Rhys fined $3.76M for illegally diverting water in Anderson Valley

[Craig_G]

I would have expected that people at Rhys would understand the details of these regulations, but what was said in the article would probably not be understood by the general public (that they had the right to pump the runoff but not to collect it).

My guess is that it has been common practice to do stuff like this and the authorities are trying to change that.

I’d like to hear Joe Webb’s opinion on this. He had some really informative and entertaining things to say about water use (by grape and pot growers) in that area.

[Josh_Grossman]

Well, apparently two of the reservoirs were predated Rhys’ ownership of the property. The article says that enforcement has picked up in the past decade, so I wonder if this was something that was sort of ignored until more recently?

In the absence of more information, I don’t think this would significantly change my consideration of Rhys wines.

I read it as the reservoirs were built in 2015?

[DanielP]

Well, apparently two of the reservoirs were predated Rhys’ ownership of the property. The article says that enforcement has picked up in the past decade, so I wonder if this was something that was sort of ignored until more recently?

In the absence of more information, I don’t think this would significantly change my consideration of Rhys wines.

I read it as the reservoirs were built in 2015?

“Two reservoirs preexisted the purchase of the 4,591-acre Clarke Ranch property southwest of Laytonville from Golden Ram Sportsmen’s Club”

[Al_Osterheld]

It’s 22 acre feet, not a 20+ acre lake unless the lake is only a foot deep.

The runoff regulations are a lot more strict in that county because of their specific circumstances.

-Al

[Peter_Valiquette]

Was also surprised to read how many thousands of acres these greedy asshats are farming. I’ll do my best to try to make it cheaper for you but it sounds pretty blatant that they knew what they were doing. I guess I would encourage you not to support greedy pot farmers who destroy wetlands too?

I’m naturally skeptical of regulations and regulators. People who set up rainwater collection systems for their house are also in violation of regulations in certain jurisdictions. Probably egregiously as well. I hope they don’t find my rainwater barrel stashed behind my house!

A 20+ acre lake isn’t comparable to a backyard rain barrel; red herring fallacy.

The article said 22 acre-feet, not 20+ acre. That’s a significant difference. Could be just a 2.2 acre pond that’s 10’ deep.

[Greg_K]

Yeah, I’m pretty dubious any time a prosecutor or regulatory agency claims actions were “egregious”. What do people expect, that they announce the violations were really minor and not worth pursuing? I’m not an expert on illegal water diversion and have no idea whether this is the case. Maybe they are, maybe they’re not, but I can’t possibly make that claim without more information. If true, I’d certainly be disappointed, though if I stopped buying wine from producers who did bad things, my cellar would look very different!

If you read the article, it states there was “unpermitted diversion of rainwater runoff” as well as “violation of state and federal law” hence the thread title of illegal diversion.

I read the article. My question was whether this was “egregious” not whether it was illegal.

[Greg_K]

Was also surprised to read how many thousands of acres these greedy asshats are farming. I’ll do my best to try to make it cheaper for you but it sounds pretty blatant that they knew what they were doing.

Where did you read that?

Someone who’s ITB should comment, but my understanding is that given how sacrosanct water rights are in droughty California, things like this don’t just happen by accident. I wonder if there was any admission of guilt in the settlement or if that was a negotiated point.

I was not suggesting they did it by accident. I’m saying I don’t know whether they knew what they were doing was egregiously wrong.

[Joe_G_a_l_e_w_s_k_i]

It isn’t fair to speculate. It could be a simple misunderstanding. Or it could be a profoundly wicked and maleficent plot by Rhys. We don’t know. To me, Kevin Harvey has always been the definition of transparency, often to a fault, in my opinion. He happily answers the minutia questions that you guys ask him about their winery and mailing list. I would assume he treats the California Water Board with the same respect.

[Peter_Valiquette]

I think the only thing egregious is the penalty. 3 small ponds on a 4,500+ acre property isn’t going to significantly alter basin hydrology.

[David_Bu3ker]

To everyone who isn’t going to buy Rhys because of this, I pose a follow up question:

Do you also boycott factory food farms, both meat and vegetable/fruit, that commit just as egregious crimes against nature? For that matter add in garment makers, energy companies, and petroleum manufacturers.

Is it not cool? Yes.
Is it going to make me stop buying Rhys? Nope.

I’ll start with food, since wine is an agricultural product.

My meat, fruit, vegetables, milk, eggs, yogurt, etc. all come from local farms almost year round. Being in New England there are some items I cannot get from a local farm in the dead of winter, but I probably buy 90%+ local. Beyond that I make very specific decisions about the rest of the food I buy.

I am very curious to know more about what happened here.

[Brian_G_r_a_f_s_t_r_o_m]

Sounds like it was probably an innocent, and expensive!, mistake.

[Scott_Watkins]

Let’s not go down the road of saying California water policies are too strict or I’m not buying their wine anymore before we really know what happened. It’s been done to death here.

[David_Bu3ker]

My wallet (and wife) would support a boycott.

Just sayin.

[Scott_Watkins]

My wallet (and wife) would support a boycott.

Just sayin.

Of what California or Rhys

[David_Bu3ker]

Probably both!

[David_K2]

“Mistakes were made.”

[Albert_R]

Just sad on both fronts!

[SLee]

Hope this hefty settlement does not cause another price increase

[GregT]

They bought the property with two of the reservoirs already there and the third was completed in the year they made the purchase. The article doesn’t say if work was already underway when the property was purchased.

Knowing nothing other than was printed in the article, it’s a leap to claim that Rhys even knew the ponds were illegal, since they were in existence when the property was bought.

And they had the rights to pump water, but not to collect it. Does the article say anything about how much water they are allowed to pump and what damage to wetlands pumping would cause?

I think we should do everything we can to protect our environment and our wetlands and streams, even if it means, as it must, that you can’t put vineyards in places that might really be good for wine.

But it’s not like they went in there and plowed up a meadow, drained wetlands, and built some pools. Honestly, I don’t see their behavior as being all that egregious, and they’ve apparently done what they can to make amends. While I’m not on their mailing list or anything, if I were buying their wine, this wouldn’t cause me to feel differently about them.

[Kevin_Harvey]

There is a lot I would like to say about this over a glass of wine (or two!) but given the situation, I cannot do that now except for a few facts:

1. we made some serious mistakes
2. The property is 4591 acres. The vineyard is 20 acres. We have always planned to conserve the remainder.
3. 2 of the 3 ponds have been on the site for 60+ years
4. anyone who has visited our vineyards has seen that they are managed with extreme environmental sensitivity and this site is no different

I am sorry but I will not be able to respond further.