Site Characteristics of Vineyards in the Rogue and Applegate Valley American Viticultural Areas

Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley American Viticultural Areas

W E

Major Highways County B orders AV A Boundaries

Elevation (feet) 0 - 1000 1000 - 2 000 2000 - 3 000 3000 - 4 000 4000 - 5 000 5000 - 6 000 6000 - 7 000 7000 - 8 000 8000 - 9 000 9000 - 1 0000

Sou rce s: Ca rt ogra phe rs : 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Miles Jackso n C ou nty GIS Services Gre go ry V . Jo ne s Josep hine C ou nty G IS S ervices Lea Lig ht Ore go n G eosp atia l Da ta C le aringh ou se (OG DC ) Sou the rn Oreg on U niversity BATF Ap prove d V iticultu ra l Area (D igitize d) Ro gue Va lle y C ha pte r of the OW A 1/1 8/0 1

Gregory V. Jones, Ph.D. Geography Department Southern Oregon University

Lea Light Geography Department

Southern Oregon University

Site Characteristics of Vineyards in the Rogue Valley American Viticultural Area

Gregory V. Jones, Ph.D. Geography Department Southern Oregon University

Lea Light Geography Department Southern Oregon University

September 2001

Funding for this project was provided from a matching grant from the Rogue Valley Chapter of the Oregon WineGrape Growers Association and the Oregon Wine Advisory Board

Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 2 TABLE OF FIGURES ...... 4 TABLE OF TABLES ...... 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 6 SUMMARY ...... 7 INTRODUCTION ...... 9 History ...... 9 Climate ...... 3 Topography and Soils ...... 2 DATA AND METHODS ...... 4 RESULTS ...... 6 GPS Survey ...... 6 Vineyard Survey ...... 6 CONCLUSIONS ...... 15 REFERENCES ...... 20 APPENDIX ...... 22

Table of Figures Figure 1 – Map depicting the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs and vineyard locations and acreage from the GPS survey...... 2 Figure 2 – Annual Precipitation for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000)...... 2 Figure 3 – The frost-free period for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs as defined by the length of time between the median dates of the last and first frosts in a given year (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000)...... 3 Figure 4 – Growing degree-days for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs summed from April to October using a 50F base temperature (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000)...... 4 Figure 5 – Example of vineyard locations surveyed using GPS in the upper Bear Creek Valley...... 2 Figure 6 – Survey acreage percent by variety for the Rogue Valley AVA...... 2

Table of Tables Table 1 – Climate characteristics for each of the available public recording stations in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 3 Table 2 – Median frost dates and frost-free season for each of the available public recording stations in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 2 Table 3 – Size distribution for all vineyards in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 7 Table 4 – Vineyard statistics for individual sub-regions in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 7 Table 5 – Descriptive statistics for topographical variables of elevation, slope, and aspect derived from a digital elevation model for all vineyards in the Rogue Valley AVA and sub-regions...... 2 Table 6 – Summary of cardinal directions for all vineyard aspects in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 3 Table 7 – The most common soil series or units, the acres encompassed, and the number of vineyards with that soil type for the entire Rogue Valley AVA (NRCS, 2001; Soil Conservation Service, 1983 and 1993)...... 3 Table 8 - The most common soil series or units, the acres encompassed, and the number of vineyards with that soil type for the sub-regions of the Rogue Valley AVA; a) the Applegate Valley, b) the Bear Creek Valley, c) the Illinois Valley, and d) the Valley of the Rogue (NRCS, 2001; Soil Conservation Service, 1983 and 1993)...... 5 Table 9 – The number of vineyards established by decade in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 6 Table 10 – Surveyed acreage of all varietals grown, summarized for the Rogue Valley AVA and each sub- area...... 2 Table 11 - Survey results summarized over all varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA for the types of rootstocks, trellis styles, and pruning styles used...... 4

Table 12 – Survey results summarized for the eleven main varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 5 Table 13 – Topographical characteristics of the major varieties planted in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 7 Table 14 - Survey results summarized for the phenological timing average over all varieties, red varieties, and white varieties grown in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 8 Table 15 - Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA...... 10 Table 16 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Was a Soil Survey conducted and if so by whom?” ...... 11 Table 17 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Is the site irrigated and if so what type of irrigation is used?” ...... 12 Table 18 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Does the site have any sort of frost protection and if so what type is used?” ...... 12

