Australia s GIs: is the approach rational?

Transcription

1 Australia s GIs: is the approach rational? RICHARD SMART SMART THINKING ON VITICULTURE I write this column in response to several recent articles in the Wine Industry Journal. First, in the November- December 2006 issue Brian Croser wrote of the Australian fine wine industry. Secondly, in the same issue Tony Keys presented the first of a two-part series on Australia s GIs (Geographical Indications). The second of the series was presented in the January-February 2007 issue and dealt particularly with the King Valley GI decision. While not necessarily apparent, it seemed to me that these three articles had some common thread. I was impressed with Brian Croser s article about the Australian industry being dominated by commodity wine products, and that the fine wine industry does not receive the support at all levels which it deserves. I commend this article to readers. A key statement by Croser about fine wines... the importance of the sense of place from which the wine is derived is a fundamental issue of intellectual curiosity influencing the perception of the wine. I have had several involvements with the GI process, preparing three expert statements for legal cases involving disputes about regional names, including two court appearances as expert witness. I will come to these experiences later, but the principal issue I wish to address is whether the Australian wine sector has been well served by the GI process. In particular I am curious as to whether the operation and success of the wine sector in 50 years time will be helped or hindered by the present and past deliberations by the GI Committee. BACKGROUND TO AUSTRALIA S GIS The GI system was introduced in 1993 to allow Australia to fulfil its agreements with the European Community on trade in wine. A Geographical Indication (GI) is an official description of an Australian wine zone, region or sub-region designed to protect the use of the regional name under international law. The system is managed by the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation, and full details can be found on its website ( Conceptually, the GI is similar to the Appellation naming system used in Europe but is far less restrictive in terms of viticultural and winemaking practices. In fact, the only restriction is that wine which carries the GI on the label should be made from at least 85% of fruit from the GI. The legislative framework for the determination of Australia s GI s is within the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Act 1980 and the AWBC export regulations Under this legislation a Geographical Indications Committee (GIC) is established as a statutory authority of the AWBC. The committee comprises a presiding member appointed by the Chairperson of the Corporation and one member appointed on the nomination of a declared winemakers organisation and another on the nomination of a winegrapegrowers organisation. The GIC is obliged to review the circumstances of applications for GIs and to make a determination. If there is dispute to this determination, the case is heard before the Australian Appeals Tribunal (AAT). CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING GIS The qualification process is not the same as for regions and sub-regions but so far as I know, there has been no dispute about the State or zone categories. The South Eastern Australia zone is a conspicuous GI on the majority of wine exported from Australia. Obviously this allows blending between the hot irrigated and cool wine regions. I am aware of several disputes in the determination of regional GIs. One was the celebrated case about Coonawarra which led to an appeal to the Federal Court, in which the AAT decision was overturned. More recently a case regarding the King Valley heard before the AAT is being disputed and will proceed to the Federal Court. More of that later. The regulations define a region as one producing at least 500 tonnes of grapes from at least five vineyards of at least 5ha. Importantly, a region is a single tract of land that is discrete and homogeneous in its grapegrowing attributes to a degree that is measurable, and is less substantial than in a sub region. Obviously the homogeneity of grapegrowing attributes is pivotal to the definition of a region. The attributes listed in the regulations include geological formations, climate, harvest dates, natural drainage basins, availability of water from an irrigation scheme, the elevation of the area, plans for development of the area by any authorities, any relevant traditional divisions within the area, and finally the history of grape and wine production in the area. Components of the climate which are specifically mentioned include temperature, atmospheric pressure, humidity, rainfall, number of hours of sunshine and any other weather conditions. CRITICISM OF THE PRESENT PROCLAIMED GIS One of the first obvious features of Australia s GIs is that there is an enormous variation in the size of regions. South Australia s Coonawarra region is one of the smallest and the Riverina region of New South Wales is one of the largest. The Hunter WINE INDUSTRY JOURNAL > VOL 22 NO 2 > MARCH/APRIL 2007 > 13

