Cropping levels and their effect on wine style/quality

WINE TALK
1

So, this is a conversation I’ve been wanting to start. Vine cropping has a major effect on many things regarding wine style and quality(of course that is a relative term). Richard Smart had been preaching for years about how, in warmer regions and or earlier, warmer harvest periods, better wine quality can and is often, made with higher crop levels. He has done countless experiments and trials in regions all over the world, over the last 20 or so years to back his claims. So here is my ?- can slightly higher yields lead to higher wine quality?
If slower ripening, longer hang time (which most winemakers view as positive for physiologic ripeness and better wine quality) can be achieved in places where there are often heat spikes that will force winemakers to pick for fear of escalated alcohols and unbalanced wine? Can it possibly result in what many of us are seeking- lower alc., less fruit bomby, more acidity, more complexity or terroir(due to slower ripening), and potentially better agability?



Please discuss…

2

I’m thinking this belongs in cellar rats, but this is much as a discusion about desired wine style to the end consumer.

3

I think the effect of crop size depends on a number of factors, such as grape type, terroir, conditions for the year, etc. This can be seen very clearly in Burgundy where, for example, crop sizes in 1999 (and 2009) were extremely large for Burgundy, but due to other conditions throughout the year, the wines have been successful, while in other years the would not have been as successful at those levels. On the other hand, low crop size forced by nature can help in some vintages, but in others it can just be a sign of problems with disease, hail, etc. One can also see with certain producers who focus entirely on very low crop yields that in certain years the wines are too concentrated, and thus unbalanced.

4

John:

In a word, yes.
I first heard this idea expressed by Christian Moueix during the start-up phase of Dominus in Napa. He was adamant that the vineyards for Dominus not be cropped too low, since he thought it would cause many of the problems you’ve mentioned associated with excessively fast ripening.

I’ve been working with Richard S for about 10 years now, and he (as you mention) has lots of data to support this.
I’ll point out that his ideas on this subject are very much dependent upon context. He’s got a reputation in the popular literature as always recommending large vines and high crop levels.
That’s just not the case… he recommends some of these techniques when he feels the specific site in question warrants them.

Cheers,

5

Bruce, what type of trellis system/ cropping regime are you employing there? Syrah, you are growing?

6

Certainly lots of variables and site vigor springs to mind right away. But if all is working in your favor and it’s warm and you can pick into an Indian summer, then I think it would behoove you to crop it up in order to have greater uniformity, nice flavors and a balanced yield.

Mo’ betta with less booze.

There is always the issue of whoring it out too far, but if you are in the vineyard a lot this won’t matter as it will not occur.

7

John:

We source fruit from seven different prefectures in Japan, and local conditions really run the gamut from hot Region IV with lots of rain, to cold Region I with only moderate growing season precipitation. The former sites tend to be very high vigor, and the latter very low vigor.
Trellising is chosen to suit the site’s vigor. High vigor sites are either planted to a traditional “hiradana” system (pics here: 栽培-芽欠き・センテイ・収穫) or, where possible, GDC. Lower vigor sites are on bilateral cordon (w/ spur pruning) or Guyot simple or double.

Cropping is dependent upon a site’s quality potential, with highest quality sites being cropped between 1.5 to 3 tons per acre. Sites with lower quality potential may be cropped as high as 6 or 7 tons per acre.

As to cultivars… again, we run the gamut given that we have so many different regional climates, and that most of these regions are pretty new (so we haven’t really figured out what works yet). We’ve got things you’ve heard of (CabSauv, Merlot, Chard, Petit Manseng, Tannat, etc), and things you probably haven’t heard of (Muscat Bailey A, Koshu, Shokoshi, Rielsing Lion, etc).
Oddly enough, we don’t have any Syrah. Probably can be done reasonably well in certain good sites, but I’ve always been a bit wary of the fact that it’s a vigorous variety on its own, and would quite possibly turn into a big, green jungle on us pretty quickly.

Cheers,

8

John -

I’m in a cool climate (Finger Lakes), but I think I can chime in on the subject, given a recent and lengthy discussion on the issue.