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the Oregon Wine Advisory Board and the Rogue Chapter of the Oregon Winegrowers’ Association for the funding necessary to complete this project. The author also owes gratitude to numerous individuals that provided various levels of information, data, or background to the project and include Laura Lotspiech, Don and Traute Moore, Will Brown, George Converse at Pacific Survey and Supply, Jason Wegener with Josephine County GIS Services, Keith Massie with Jackson County GIS Services, and the faculty in the Geography Department at Southern Oregon University. But more importantly, thanks goes out to all of the growers in the Rogue Valley for being a part of what is hoped to be a valuable piece of research. Moreover, thanks goes to those growers that lent the author their various forms of motorized vehicles to get around their vineyard. Finally, special thanks goes to Liz, Adam, and Curtis Jones, without whose understanding and love this project would not have been possible.

Summary A combined ground and paper survey in the Rogue Valley AVA has documented the locations, characteristics, and general background of vineyards in the region. The results have provided a baseline of knowledge, from which existing and future grape growers can better understand the overall nature of grape growing and make informed decisions when establishing new sites or altering existing ones. Vineyard development has grown tremendously over the last thirty-one years, with all indications for continued growth in the decade to come. While vineyards vary greatly in size, the majority are between 1-15 acres with a median of 5.7 acres. Topographically, vineyards are found from just less than 900 feet to nearly 2500 feet with an average elevation of 1566 feet. Slopes vary from 2-13%, with an average of 7% with mostly SE to SW aspects, although nearly 20% are on flat sites. Over 100 different soil types are found on the vineyard sites with the Ruch, Central Point, Manita-Vannoy, and Darow complexes being the most common. By variety, Merlot is the most planted red variety (26% of all acreage) followed by Pinot Noir and Cabernet Sauvignon. The largest planted white variety is Chardonnay (11.9% of all acreage) followed by Pinot Gris and White Riesling. Numerous varieties are planted to small amounts of acreage indicating experimentation for more suitable or more marketable types. Plant and management characteristics reveal that, across all varieties and sites, that most plants are self-rooted (40%) with 3309 and 101-14 rootstocks also common. Vertical shoot positioning represents 63.6% of all trellis systems used while cane is the most common pruning method (55.1% of all methods used). In terms of the timing of plant growth (phenology) for the region, budburst is a mid-April event, flowering occurs most frequently in mid-June, véraison happens generally in the last week of August, and harvest commences over a three-week period starting the first week of October. From the surveyed data, the intervals between phenological events average 59-65 days from budburst to flowering, 66-81 days from flowering to véraison, 40-48 days from véraison to harvest, 116-125 days from flowering to harvest, and 176-186 days from budburst to harvest.

Of the 71 responding vineyard owners, 54% owned their land and then decided to grow grapes with nearly two-thirds devoting the land solely to the vineyard and a personal residence. Other uses include commercial orchards, various field crops, and forest resources. During the development stage, 65% of all growers conducting some form of soil analysis, with many using the local county soil survey and others conducting annual or biannual laboratory analyses. The vast majority of all growers use irrigation (96%) with drip systems the most common and 34% use frost protection with overhead sprinklers and wind machines the most frequently used. Vineyard owners indicated that networking between growers was very important in obtaining the initial knowledge needed to grow grapes in the region. Many also indicated obtaining formal education or attending seminars at various institutions and at meetings of the local chapter of the Oregon Winegrowers’ Association. Still others relied heavily on the OWA’s guide to growing grapes and other viticulture publications. Still others indicated the “school of hard knocks” was the most influential. When asked what they would change about their operations, three broad themes were evident; 1) “better planning, site selection, and site preparation", 2) “plant more red varieties and less white varieties,” and 3) “alter row spacing, vine spacing, and trellis type.” When asked “if they had more acreage and resources, what they would plant and why,” most indicated paying greater attention to the “marketability” and “profitability” of both existing and potential varieties. Many indicated that they would plant more reds, including Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Zinfandel, Pinot Noir, Syrah, Cabernet Franc, Tempranillo, Sangiovese, Dolcetto, and Malbec. Numerous responses also indicated a desire to plant more white varieties such as Pinot Gris, Viognier, Gewurztraminer, White Riesling, and Pinot Blanc. Still others indicated that they would not plant any more grapes, thinking that the market was not open to more production at this time. Overall, the data derived in the research should be viewed as the initial establishment of a database that can be immediately useful and provide for longitudinal studies of the changing nature of grape growing in the region. As the region continues to grow in terms of acreage planted, the number of growers, and production, it will be important to continually document the nature of the industry to be more viable economically.