2 Valley is also a relatively large region. Secondly, there are few sub-regions which have been declared, with most of these in Western Australia. Finally and perhaps most importantly, most of the regions are continuous. One can only assume that this has been a deliberate attempt by the GIC 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 Europe. It seems to me that the attempt to make wine regions continuous may prove in the future to be a fundamental flaw. In his November-December 2006 Journal article about homogeneity of Australian GIs, Tony Keys is extremely critical of the outcome of the GIC s deliberations. He claims that the assessment of homogeneity of GIs is farcical, noting the example of the Grampians where he lives. Tony Keys challenged Ernie Sullivan of AWBC that the GIs appear to be the largest possible area of land possible, with no real regard to homogeneity. The response was interesting. Keys asks a relevant question as to composition of the GIC. He says, and I agree, why does this committee not include geographers or climatologists? I would add, have the existing and past members of the GIC the relevant skills in geography and allied sciences to make these determinations? Keys further challenges the GIC with confusing sense of place with plain commercialism. He interviews several proprietors on the issue of the success of regional and subregional divisions, and finds that commercial, tourism and marketing aspects predominates over wine style. In his second article in the January-February 2007 issue of the Journal, Tony Keys looked at the saga of the King Valley. As for Coonawarra there has been an appeal to the AAT decision and the issue will go to the Federal Court, with the date to be set. The GIC and the majority of growers and winemakers argued for a King Valley GI which would include elevated areas to the south. There were four grape producers among a number of others on these elevated areas who proposed an alternate GI to be called Whitlands High Plateaux. This area produces sparkling wines and distinctive cool-climate wine styles at elevations around 800m, while on the plains to the north full-bodied table wines and fortified wines are produced at elevations as low as 150m. His Honour, Justice Downes of the AAT handed down his findings on the 18 October He found that there should be one region for the area and it will be called the King Valley. So, in his opinion, Australia shall have a GI in which both fortified wines and sparkling wines are produced! Such an outcome will cause many students of wine to be incredulous. Tony Keys agrees. He quotes the Judge, Changes in latitude are not significant enough to lead to meaningful variations in the area under consideration but changes in altitude are. As Keys states then why wasn t the verdict different? ISSUES OF HOMOGENEITY AND CLIMATE My experience in the international wine industry is that climate has the predominant effect on regional wine styles McCann Momentum - BD&CO - P. Plisson - Corbis CMA CGM From the seven seas to the world Our promise: answering our customers' needs, to bring them the best in container shipping across the 7 seas and beyond. We offer fast and reliable custom-made services from door to door, with the respect of the environment always on our mind. Every day, the teams of the CMA CGM Group and our state of the art technology, bring you closer to the furthest reaches of the world. ADVANCED SHIPPING 14 > MARCH/APRIL 2007 > VOL 22 NO 2 > WINE INDUSTRY JOURNAL

3 Destemmer/Crushers Over 40 years in the industry is your guarantee SALES AND SERVICE 24 hours a day, 7 days a week ORDER NOW competitive prices, tailor-made payment terms available There are six models in our MC Series: MC tonne/hr MC tonne/hr MC tonne/hr MC tonne/hr MC tonne/hr MC tonne/hr Features of the Miller MC Series are: Heavy duty stainless steel construction High on output, and gentle on product Four modes of operation (optional) Destem then crush Destem without crushing Crushing without destemming Bypass Destemmer and crusher Easy to operate and maintain Easy to clean Neptune Terrace Ottoway South Australia 5013 Phone (08) Fax (08) fmc@fmiller.com.au For more information on our wide range of products visit