In our emerging region, most growers have over-cropped for years. However, the best FL producer is a world-class outfit that works with very small yields. At a summer tasting of local Cabernet Franc, we detected something interesting. Hermann J. Wiemer’s CF is cropped at 1.8 TPA and came in just under 24 brix, but it still weaves a subtle (and to my taste, enjoyable) green note. Some producers who crop at 3 TPA have less of the green note (though it might be shielded by more new oak).

The discussion can best be summed up this way: Quality works on a bell curve with cropping, especially if your desire is to eliminate green notes. Wiemer’s winemaker added this insight: at high TPA with Cab Franc, for example, you’ll get thin, green wine. At “optimal” TPA (2.5 to 3, with optimal signifying a balanced canopy), you’ll get less of the green. But at very small yields, you’ll see some of that green note return, with an added benefit: much more weight and mouthfeel. The green note tends to return because the canopy dominates the fruit. You might notice that I’m a writer and not a trained grower, so perhaps I’m not perfectly recapturing the discussion.

But the bottom line is that some of the producers decided it’s best to sacrifice a bit of weight in the mouth to ensure a more balanced wine with fewer green notes.

I have no idea if this is relevant, but there it is. Cheers.

9

I think the “bell curve” is a pretty much spot on. There are soo many variables regarding this subject, there is no one way to do it. Being in the Pacific Northwest, where fully ripening fruit is iffy some years, sticking to low yields as a general practice is the safest way to ensure ripeness, especially in cooler late years. But if you are in areas where the season is longer and early rains aren’t as much of an issue, I can see carrying a little extra load, provided you have the adequate canopy to ripen that fruit, (8-10 leaves per 8oz bunch)can be a good thing, to ensure the sugars don’t go through the roof before you are able to achieve seed and skin ripeness. On the flip side of that coin, is carrying too much fruit, and the grapes lose crucial acids and tannin structure, leaving the wines a bit flabby and thin/dilute. It’s a tough call, but a subject that needs to be looked at, if we intend on reducing alc. levels and achieving more complexity and nuance/finnese in our wines. For myself, I’ve found that the longer season/later falls produce more complex/less primary wines.
Just this mornings coffee induced thoughts…

10

John,
If you get a chance this weekend, talk to Doug Tunnell about this. I think he crops different parts of his vineyard differently based exposure, soil, and his experience with the vineyard.

11

I was hoping to pull guys like Adam Lee and Brian Loring(guys that get fruit from many different vineyards and regions) in to this discussion as well… hello… you guys have anything to add to this? The more perspectives the better.

12

I’m not quite sure on which msg board I’ve read this, but crop load does effect the vines in the subsequent year…for better and for worse so that is yet another consideration.

13

Totally agree. Like my high school chemistry teacher used to say, science keeps you off the streets kids. So if I see you walking the streets of Mac for money, I’m rolling down my window and yelling, “get thee to a vineyard.” It’s the only safe place left.

14

Back to serious discussion, I don’t have much knowledge to offer. But in my opinion, I think a bigger crop this year in our area really helped with the excessive summer heat, spreading out plant energy. I have heard from a few highly experienced growers that want a lighter, more “elegant” style that they shoot for slightly higher crop loads. Makes sense to me.

15

Can’t speak to anything but Pinot Noir… for which the answer is yes. But the problem is determining ahead of time what will work best for the upcoming year. Provided Mother Nature even let’s you decide. Sometimes you’re “handed” 1/2 ton per acre because MN is a bitch. Sometimes you have the option to leave more fuit because you anticipate a warmer year, hoping to dial it in later. And then it rains.

And even when things seem to work out perfectly, you can make boring wine. And when things go to hell, you can make great wine. It’s so variable that it’ll drive you crazy. That’s why we let the growers decide [berserker.gif] We figure it’s part of the terroir of the site. We then put our spin on it by picking at our definition of ripe. Of course, if a vineyard never seemed to get ripe, we’d probably look at asking the grower to try lower yields. But we really haven’t run into that situation.

16

Seemingly, the best solution is to either walk the land yourself (and check out the weather patterns in the Pacific Ocean) or have somebody you trust do it. And I’ve pulled the trigger for you/Pali a couple times. The plant knows what it can get ripe, and the job really is to say whether or not an adjustment is in order.

For me, I love the farming strategy aspect of this biz and getting to know a site.

17

+1 [thumbs-up.gif]