Wine in the : From to Rebirth

By

Willard Brown

Southern University

History 415

Fall, 1999 Introduction

In a previous paper this author explored the origins of grape growing and winemaking in the in the Rogue Valley of . Peter Britt was credited with establishing the first vineyard around 1855,arrd later, he produced wine under the name Valley View Vineyards. By the end of the century Britt had introduced premium wine grapes from and had disseminated cuttings to other growers for propagation and vineyard development.1 Following the death of Britt in 1905, his winery ceased operating-2 and after 1916 when Oregon prohibition took effect, wine production in the valley ceased altogether. It would be nearly sixty years before it would resume.

No single factor can explain this extended absence, but a number of successive and sometimes interrelated events impacted the industry and delayed its return. In the following, we will examine these events and evaluate their role in the decline and the rebirth of this industry.

The End of the Beginning

Grape growing and winemaking in the Rogue Valley reached its apogee around 1890. At that time nearly seventy-five acres of vineyards were in production and a number were recently planted. Grapes were sold locally, sent to the Portland market, and used in the manufacture of wine and brandy.2 By 1903 grape acreage had not increased and may have declined somewhat Only five vineyards totaling sixty acres were noted in a newspaper account, although a number of those plantings emerging in 1890 were not mentioned.3 Appendix A

summarizes several reports from 1889 to 1903.

August Petard arrived in the valley in 1899 and developed a vineyard

southwest of Jacksonville where he shipped grapes to the Portland market and

made wine for his own use.4 In 1876 Alfred H. Carson settled in the Missouri Flat area of the Applegate Valley near Grants Pass. Carson developed a nursery, a fruit ranch, and a vineyard on the property. The vineyard of forty acres was one of the largest in Oregon and after the arrival of the railroad in 1883he shipped grapes to the Seattle market. He also made a small amount of wine.5

In September1905, Peter Britt then eighty-six years of age, attended the

Lewis and Clark Centennial in Portland. This celebratory exposition displayed

many Oregon products including fruit, wines and photographs from Jackson

County. Returning by train from Portland he contracted an upper respiratory

infection and succumbed to pneumonia on 30ctober 1905.6 After the demise of

Britt, the slowly declined and after August 1907 there were no recorded transactions.7 By this time prohibition sentiment was on the rise, both nationally and locally.

The death of Peter Britt and the closure of Valley View seem to have presaged a decline in the vineyard acreage and in the industry as a whole. By

1922 only one working vineyard, that of August Petard was still in operation in

Jackson County.8 Although Peter Britt was the seminal figure in Rogue Valley viticulture, it does not seem that his death alone should have precipitated the decline. Certainly prohibition played a role but it would not arrive for another eleven years. Cultural factors including vineyard site, soil factors, and plant diseases may have been implicated. The vine root louse Phylloxera was epidemic in California at the time and might have been found in Oregon had anyone been looking.

Phylloxera, Could it Have Happened Here?

In order to ask the question it is necessary to be aware of the

scourge of this vine root pest, which ravaged the vineyards of Europe and

California in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. In order to answer

the question it is necessary to understand the life cycle of the insect, its

natural history in the vine and the soil and factors affecting the

dissemination of the pest.

Dactylasphaera vitifoliae, also known as Phylloxera vasatrix and

Phylloxera vitifoliae, is an aphid like insect which inhabits grape plants native to the eastern .lt has not been established west of the Rocky

Mountains in the wild state. The organism is small, measuring less than one millimeter in length and width. The insects are oviparous (producing eggs outside the body) and parthenogenic (unfertilized eggs develop into new individuals).

They inhabit the root zones of grapevines, where in late autumn, eggs hatch to larvae, which then overwinter in the roots. In the spring after temperatures reach fifty degrees Fahrenheit or greater, the larvae mature, producing the first of many generations in the yearly cycle 9 During warm weather in heavy soils where fissuring occurs, the mature forms migrate via the cracks in the soil to the surface. At this stage they are referred to as crawlers or wanderers. They may be disseminated by wind, , irrigation water, or by mechanical means such as implements, packing boxes or even automobile and truck tires and soles of boots. Winged forms are possible and are disseminated much more rapidly.

These forms, uncommon in California were responsible for the rapid spread of the pest in Europe.10 Spread from infected to non infected vineyards may occur by any of the aforementioned means or by the planting of infected rooted plants.

Infestation is more common in heavy soils, such as clay and adobe, and is uncommon in sandy soil.11 Damage to the vine is caused by the effects of the pest feeding on the roots, and injecting its poisonous saliva. Swelling and galls result, which impair the absorption of nutrients, leading to loss of vine vigor, decline and ultimately death of the vine. During this debilitative phase the vine is also more susceptible to attack by fungi and other insects.12

The diagnosis of the disease is established by demonstrating the organism, but the damage may resemble that of oak root fungus, gophers, nematodes, water stress or winter injury. Because of the slow dissemination of the non-winged form, several years may pass without detection of the pest.13

Had it remained in its natural habitat where native grapes had developed resistance to its destructive effects, the viticultural world would have been spared one of its most disastrous episodes. Around 1860 American vines were imported to Europe for experimental purposes. After vines in southern France began to die for no apparent reason, several years passed before the destruction was attributed to Phylloxera.14 Over the next twenty years the infestation spread to all of France and most of Europe. Here the winged form was implicated with its rapid dissemination. Although many control measures were attempted, it was not until 1881 that it was finally acknowledged that control could only be achieved by grafting the European wine varieties (Vitis Vinifera) to the rootstocks of American varieties.15

In California where the pest had been introduced from either France or the eastern United States, the first infestation was recognized in 1873 near Sonoma.