Introduction

The Rogue Valley American Viticultural Area (AVA) is the southern-most winegrape-growing region of Oregon and is located entirely within Jackson and Josephine counties (Code of Federal Regulations, 2000: Figure 1). Established in 1991, the Rogue Valley AVA offers over 15,000 potential acres for growing winegrapes. Within the region, there is a diverse array of landscapes and climates that offers the various conditions needed to produce both cool and warm-climate grape varieties. While the region offers many areas for winegrape growing, it can be roughly divided into three main sub-regions: the Bear Creek Valley, the Applegate Valley, and the Illinois Valley. Recently, the Applegate Valley was approved as a viticultural area lying wholly within the Rogue Valley AVA (Federal Register, 2000). Geographically, the Rogue Valley AVA is bounded to the west and south by the Klamath-Siskiyou Mountains and to the east by the Cascades. The Illinois River, the Applegate River, and Bear Creek drain the valleys with each emptying into the Rogue River and ultimately the Pacific Ocean.

History Grape growing and wine making in the Rogue Valley AVA owes its origin to Peter Britt planting grapes in Jacksonville in the mid-1850s1. By 1866, it was documented that Britt was making wine and, after losing a wine tax appeal to the Internal Revenue Office, started a legal operation named Valley View Vineyard. During the late 1800s, Britt brought in over 200 varieties of grapes from California and the Eastern United States, conducting the first trials for varietals in the area. Documents show that Britt grew Bordeaux, Burgundy, German, Alsatian, North American, and hybrid varieties. In 1890, the Oregon State Board of Agriculture produced a report on grape acreage showing over a dozen growers in the region, mostly concentrated off Old Stage Road near Jacksonville, growing approximately 100 acres of grapes. Around this time, A. H. Carson established the first vineyard in the Applegate Valley and sold table grapes locally. Most of the growers were growing Mission and Sweetwater (Palomino) grapes

1 The historical information mentioned here is from “Wine in the Rogue Valley: Peter Britt and the Beginning” and “Wine in the Rogue Valley: From Peter Britt to Rebirth,” unpublished manuscripts by Willard Brown (1999).

Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley

CR ATER LAK E HW American Viticultural Areas 62

W E

S #

SH AD Y CO VE

# BUTTE FAL LS

M E RL IN R # O A D

EA GLE GRA NTS P OIN T # GO LD P ASS ROGUE # H ILL RIV ER R # # OGUER IVER ## # CENTRAL P OINT # OL D STA G E R D #

# MEDF ORD # ## JA CKSON VIL LE # ## # ### # # ####### # Map Lege nd # SOUTH STAGE RD

38 W 2 ### H # # # PHO EN IX Vineyards (acres) P I O # NE # ER #RD ME DFO # # RD - # PRO # VO L # T HW # < 5 # 238 # # # # TA LENT # 5 - 15 ## # # EK # E # CR # Y RK # A CA VE E # 15 - 30 # #G JU NCTIO N # # ## L I T LE AP PL 30 - 60 EG AT ASHL AN D #E R # # # D # # # > 6 0 # Rogue Va lley AVA #

D # R E T A G E L Appl egate Va lley AVA P

Riv ers & Lak es

City Limits Major Roads Inters ta te 5 Secondary H ighway s Sources: Cartographers: Secondary R oads Jackson County GIS Services Gregory V. Jones and Lea Light 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Miles Josephine County GIS Services Southern Oregon University Oregon Geospatial Data Clearinghouse (OGDC) 1/18/01 USDA Approved Viticultural Area (Digitized) Rogue Valley Chapter of the OWA

Figure 1 – Map depicting the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs and vineyard locations and acreage from the GPS survey.