4 and varietal suitability. (This is why I am so concerned about the impact of climate change on the Australasian wine sector). Further, of all the climate elements, temperature is known to be the most important in affecting vine phenology and final fruit composition. I am unaware of any argument to the contrary, and certainly there is a considerable body of scientific literature to support this view point. Soil effects are often discussed, and perhaps too much discussed by wine journalists. The effect of soil properties is generally less than that of climate. This is just as well, as soils are far more variable in a regional perspective than is climate. I am unsure if the GIC is affected by its parent body the AWBC, but I hope not. In particular the AWBC s understanding of the groupings of Australian wine regions by climate can most generously be described as appalling. Projections are made on the basis of warm inland or coolclimate. The inland irrigated areas are in fact best described as hot rather than warm, but to call the remainder cool is ridiculous, a fact which caught Brian Croser s attention. To lump together the Swan River region with a Mean January Temperature (MJT) of 24.5 C, with the Barossa Valley (MJT 21.2 C) and Hobart (MJT 16.7 C) as cool climates, covering the range from hottest to coolest in Australia, is a total nonsense. In my presentation to the Coonawarra AAT hearing I presented arguments along the climate line as I discussed the grapegrowing attributes of a region. In the instance of Coonawarra we were discussing a relatively small area of land essentially on a plain. There were small climate gradients which could be demonstrated by reference to long-term data and controlled local measurements. In my submission I noted that the temperature index MJT has application in defining homogeneity of grapegrowing regions. It is important to note that this is a temperature index, a simple number which describes as a meaningful average the annual and monthly temperature patterns. I made similar arguments in my expert witness statement to the AAT in the case of the King Valley deliberations. Similar comments were made by Dr John Gladstones and Associate Professor Peter Dry, and His Honour Justice Downes stated that climate is recognised by all witnesses as the most important matter in determining viticultural properties. However, he appeared to have problems with the use of the MJT index. He indicated it was flawed because it missed the effect of cold air drainage. Further he stated that my evidence was counter productive because it failed to show a favourable distinction between plateaux and valleys, notably the beneficial effects of cold air drainage. I do not understand what this means. Local wine producers would doubt the beneficial effects of cold air drainage on the morning of 25 September 2006 when substantial frost damage occurred in the King Valley. Most of the damage was to vineyards of lower elevation of m and those at intermediate elevations were affected depending on cold air drainage. The vineyards within the suggested Whitlands High Plateaux received little damage. My point here is obvious in that not all cold air drainage is beneficial. His Honour also had trouble distinguishing between the relevance of local temperature measurements made with and without cold drainage effects due to choices as to the sensor location. These measurements clearly showed that maximum temperature and to a lesser effect the main temperature varies inversely with altitude. If the sensors were placed in areas receiving cold air drainage the minimum temperatures would be lower than they otherwise might be due to elevation considerations alone. CONCLUSION My concern in this article is to raise the issue of the GI process and to bring it to the attention of the Australian wine sector. It seems to me that many in the wine sector are unaware of the decisions which have been made and the significance of these. I share Tony Keys concern about the consistency of the determinations. In conclusion I want to question the appropriateness of the present procedure. It is the wording of the Act relevant? In my opinion it is largely appropriate and homogeneity of grapegrowing attributes seems to me to be an appropriate point about which definition of grapegrowing regions can proceed. However, the person who drafted the Act must be questioned as to why atmospheric pressure was included. So far as I am aware this has no effect on grapegrowing attributes. Is the composition of the GIC relevant? I certainly question this. In this column I have been previously critical of the way many committees serving the wine sector have been populated. The influence of organisations and large companies especially in South Australia is all pervasive, seemingly more important than the ability of the person chosen. In this instance I see no justification for limiting membership to representatives of winemakers and grapegrowers associations. I am sure their commercial experiences will be useful but I doubt any of them possess appropriate qualifications in geography and climatology or related sciences. Further, I have not seen any evidence of the GIC using independent experts, nor other data that is readily available, such as gridded climate data. I have also read many applications for GIs, and some of them are of an appalling standard of logic and presentation. I cannot help but think that the prime approach of the GIC has been to settle local politics more than to follow the guidelines of the Act. Is the Appeal process to the AAT relevant? Admittedly they are senior judges who hear the appeals, but they have no qualifications nor training in the area of geography, viticulture or wine. One might argue that this should not matter, and it is the job of the parties before the Court to present evidence in such a way that it is understandable. However, in my experience the presented science and opinions can appear so contradictory that only a trained person might correctly interpret it. Expert witnesses can only answer questions, rather than dispute facts as presented. Why not have the opinions heard by a specialist referee or arbitrator in a more flexible forum than a courtroom. This person could come to an opinion based on logical interpretation of the facts of the case, and then send a report to the judge. This procedure is used in other areas of the law where technical issues are debated, why not here? I conclude by drawing the readers attention to the map of GI regions and sub regions included here. Is this the most relevant image for Australia to present to its customers around the world for ever in the future? I do not think that in its execution the GI process totally serves the needs which Brian Croser identifies > MARCH/APRIL 2007 > VOL 22 NO 2 > WINE INDUSTRY JOURNAL

5 The GIs and sub-regions of Australia. Image supplied courtesy of the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation. From the company that has been making barrel racks for 15 years. Stacks tight for Freight Rack on rack system For extra height No weight on barrels Simple uncluttered design Easy & visible location Galvanised finish Reg Design No Barrel Rolling options BARREL MASTER fitted with rollers. Stir lees by rotation without introducing oxygen into barrel. Proudly Manufactured by: JOHN FALLAND AUSTRALIA Setting Standards Since 1961 Moppa Road South, Nuriootpa, SA 5355 Ph: (08) Fax: (08) Website: New Zealand Sales & Distribution: KAURI NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Ph: Fax: PO Box , Karori, Wellington. WINE INDUSTRY JOURNAL > VOL 22 NO 2 > MARCH/APRIL 2007 > 17