Because the wingless form was implicated, spread was considerably slower than that in Europe, but eventually reached all of the wine districts in northern

California by 1885.16 By 1881 the State Board of Viticulture and the University of

California had recommended control by grafting to resistant rootstocks, but the infestation still eluded control as late as 1915.1/

" The story of Phylloxera is one of the most curious in the relationship of entomology to economics".18 The economic consequences led to a diverging differentiation in the structure of wine production in Europe. Larger more capital intensive enterprises could withstand the high cost of grafting over the vineyards, while many small peasant producers, unable to compete, were forced to relocate or emigrate.19

While the historical significance and consequences of Phylloxera in

Europe and California are well established, in Oregon such is not the case. There is no record of Phylloxera in Oregon prior to the late nineteen sixties.20 In the

Rogue Valley given the small acreage here, it might have gone unnoticed, particularly after the onset of prohibition when vineyards may have been

neglected. Based on a number of factors it seems unlikely that Rogue Valley

grapes could have escaped infestation. I have noted previously that the pest was

present in all the vineyard districts of northern California.Peter Britt obtained

grape cuttings from many places including California and from the eastern states.

Infected rooted plants easily disseminate the organism. Although this would have

been unlikely before 1887,after that time the Southern Pacific Railroad was

complete, and rooted material could have reached southern Oregon from almost

anywhere in California within a few days. The Rogue Valley vineyards, located

primarily near Jacksonville were in close proximity to one another so that if any

one of them had become infected, the others would have been susceptible. The

soil in the Jacksonville vineyards would not have discouraged the pest. Finally,

given the slow progress of the non-winged form, the effects could have gone

unnoticed for years or have been confused with other problems including neglect.

Given these hypothetical factors, could the Rogue Valley vineyards have

been infected? We cannot answer that question definitively. After the advent of

state and national prohibition, some vineyards would have been abandoned

unless a local or distant market was established. In neglected or abandoned

vineyards, infestation may have gone unrecognized.^

The State Department of Agriculture reported the presence of Phylloxera for the

first time in its biennial report in 1970.21 The organism was supposedly found in four counties. In a personal communication I learned that the infected vineyards were found in Jackson, Josephine, Douglas and Wasco Counties.22 Apparently much of this information has been lost, thus there is no written record and the information is anecdotal. Dr. Porter Lombard, former

Extension agent and Professor of Horticulture states that Phylloxera " was noted as early as the thirties in some of the vineyards".23 Although we cannot prove the existence of phylloxera, we might make some assumptions based on what we know about the organism and its natural history, its place in time and space and draw some conclusions.

Assume that the pest was actually present in the nineteen thirties in the

RogueValley, and was found in the nineteen sixties in three counties in southern

Oregon contiguous to California and to each other. When did it arrive, where did it come from, how did it get here and who introduced it? I believe it unlikely to have arrived before 1887 when the rail line was completed, making it feasible to ship rooted plants longer distances in a short time. It probably came from

California rather than the eastern United States because of proximity. Who introduced it? At the end of the century Peter Britt was still introducing new varieties. August Petard planted a new vineyard after 1900 and we do not know where he obtained his plant material. A, H.Carson in the Applegate Valley had developed a vineyard and nursery business in the late 19th century. Any of these growers could have unknowingly imported or disseminated infected plant material. If the organism was introduced early in the twentieth century and if it came from California, it would have been the wingless form and spread would have been very slow, explaining why it was not identified until much later. In addition, perhaps no one was looking since by that time, vineyards were no longer a viable commodity. Although we will never know, it would be ironic if

Peter Britt, the father of the industry in the valley, became an agent of its decline.

While Phylloxera may arguably have hastened the decline of grape

growing in the Rogue Valley, winemaking was brought to an abrupt halt in

January 1916 as a result of prohibition enacted by Oregon referendum in 1914.

This social phenomenon had been a long time coming.

The Beginning of the End: Intemperance, Temperance, and Prohibition

Our twenty first-century sensibilities might consider Prohibition to be an

aberration. When considered in the context of the history of the United States

however it becomes more understandable. It is a history of the role of alcoholic

beverages in our society, of temperance and intemperance, of religion and its

purview, of class, racial and religious intolerance, and the politicization of a

movement*.

[ Central to this history was the use of alcoholic beverages,"ardent spirits" or

intoxicating liquors in the lexicon of those opposed to its use.

From the very beginnings of European settlement in the American

northeast, alcohol was in the employ of the colonists as an uncontaminated

source of water, and a general tonic.24 The Christian Religion of the early settlers

did not preclude the temperate use of alcohol and vineyards were planted by the

Puritans soon after their settlement was established. In the 18th century whiskey

and rum were cheap and abundant. Whiskey became a concentrated portable

9 and saleable form of corn, which would otherwise have been difficult and expensive to transport from distant markets 25 With the easy, cheap and increasing availability of alcohol, particularly in the form of distilled spirits, intemperance became an increasing problem.