from Peter Britt’s cuttings. The report is unclear as to the market for these grapes; however, it is thought that some went into local wine or brandy production, some was sold locally as table grapes, but that the vast majority went to the Portland market as table grapes. After Britt died in 1905, Valley View Vineyards went downhill and was defunct by 1907. In 1916, Oregon enacted state prohibition, which closed all wineries in Oregon and in 1920, National Prohibition was established. During prohibition, there are records of at least one local table grape grower who was convicted of the manufacturing and possession of intoxicating liquor. In 1933, Prohibition was repealed nationally and many wineries quickly opened in Oregon, but none in the Rogue Valley. During the next forty years, very little grape growing activity beyond small backyard vineyards occurred in the region. In the early 1960s, Oregon’s post-prohibition winegrape pioneer, Richard Sommer, examined the Rogue Valley as a potential area to grow grapes. Concluding that the Rogue Valley might be too hot, he eventually established a vineyard and winery (Hillcrest Vineyard) west of Roseburg, in the Umpqua Valley. In 1968, an experimental vineyard, established by Porter Lombard, was planted at the Oregon State University Extension Center in Jacksonville. In 1972, Frank Wisnovsky planted Valley View Vineyard near Ruch, in the Applegate Valley and produced the first legal wine in the region since Peter Britt. Others soon followed in the early to mid 1970s including John Ousterhout, Dunbar Carpenter, Roger Layne, Dick Troon, and Ted Gerber. By 1987, the first year a comprehensive survey was conducted by the Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service, the region had 38 vineyards with 302 acres and five wineries crushing 514 tons of winegrapes. Today, the Rogue Valley AVA has 78 vineyards with 1334 acres planted to vines, which are increases of 105 and 342 percent from 1987, respectively (Oregon Vineyard and Winery Reports, 1987-2000). In addition, the number of wineries has grown to twelve and the total amount of grapes crushed has increased to 1645 tons (140 and 220 percent increases, respectively). Grape varieties commonly grown in the Rogue Valley AVA today include Merlot, Pinot Noir, Cabernet Sauvignon, Chardonnay, Pinot Gris, Riesling, and Gewurztraminer. In addition, plantings of Cabernet Franc, Pinot Blanc, Early Muscat, Gamay Noir, Zinfandel, Malbec, and Syrah are increasing.

Climate In comparison to the other winegrape growing regions in Oregon, the Rogue Valley AVA has the highest elevations, but is overall the warmest and driest region. The general north-south tending valleys, their proximity to the Pacific Ocean, and their intervening topographical barriers create a climate transect of wetter and cooler conditions in the western parts of the region to the warmer and drier eastern areas. Precipitation varies from 12-60 inches across the region, declining in amount from west to east in the sub-regions (Table 1 and Figure 2). Overall, less than 15 percent of the total precipitation occurs during the growing season of April through October. The

Table 1 – Climate characteristics for each of the available public recording stations in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Station (Elevation) Average July Average Average Mean Growing Precipitation Maximum January Growing Degree Days (inches) Temperature Minimum Seasona (Apr-Oct., (ºF) Temperature Temperature 50ºF base) (ºF) (ºF) Applegate (1276 ft.) NAb NA NA NA 25.6 Ashland (1750 ft.) 86.8 29.6 60.2 2338 19.2 Cave Junction (1280 ft.) 88.5 31.9 60.7 2403 59.8 Grants Pass (960 ft.) 90.1 32.7 63.1 2870 31.1 Medford Airport (1300 ft.) 90.5 30.1 62.6 2815 18.9 Medford Exp. Station 88.8 30.1 61.2 2490 21.2 (1457 ft.) Ruch (1549 ft.) 89.3 29.7 61.3 2531 26.0 Williams (1450 ft.) NA NA NA NA 33.7 *All data are from the 1961-1990 climate normals for that station, except for Applegate and Williams which are from monthly climate summaries over for 1979-1998 and 1900-1998, respectively (Oregon Climate Service, 1993 and WRCC, 2001). aApril through October bNA = data not available. growing season averages 155-185 days (Figure 3) with the average last and first frosts occurring on May 10 and October 10, respectively (median frost dates defined for 32ºF averaged across all stations, Table 2). The growing season length is shorter in the Rogue Valley AVA than those found in the other AVAs due to higher elevations that bring later and earlier frost potential in the spring and fall, respectively. Growing degree- days exhibit a similar spatial trend with values ranging from 2200 to nearly 2900 from west to east (Table 1 and Figure 4).

Annual Precipitation

W E # S

# # # # #

# # #

# ## ## # # Coun ties # # # #### ## ### ## AVA Boun daries # ## # # # # # # # # Vineyards # # # # # # # # # # # Annual Precipitation (in.) # # ## # # # ## # # ## 0 - 10 # # # # 10 - 15 # # 15 - 20 # # 20 - 30

30 - 40

40 - 60

60 - 80

80 - 100

Figure 2 – Annual Precipitation for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000).

