first step of alcoholic fermentation.

Despite its very high concentration in amino acids, Natuferm has been specifically formulated to avoid increasing undesirable compounds, such as biogenic amines and ethyl carbamate in wines.

For further information visit www.oenobrands.com

Can’t find someone…………

Searchable Wine Industry PERSONNEL PHONEBOOK To access phonebook visit your Wine Industry Directory ONLINE* at www.winebiz.com.au *Available only to those who have purchased/subscribed to the Wine Industry Directory

V2 7N 6

W i n e & V i ticultur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER

www.winebiz . com . au

113

C l a s s i f ied s

MALLEE POINT NURSERY Orders taken for 2012 plantings NOW. Phone 02 6968 1086 Fax 02 6968 1786 Mobile 0428 690 208 PO Box 438, Yenda, NSW 2681

For classified bookings contact: Nicole Evans (08) 8369 9515 widsales@winetitles.com.au

GrapeVine GraftlinGs & rootlinGs • Serving Australian Viticulture for over 50 years • Vine Improvement sourced material • Hot water treated • Trichoderma protected • Taking orders now for 2012, 2013 and 2014 requirements • We also propagate to order Avocado, Citrus, Olive, Pistachio and Pomegranate trees.

Growing for You

odshield.com.au Dedicated to covering all aspects of winemaking and technology, viticulture, wine business and marketing – from vine to market.

Since 1952

www.sunraysianurseries.com.au Sunraysia Nurseries PO Box 45, Sturt Highway, Gol Gol, NSW 2738 Ph (03) 5024 8502 Fax (03) 5024 8551 Email sales@sunraysianurseries.com.au

Subscribe today at www.winebiz.com.au or call (08) 8369 9500

VINE GRAFTING Bruce Gilbert 0428 233 544 Brian Phillips 0417 131 764 fax 03 5025 2321

brucethegrafter@gmail.com www.brucethegrafter.com

WINERY EQUIPMENT FOR SALE

Location: Griffith NSW jobs .com.au

Incorporating mywinejob.com.au

The Wine Industry’s leading Online Job Site For further information contact jobs@winebiz.com.au or phone +618 8369 9500 post your job online at winejobs.com.au created and managed by

A variety of winery equipment including: • 2 x Screw presses • Grape Hopper • Destemmer • D-Juicing Auger • Hopper • 10 x 20,000 litre wine tanks some with dimple plating All enquiries glillee@harveyfresh.com.au

PROVIDING SOLUTIONS TO THE WINE INDUSTRY

114

ww w.w i n eb i z .c om.au

W i n e & V i t i c ult ur e Jo ur na l NO V EMBER/DEC EMBER 2012

V27N6

Quality First, No Compromises www.kcvines.com.au Field Grown - supplied dormant

Bench Grafted, field grown

LATE PLANTING DECISION?

2 year old High Vines

Using biological farming methods.

Soils inoculated with compost teas.

Certified planting material used.

No Problem, Greenhouse container grown production for same year Spring

Container Grown Using peat pots for excellent take, minimal transplant shock, easier to plant.

Great start when transplanted – minimal establishment delay, earlier crop.

Soil biology bonus - Vines are inoculated with compost teas to provide essential soil microbes which come with the vines and improve vineyard fertility.

Peat pots in easy handling trays

New CSIRO Root Stocks available.

LEAD TImES DO APPLy ORDER NOW FOR 2012 and 2013

AVAILABLE FOR SAME YEAR SPRING PLANTING “The future belongs to those who plant for it”

(03) 5024 8812

Email: info@kcvines.com.au mobile: Andy 0407 309 961 Justin 0427 808 998 Fax: (03) 5024 8834

Melbourne

Adelaide

New Zealand

FLOTATION-

REDUCE YOUR FOOTPRINT With the benefit of twenty years’ experience, JUCLAS is able to offer a clarification and stabilization process for grape juice using flotation in batch or continuous process.

With over 40 installations throughout Australia and New Zealand, the efficiencies that are gained from Juclas flotation are now clearly demonstrated.

Easyfloat for 1,000-50,000L tanks

JUICE TRAY TRAY TO INOCULATION IN LESS THAN 4 HOURS IMPROVEMENTS IN EFFICIENCIES · Reduction of refrigeration loads · Elimination of cold settling · Three times faster than largest centrifuge · Large reduction in diatomaceous earth requirements · Reduction of downgraded juice · Accelerated turnover of tanks · Decrease in waste products

Batch system up to 50,000 L/hr

Products available: FLOTTOBENT - EXTREMELY PURE ACTIVATED BENTONITE FLOTTOGEL - PURIFIED GELATINE WITH HIGH ELECTRICAL CHARGE FLOTTOSIL - SILICON DIOXIDE IN COLLOIDAL SUSPENSION FLOTTOCARB - EXTREMELY PURE VEGETABLE CARBON FLOTTOZIMA L - LIQUID PECTOLITIC ENZYME

Continuous system up to 50,000 L/hr

For further details, contact us on: Melbourne 59 Banbury Rd, Reservoir Ph. 1300 882 850 Adelaide 12 Hamilton Tce, Newton Ph. 08 8365 0044 New Zealand 4c Titoki Place, Albany, Auckland Ph. 0800 699 599 E. sales@winequip.com.au www.winequip.com.au www.winequip.co.nz