In the beginning the idea of temperance was based on the dual concepts of spiritual and physiological health. Although moral in character, the early temperance movement was not the exclusive province of the churches.26 In

1784, Benjamin Rush, America's foremost physician and signatory of the

Declaration of Independence, published An Inquiry Into the Effects of Ardent

Spirits on the Human Mind and Body .In that treatise he associated alcoholism with the social ills of crime, squandering of family income, breakdown of the family and moral degradation as well as the health risks of physical debilitation and death.27

By 1830 it appeared that temperance was not a viable concept and after that time the movement changed direction as the control became conservative and evangelistic, and the goal became abstinence.28 Evangelical Protestantism and temperance were symbiotic responses to the 19th century American phenomena of rapid industrialization, urbanization and immigration. Both sought to impart structure and control, a concept not inconsistent with the interests of the middle and upper classes who were threatened by the political and economic agenda of the non-Protestant immigrant masses.29 Thus issues of social class, religion, and ethnicity were intimately associated with temperance from early times. After 1833 the story of prohibition is that of increasing politicization as the dry movement gained control of national organizations. In 1851 Maine became the first state to elect prohibition 30 (Although the had enacted it in 1844). Congress passed the Internal Revenue Act in 1862,taxing beer, spirits and wine. The law had the effect of legitimizing the making and selling of spirits.31

After the Civil War the dry strategy changed to a constitutional approach. Kansas became the first state to enact prohibition by a state constitutional amendment.

The concept of a prohibition amendment to the U.S. Constitution was first proposed as part of the Prohibition Party platform.32 The movement gained momentum with the addition of the Women's Christian Temperance Movement

(W.C.T.U.) in 1874, and the Anti -Saloon League in 1895. The latter organization endorsed dry candidates of any party and soon the dries controlled state legislatures in the south, midwest and west. By 1919, thirty-three of forty-eight states were dry. The eighteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishing national prohibition was first proposed in 1914. It was passed by Congress in

1917, ratified by two thirds of the states by 1919 and became effective on 16

January1920.33

From early times wine had always been considered a beverage of moderation and temperance efforts were directed primarily at "ardent spirits". As the prohibition movement gained strength, wine and beer were not excluded. In the end the wine dominion underestimated the zeal of the reformers. While the dry forces knew what they wanted and how to get it, the wine people could only protest their innocence and hope for the best.34 In Oregon the movement began early. The provisional legislature passed legislation prohibiting the introduction, sale or distillation of ardent spirits in 1844, the first such law in the United States.35 In 1849 the law was repealed by the territorial legislature which enacted a bill allowing the sale of spirituous and vinous liquors in quantities of less than one quart, thus enabling saloons to operate.36 The Territorial Temperance Society was active after 1852 and endorsed the Maine Law.37 In 1859 a prohibition referendum was defeated.^Late in the century the W.C.T.U. and the Anti Saloon League became active in the state and in 1904 a local option referendum was passed. The Oregon Supreme

Court upheld this law allowing countywide prohibition.39 In 1914 a referendum to prohibit the manufacture, sale, and advertisement of intoxicating liquor, was placed on the ballot.^he national prohibition organizations extended considerable effort in the Oregon election. The referendum was approved by a vote of 136,842 to 100,362. Nine hundred saloons and eighteen breweries were closed 41 The number of wineries closed is not known but all would have been affected. In 1915 the legislature passed the Anderson Act implementing statewide prohibition. The law became effective 1 January1916.

It is impossible to accurately assess the impact of the state prohibition on wine making in the Rogue Valley. At the time of its enactment, the industry was in decline after the closure of Valley View.The Anderson Act declared that the possession of an Internal Revenue Stamp was prima facie evidence of illegality 42 Thus any winery which may have been bonded, and we have no evidence that there were any, would have had to cease operating. The growing of grapes and sale for table use could have continued but would have required a market. The sale for home winemaking was not to be an option for several more years as result of national prohibition and the Volstead Act.Thus it appears that the wine industry in the Valley succumbed on 1 January1916.

The Prohibition Years

The responses to Prohibition in Oregon and California could hardly been more divergent. The immediate response in Oregon after January, 1916 was a decrease in grape and wine production. The statistics are difficult to compare because of different reporting agencies and different criteria, but some are informative. The number of grapevines in Oregon fell from a high of 537,139 in

1899, to 381,300 in 1909 and to 361,484 in 1919. Grape production however increased from 1,421 tons in 1919, to 2,668 in 1929.43U.S. Internal Revenue

Statistics on production of fermented liquors showed that the volume fell from

181,272 barrels in 1915,44 to 106,260 barrels in 1916,45 to no reported production from 1918 through 1926.46 For purposes of comparison, if the grape production of 1929 had been made into wine, it would only have resulted in about 8000 barrels. Thus we see a picture of devastation in the wine-producing sector while grape production languished.

The Volstead Act, the enforcement legislation of the eighteenth amendment, went into effect on 16 January1920. 4,The constitutional banned the manufacture of intoxicating liquors, but as a concession to American farmers who had traditionally made hard cider and other beverages from homegrown fruit, an exception was granted. The exception stated that" the penalties provided in the act against the manufacture of liquors without a permit shall not apply to a person for manufacturing non-alcoholic ciders and fruit juices exclusively for use in his home, but such cider and fruit juices shall not be sold or delivered except to persons having permits to manufacture vinegar."48 Ironically and fatally for the Act, the term non- intoxicating was never defined for this exception, although the Act itself had defined it as„5% or more of alcohol by weight. Other exceptions to the act granted permission to make wine for sacramental and medicinal purposes, for flavoring, for industrial alcohol and for vinegar. Permits for home winemaking allowed a male, head of household, to make up to two hundred gallons of wine per year for family use. Because of this anomalous exception, wine production in the U.S. rose to over 75 million gallons per year, from, a pre- prohibition high of about 50 million gallons per year.49 The number of wineries fell from about 700 before prohibition to 140 in 1932. ^This paradox is easily explained by the exception to the Act.

Immediately after the onset of the new law, brokers began to purchase

California grapes for resale in populous eastern cities. Over the next few years grape prices escalated, initiated a cycle of increased grape planting and land speculation in California.Eventually an over supply resulted in price deflation31 At the distribution points in the eastern states, elaborate mechanisms evolved to distribute the grapes. The Pennsylvania Railroad developed an entire yard in the area to deal with California grapes, while grape brokers and street

peddlers were a common sight. (TH, 57) Purchasing the grapes were the

immigrant residents, for whom, wine was central to their religion or to their way of

life.52 The scene was played out in cities all over the U.S., with only local

variations.

Because of the necessity to ship fruit long distances grapes with thick

skins and good travelling potential were favored. Many immigrants preferred

grapes with high pigmentation. Thus the grape variety, Alicante Boushet claiming

both of these qualities,and never highly regarded before Prohibition or since, sold

at a premium and its acreage increased steadily.53

In the market, because of the proximity to the source, and

short shipping time, better varieties were available for the cities Italian, German

and French residents. In many cases the grapes were actually crushed and

pressed in the field and the juice delivered to the consumer, ready for fermentation.54

By 1927 the California Winegrowers Association formed in response to the

need to stabilize the market, which by that time was plagued by oversupply and falling prices. The growers turned to grape concentrate as a solution.

Concentrate could be easily produced and needed only rehydration and fermentation to produce wine. The production of the product was approved by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Prohibition and even endorsed by President -

elect Herbert Hoover. Fruit Industries a conglomerate of California wineries was formed to produce the concentrate which was aptly named Vine-Glo.ln October, 1931 however a Federal Court in Kansas City ruling on another case held that" anyone having any part in growing, producing, handling or selling any product he knew intended for making any beverage of more than .5% alcohol or greater, was violating the Volstead act".55 The ruling effectively ended the fruit concentrate business, but Fruit Industries continued to produce sacramental, medicinal and other wine products in conformity with the Act, and positioned itself well for the repeal the repeal of Prohibition56 With the election of Franklin

Roosevelt in 1932 prohibition was doomed and in December 1932 Congress proposed the 21st Amendment, which would repeal the 18th57 By December 1933 the number of wineries in California had Increased to 380,about one half of the pre prohibition figure.58 Thus the industry in California managed to survive, and position Itself for the post repeal recovery, while in Oregon with a four year handicap, recovery would not be realized for many years.

In the Rogue Valley commercial winemaking had ceased. However, at the home of August Petard just southwest of Jacksonville, wine making continued, resulting in one of the more curious episodes in the history of prohibition in the area.

August Petard I and his son had arrived in the USA from France In 1898. Looking for gold, they found only worked over mines in, California.Quitting there, they were enroute to the Alaska gold fields when they stopped in the Rogue Valley and visited Jacksonville.59.Petard, enamored of the Valley, purchased land above

Rich Gulch, where gold had been discovered in, fifty years earlier. Eventually he planted grapes on the slope and expanded his vineyard to twenty acres. He continued to prospect for gold in the gulch, and when his vines matured, he sold grapes to the Portland market, through brokers Levy and Spiegl.^He built a small winery on the property to make wine for his own use. He is known to have grown

Malaga and Flame Tokay grapes.61 and made wine with the excess grapes. His response to Oregon Prohibition is not known, but making wine would have been a violation of the Anderson Act after 1 January 1916. However, after 16 January

1920, his home wine making would have been legal under the Volstead Act.

Around 1 May 1924, after a complaint by the Medford W.C.T.U that Petard was selling wine to bootieggers, the Petard property was raided by the Sheriff, and over 600 gallons of wine in barrels and fifty quarts of wine in bottles were confiscated. The Petards insisted that the wine was for family use only62 On 3

May, Petard pleaded guilty and was convicted on two charges; first for the manufacture of intoxicating liquor and secondly for the possession of liquor. On the first charge he was fined and given a suspended sentence, and on the second, a fine. The sentence was criticized by the W.C.T.U. as not being severe enough. Petard insisted to the end that the wine was for his own use,but the confiscated wine was destroyed.63

The guilty plea is perplexing since under the Volstead act, Petard would have been allowed to make up to 200 gallons per year for his own use. If he had been found guilty of selling the wine, the sentence would likely have been more severe. I can only conclude that he probably did not bother to apply for the permit necessary for wine making at home and thus the penalties were minimal. There are interesting ethnic and religious issues here since the aged Frenchman was a Catholic in a community not known for its religious harmony.64 Petard died a few years later. 65

Petard was the last of the grape growers in the Valley during the prohibition years. Agriculture however was thriving in another dimension, one that had started about the same time as grapes but soon dominated fruit growing and maintained that position for many years.

The Ascendancy of Pears

Agriculture had already established a presence in the Valley when gold was discovered in 1851 66 By the eighteen seventies wheat, corn, grasses and range animals were part of subsistence agriculture.6' This began to change with the introduction of tree fruit. Miller credits Peter Britt with the planting of the first fruit trees in 1857,68 but others may have preceded him.E.K. Anderson apparently planted fruit on his land claim in the early 1850,3 and Henry

Barneburg planted the first Bartlett pear in 1855 along North Phoenix Road. In

1859 Orlando Coolidge planted a thirty five-acre nursery south of Ashland, and in

1865 John Norton planted the first d'Anjou pear.69

In the beginning these orchards provided fruit for the owners and their neighbors, since reliable transportation was not available until the arrival of the railroad from the north in 1884.J.H. Stewart planted the first commercial orchard in 1885, and after the completion of the rail line to the south, shipped the first

Rogue Valley fruit to outside markets.70 The next two decades witnessed incredible growth in the fruit industry of the

Valley, for which the railroad was largely responsible. In the earlier days, apple production outpaced that of pears, but after years of poor yield, poor markets, and orchard diseases, gave way to pears. The maximum production of apples, about 10,000 acres, was reached around 1910/1 As fruit production exceeded local demand and shipping increased, packing and cold storage facilities followed.'2 After 1902, thousands of acres were planted to pears.. Nurseries for tree propagation thrived as well. In 1910, one million pear trees were planted/3

The rapid orchard expansion was accompanied by a rapid population increase and a change in demographics. In 1907, Mrs. Potter Palmer, owner of Chicago's

Palmer Hotel, visited Medford. Captivated by the area, she purchased orchard land, which spurred a boom in land sales to wealthy easterners, many of whom relocated to the valley. The impaci on the previously agrarian economy was substantial and is still being felt. In addition to shipping fruit, the Southern Pacific

Railroad also contributed to the iand boom and to population increases with its heavy promotion of the Valley/4 By 1912 the initial boom had subsided, a victim of overspeculation lack of irrigation and cultural problems in the orchards/3

Because the Valley had become a significant fruit growing area, the Oregon

Agricultural College established a seventeen-acre Experiment station near Talent in 1911 .After passage of the Smith-Lever Act in 1914, enabling Agricultural

Extension Services, one of the first was established in Jackson County/6 With more scientific expertise available and with the establishment of irrigation and drainage, the pear industry continued to grow. Following the stock market crash of 1929, pear prices declined. The years of the depression were very difficult in the pear industry as low prices and grower income led to deterioration of orchards. During this period there was considerable consolidation in the industry with the defection of a number of small growers. From a high of four hundred growers In 1930 only about one hundred remained in 1975, although acreage remained the same.7'The number of boxes shipped increased from two thousand in 1890 to over two million in 1930, a staggering one thousand fold increase.78

Assuming that the total plantings in pears by 1930 was about twenty thousand acres, a figure based on the amount of available irrigation water, and assuming that the maximum planting of grapes never exceeded one hundred acres it can readily be calculated that the maximum grape acreage did not exceed about one half of one percent of the pear total. Considered in this context it is not difficult to understand why the grape industry could not compete.

Repeal and Beyond

We have noted earlier, that the industry in California, anticipating the repeal of prohibition, had begun to organize to that end. During ratification of the twenty- first amendment, the government permitted bonding of new wineries, so that by

December 1933,there were 380 bonded wineries. Many of these had continued in operation during prohibition making wine through exceptions to the Volstead

Act.79 Many factors contributed to the difficulties the wineries encountered in resuming operations. Experienced winemakers and workable equipment were in short supply. Vineyards had been replanted to less desirable grapes, the public had acquired a taste for sweet wine and many home wine makers wanted to continue their own winemaking.80

In 1934 the wine makers organized the Wine Institute a voluntary organization devoted to setting standards for the industry.81 The California

Marketing Act of 1937 enabled the passage of marketing orders for wine and wine grapes.82 The Wine Advisory Board was created as the marketing arm of the Wine Institute. Membership in the W.A.B. was mandatory and a tribute was exacted on each bottle of wine to support the activities of the Board. Wine sales increased significantly as a result of the efforts of that group. By 1934 there were over eight hundred wineries in the state.83

In Oregon the industry, moribund during prohibition, responded in the post repeal period and by 1938 there were twenty-eight bonded wineries and the production in that year exceeded one million gallons of wine.84 it is likely that a iarge part of this production was fruit wine since many vineyards would have been lost during the seventeen years of prohibition in Oregon. I am not aware that any wineries were bonded or operated in the Rogue Valley in this post repeal period.

Repeal came during the era of the depression and the years of World War

II followed. Oregon grape production continued to decline until the 1950's.85 Post War to Rebirth

In 1963, Dr. Porter Lombard arrived at the OSU Experiment and Extension

Station at Jacksonville. Dr. Lombard, the new station superintendent and

Associate Professor of Horticulture, was trained in Pomology (tree fruit culture)

and his primary responsibility was to conduct research in pears. His work

concentrated on rootstocks, crop cover and frost protection, it was noted earlier

that the Agricultural Experiment Station had been established in Jackson County

in 1911 and the Extension Office followed in 1914. Dr. Clifford Cordy had served

as extension Horticulturist from 1935 and was Dr. Lombard's predecessor. The

primary interest at the facilities was pear culture and understandably so since

that crop had dominated agriculture In the Valley for many years.

At the time of his arrival in theValiey, there was virtually no interest in

viticulture and except for a few old pre-prohibition vines and a few table grapes,

there was no crop. Lombard relates that Cordy, who was raised in the Napa

Valley, did not feel that the Rogue Valley was suitable for viticulture because of

its climate and soils which were different from those in the Napa Valley. Dr.

Lombard might have accepted that view had he not become aware of the work of

Walter Clore in the Yakima Valley of Washington. Clore, working at the

Washington State University Extension Service at Prosser, was experimenting with European Vinifera wine grapes to determine their viticultura! potential in. the

Yakima Valley. Lombard, having been raised in the Yakima Valley realized that the climate there was quite comparable to that of the Rogue Valley. In 1966-67 he visited both the Napa Valley and the Prosser facility and returned with plans to conduct trials in the Rogue Valley.In 1968 an experimental vineyard with eight varieties was planted at Jacksonville. At the same time small plots were planted in the Appiegate Valley and at Grants Pass.( these were later abandoned) The initial plantings included Pinot Noir, Chardonnay, Riesling, And Gewurztraminer among others.Several years later the vineyard was expanded to over twenty varieties. Many of the varieties performed well at this site including Chardonnay,

Gewurztraminer, Muscat Blanc, Sauvignon Blanc, Semillon, Sylvaner, White

Riesling, Cabernet Sauvignon, Pinot Noir and Zinfandel.

In the early 1970's growers interest in viticulture in the Rogue Valley began to increase and vineyards were planted by John Osterhout, Dunbar Carpenter, Dick

Troon and Frank Wisnovsky.The latter produced wine and marketed it under the

Valley View label, becoming the first post repeal winery in the valley.

Transferred to Corvallis in 1981, Dr. Lombard spent the next few years as professor of horticulture at Oregon State University and became well acquainted with grape growing and winemaking in the , which was undergoing a rapid and significant expansion. By the time he returned to the

Rogue Valley in the 1991 a small but vibrant industry was in place.86 Conclusion

After 1900 the wine and grape industry in the Rogue Valley declined.

Although cultural practices and grapevine diseases may have hastened the decline, it is difficult to prove in the absence of firm data. It is likely that factors outside the industry were more important.

Prohibition sentiment was everywhere apparent by the turn of the century.

It would have been neither wise nor prudent to expand wine production capacity in such a milieu. Lacking winery capacity, vineyard acreage could not be expanded without the certainty of a locai market or a distant one accessible by rail. Although several local viticulturists had established such markets in the

Pacific Northwest, competition from growers in California with its half million acres of grapes would have been formidable.

While the grape-based industry in the Valley was declining, agricultural activity was undergoing a rapid expansion. Led by pears and apples, thousands of acres were planted in the boom years up to about 1912. The vast acreage planted in pears totally eclipsed the grape plantings.

During Prohibition , which began four years earlier in Oregon, wine production ceased and the old vineyards,except for a few growing table grapes, were neglected or abandoned.

At repeal of Prohibition, the infrastructure for a viable wine industry in the

Rogue Valley was gone. By contrast, California, with is huge grape acreage and a cadre of surviving wineries aided by a mandatory marketing strategy, quickly assumed the lead in the wine industry in the United States.

Once gone, interest in the wine business in the Valley would not be revived during the stagnant economy of the post repeal depression or the preoccupations of World War II. In the post war period the pear industry continued to dominate agriculture in the valley with the official blessing of the

Oregon State University Extension Service

It was not untii the late 1960s that the Agricultural Experiment Station, through the foresight of supervisor Porter Lombard, laid the groundwork for the future of the Industry, in establishing a successful experimental vineyard at the

Station near Jacksonville, the area was again proven to be congenial to the cultivation of premium wine grapes. Soon thereafter a number of local vineyards had been planted, and wineries established, leading to the renaissance of the industry. Appendix A

Grower Source: Source: The Source: Portland Ashland( Oregon) Resources of Oregonian 29 Tidings 20 Southern March 1903 December 1889 Oregon, The Southern Oregon State Board of Agriculture, Salem, Ore. 1890 Peter Britt 6 A , 3A bearing 5 acres, all made 12A 1887,2000 gallons into wine, nearly 1889,1000 gallons all kinds of >40 varieties grapes, many experimental Raphael Morat 10 acres, 43,000 10 A,Mission and Not mentioned lb., 1700 gal. Sweetwater wine.200gallon,br grapes, yield,2-5 andy.balance sent tons/ A, Makes to Portland brandy Emile Barbe 6 acres, 1200 6 acres,Mission 18 acres gallons wine, and Sweetwater, Miller Mission and half to wine, half Sweetwater to market grapes JNT Miller 16 acres, yield 22 20 acres.2-5 tons 20 acres tons, 800 gal. /acre, half to Wine, balance to market, remainder Portland, Miller into wine, Miller Mission and Mission, Sweetwater, total Sweetwater and of 25 varieties. 20 other varieties, many new. Others:, W.T. Leever, Dr. G. Sears,4 acres, CD Reed, 5acres E.P. Geary, Conrad Lever,4 Granville Sears, J.H. Stewart acres, Dr. George 6, acres Mrs. Straub De Bar,8 acres, Dr. Geary,8 acres Martin Last, C.D.Reed, 8 acres Frank Lorraine Bernard Lorraine Mr. Hurburger Mr. Christian Mr. Beavenue Mr. Lampert J.H. Stewart I Willard Brown. " Wine in the Rogue Valley: Peter Britt and the Beginnings"(Unpublished Manuscript. Southern Oregon University, 1999), 14. " The Resources of Southern Oregon, The Southern Oregon State Board of Agriculture. Salem, Oregon. 1890,51. 3 Portland Oregonian, March 29, 1903, 59. 4 Ray Lewis, "Auguste Petard and the Volstead Act" The Newsletter of the Southern Oregon Historical Society I, no.8, (1981): 14. J Portrait and Biographical Record of (Chicago, Chapman Publishing Company, 1904), 336. 6 Alan Clark Miller, " Peter Britt: Pioneer Photographer of the Siskivous"(MA Thesis, Trinitv College, 1972), 199. '"Income Book, Valley View Winery"(1893-1907) Collection of The Southern Oregon Historical Society. Medford, Oregon. 8 Farmers Directory: Jackson County Oregon and Siskiyou County Cali fornia, 1921-23,115. 9 A.J.Winkler, J. A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer andL.A. Lider, General Viticulture (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974), 539. 10 Winkler, General Viticulture, 541. II Winkler, General Viticulture, 542. Beniadine C. Strik "Grape Phylloxera" in Oregon Winegrape GroM'ers Guide ed. Ted Casteel 3d ed.(Portland. Oregon: The Oregon Winegrowers Association, 1992), 187. 13 Strik. " Grape Phylloxera", 188. 14 Tim Unwin, Wine and the Vine (London: Routledge. 1991), 285. 13 Unwin, Wine and the Vine, 291. 16 Ruth Teiser and Catherine Harroun, Winemaking in California (New York: McGraw- Hill, 1983), 104. 1 Thomas Pimiey, A History of Wine in America: From the Beginnings to Prohibition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989), 345. 18 John N. Hutchinson, "Northern California From Haraszthy to the Beginnings of Prohibition" in The Book of California Wine, eds. Doris Muscatine, Maynard A. Amerine, and Bob Thompson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 39. 19 Unwin, Wine and the Vine, 284. 20 Strik, "Grape Phylloxera", 187. 21 Oregon Agri-Record (Salem, Oregon: State Department of Agriculture, no.248, Dec.. 1970), 19. 22 Personal communication from Edward [email protected].,4Novemberl999. 3 Porter Lombard, interview by Willard Brown, tape recording, 11 November 1999, "J Robert C. Fuller, Religion and Wine (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1996), 75. " Pimiey, Wine in America, 426. 26 Pimiey, Wine in America, All. 27 Fuller, Religion and Wine, 78. ~8 Pimiey, Wine iiiuimerica, 431. i9 Fuller, Religion and Wine, 79-80. 30 Piimey, Wine in America, 431. 31 Pimiey, Wine in America, 432. 3~ Pinney, Wine in America, 433. 33 Piimey, Wine in America, 434. 14 Piimey, Wine in America, 436. 35 Caswell. Joint Edwards. "The Prohibition Movement in Oregon to the Adoption of Statewide Prohibition in 1914 " (Thesis, MA, University of Oregon, 1937), 24. 36 Caswell, " The Prohibition Movement in Oregon". 31. 3 Caswell, " The Proliibition Movement in Oregon", 33. 38 Caswell, " The Proliibition Movement in Oregon", 37. 39 Caswell, " The Proliibition Movement in Oregon", 39. 40 « 'Liquor Control, Temperance, and the Call for Proliibition" Oregon State Archives, 50th Anniversary Exhibit, (accessed 12 October 1999),available at: http://arcweb.sos. or. gov/SO^/proliibitionl/temperance.html

41 Caswell " The Proliibition Movement in Oregon", 90. 42 Caswell " The Proliibition Movement hi Oregon",91 43 The Industry: Historical Perspectives and the current Production and Cost Situation (Corvallis: Oregon State University Extension Service, EM 8264, January 1984), 3. 44 Annual. Report ofthe Commissioner of Internal Revenue, For the Year Ending June 30, 1915. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1915), 131. 43 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, For the Year Ending June 30, 1916 (Waslimgton: Government Printing Office, 1916), 145. 46 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue,For the Year Ending June 30, 1918 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1918) 168.The same documents for the years 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923,1924, 1925,and 1926 were examined and there was no reported fermented liquor production hi Oregon in any of those years. 47 Ruth Teiser and Catherine Harroim " The Volstead Act, Rebirth, and Boonf'in The Book of California Wine. eds. Doris Muscatine, Maynard A. Amerine, and Bob Thompson (Berkeley: University of California Press/Sotheby Publications, 1984), 51. 45 Teiser and Harroun,, "The Volstead Act", 50-51 49 Teiser and Harroun, "The Volstead Act", 51. 50 Teiser and Harroun, " The Volstead Act", 53-54. 51 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 56-57. 54 Teiser and Harroun, " The Volstead Act", 57. 53 Teiser and Harroun, " The Volstead Act", 58. 34 Teiser and Harroun," The Volstead Act", 60-61. 35 Teiser and Harroim. "The Volstead Act", 65. 313 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 66. 3 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 66. 38 Teiser and Harroim," The VoOlstead Act", 68. 59 Ray Lewis, " Auguste Petard and the Volstead Act", The Newsletter of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, I,no. 8(1981),14. 60 Ray Lewis, "Auguste Petard and the Volstead Act", 14. 61 August Petard III, personal communication by telephone,26 October 1999. 62 The MedfordMail Tribune, 1 May 1924,1. 63 The Medford , 3 May 1924,6. 64 Zita Dorothy Marie Singler Maddox, Oral History Interview, by Maijorie Edens, Tape 178A, 23 January 1981.The Southern Oregon Historical Society. Medford, Oregon. 65 Ray Lewis, " Auguste Petard and the Volstead Act", 16. 66 Alan Clark Miller, " Peter Britt", 20. 6 Kay Atwood, Blossoms and Branches a gathering of Rogue Valley orchard memories, (Medford. Oregon, Gandee Printing Center, 1980), 4. 68 Alan Clark Miller, " Peter Britt",89. 69 Atwood. Blossoms and Branches, 3. 70 Clifford B.Cordy, " History of the Rogue Valley Fruit Industry",(Unpublished manuscript. Central Point. Oregon, 1977), 2. 1 Cordy, "History of Rogue Valley Fruit Industry",8. 12 Cordy, "History of Rogue Valley Fruit", 10.

73 Atwood, Blossoms and Branches, 42. 4 Atwood. Blossoms and Branches, 38. 75 Catherine A. Noah, " Age of Speculation and Orchard Boom", in Land in Common: An Illustrated History of Jackson County, Oregon, ed., Joy B. Drum (Medford. Oregon: Southern Oregon Historical Society, 1993), 67. 76 Cordy, " History of Rogue Valley Fruit", 11-12. 77 Cordy, " History of Rogue Valley Fruit", 28. 8 Atwood,Blossoms and Branches, 11. 79 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 68.

80 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 70. 81 Teiser and Harroim, " The Volstead Act", 70. 82 The Oregon Wine Industry, OSU Extension, 3. 83 Teiser and Harroun, "The Volstead Act", 72. 84 The Oregon Wine Industry, OSU Extension, 3. 83 The Oregon Wine Industry, OSU Extension, 3. 86 Porter Lombard, interview by Willard Brown, tape recording. 11 November 1999. Works Cited

Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, For the year Ending June30, 1915. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1915. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, For the year Ending June30, 1916. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1916. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, For the year Ending June30, 1918. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1918. Atwood, Kay. Blossoms and Branches: a gathering of Rogue Valley orchard memories. Medford, Oregon: Gandee Printing Center 1980. Brown, Willard. Wine in the Rogue Valley: Peter Britt and the Beginnings. Caswell, John Edwards. "The Prohibition Movement in Oregon to the Adoption of Statewide Prohibition In 1914". M.A. Thesis, University of Oregon, 1937. Cordy, Clifford B. "History of the Rogue Valley Fruit Industry." Unpublished Manuscript, Central Point, Oregon, 1977. Farmer's Directory: Jackson County Oregon and Siskiyou County California, 1921-23. Collection of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, Medford, Oregon. Fuller, Robert C. Religion and Wine. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1966. Hutchinson, John N. " Northern California From Haraszthy to the Beginnings of Prohibition"in The Book of California Wine. University of California Press/ Sotheby Publications, 1984. Income Book, Valley View Winery, 1893-1907. Collection of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, Medford, Oregon Lewis, Ray. " Auguste Petard and the Volstead Act." In The Newsletter of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, I, no. 8,1981. Liquor Control, Temperance, and the Call for Prohibition. 50th Anniversary Exhibit.available at http://arcweb.sos.or.gov/50th/prohibition1/temperance.html Lombard, Porter. Oral History Interview by Willard Brown. Tape recording and unpublished manuscript, 11 November 1999. Maddox, Zita Dorothy Marie Singler.Oral History Interview by Marjorie Edens, Tape 178A, 23 January 1981. The Southern Oregon Historical Society, Medford Oregon. Medford Mail Tribune. Medford, Oregon, 1May 1924. Medford Mail Tribune. Medford, Oregon, 3May 1924. Miller, Alan Clark. " Peter Britt Pioneer Photographer of the Siskiyous." M. A. Thesis, Trinity College, 1972. Noah, Catherine A. " Age of Speculation and Orchard Boom."in, Land in Common: an Illustrated History of Jackson County, Oregon, ed. Joy B. Dunn. Medford, Oregon: The Southern Oregon Historical Society, 1993. Oregon Agri-Record.Salem, Oregon: State Department of Agriculture, no.248, December 1970. Oregon Wine Industry: Historical Perspectives and the Current Production and Cost Situation.Corvallis: Oregon State University Extension Service, EM8264, January 1984. Pinney, Thomas. A History of Wine in America from the Beginnings to Prohibition.Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. Portland Oregonian. 29 March 1903. Portrait and Biographical Record of Western Oregon. Chicago: Chapman Publishing Company, 1904. Resources of Southern Oregon. Salem, Oregon: The Southern Oregon State Board of Agriculture, 1890. Strik, Bernadine." Grape Phylloxera."in Oregon Winegrape Growers Guide." ed. Ted Casteel 3d,ed. Portland, Oregon: The Oregon Winegrowers Association, 1992. Teiser, Ruth and Catherine Harroun." The Volstead Act, Rebirth and Boom."in The Book of California Wine,eds., Doris Muscatine, Maynard A. Amerine, and Bob Thompson. Berkeley: The University of California Press/ Sotheby Publications, 1984. Teiser, Ruth and Catherine Harroun. Winemaking in California. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983. Unpublished Manuscript, 1999. Unwin, Tim. Wine and the Vine. London: Routledge, 1991. Winkler, A.J., J.A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer, and L.A.Lider, General Viticulture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974.