Frost Free Period

W E # S

# # # ## #

# # #

# # ## ## # # # # Counties #### ## ### ## # ## AVA Boundaries # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Vineyards # # # # # # # # # # Frost Free Pe riod (Days ) # # # ### # # # 140 - 160 # # 160 - 180 # # 180 - 200 #

200 - 220

> 220

Figure 3 – The frost-free period for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs as defined by the length of time between the median dates of the last and first frosts in a given year (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000).

Growing Season (Apr-Oct) Growing Degree Days

W E

# S

# # # ## #

# # #

# # ## ## # # # # ##### ## ### Counties ## # ## # # # # AVA Boundaries # # # # # # # # # # # # Vineyards # # # ## # # # # # # ## Growing Degree Da ys ## # # 2000 - 2200 # # 2200 - 2400 # # 2400 - 2600 #

2600 - 2800

2800 - 3000

> 3000

Sou rce s: Ca rt ogra phe rs : 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Miles PR ISM M app ing Project , OS U Gre go ry V . Jo ne s an d L ea Ligh t BATF Ap prove d V iticultu ra l Area (D igitize d) Sou the rn Oreg on U niversity Ro gue Va lle y C ha pte r of the OW A 1/1 8/0 1 Figure 4 – Growing degree-days for the Rogue Valley and Applegate Valley AVAs summed from April to October using a 50F base temperature (PRISM Mapping Project, OSU 2000).

Topography and Soils The landscape of the Rogue Valley AVA is extremely diverse, offering numerous vineyard sittings on isolated hills, stream terraces or benches, and at the foot of alluvial fans. Most potential and existing vineyard sites range from near 900 ft. in the lower Rogue River area near Grants Pass to over 2200 ft. in the upper reaches of the Bear Creek Valley. Isolated hills are generally found separated from the surrounding mountains in the broader stretches of the valleys. Good examples can be found from the mid to upper Bear Creek Valley and in the Illinois Valley. Hillside terraces or benches are found throughout the region, with the majority above the main river and stream reaches. Probably the most common potential and existing vineyard locations occur on the footslopes of the surrounding mountains. Footslopes represent

Table 2 – Median frost dates and frost-free season for each of the available public recording stations in the Rogue Valley AVA. Frost- Median Date of Last Spring Median Date of First Fall Free Occurrence Occurrence Period Station (# of days last 24ºF 28ºF 32ºF 36ºF 24ºF 28ºF 32ºF 36ºF to first, 32ºF) Applegate (1276 ft.) NAa NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Ashland (1750 ft.) 13-Mar 19-Apr 11-May 27-May 24-Nov 05-Nov 12-Oct 27-Sep 154 Cave Junction (1280 ft.) 10-Mar 19-Apr 12-May 01-Jun 12-Dec 18-Nov 12-Oct 14-Sep 153 Grants Pass (960 ft.) 11-Feb 24-Mar 29-Apr 20-May 15-Dec 27-Nov 15-Oct 03-Oct 169 Medford Airport (1300 ft.) 27-Feb 05-Apr 03-May 20-May 28-Nov 06-Nov 15-Oct 04-Oct 166 Medford Exp. Station (1457 ft.) 01-Mar 31-Mar 17-May 30-May 23-Nov 27-Oct 04-Oct 15-Sep 140 Ruch (1549 ft.) 22-Mar 30-Apr 20-May 07-Jun 25-Nov 27-Oct 04-Oct 13-Sep 137 Williams (1450 ft.) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Data Source: Oregon Climate Service, 1993 (from 1961-1990 means). aNA = data not available. accumulated rock material that has weathered from the mountains and soil that formed over time. Most isolated hills, terraces, and footslopes offer sites 100-300 feet above the lower lying valleys and provide the slopes and aspects necessary for increasing solar radiation receipt.

The soils of the Rogue Valley AVA owe their origin to the complex mountain building episodes that occurred over geologic time. The region’s geology is diverse with the intermingling of the Klamath, Siskiyou, and Cascade Mountains. As the landscape was weathered over time by glaciers and rivers they produced narrow to broad valleys that contain thick beds of rock, gravel, and the associated soil complexes found in the region. Soil types vary greatly over the region, however some general patterns in soil texture can be found:  Flatter sites tend to have deep mixed loams.  Northern and eastern facing slopes tend have heavier clay soils.  South and western facing slopes tend to have lighter granitic soils.

Drainage and moisture-holding capacity varies greatly by soil type, and while most soils in the region do retain water into the growing season, available water for mid to late summer growth is generally needed. Soil nutrition varies greatly over the region with issues generally related to either surpluses or deficits of nitrogen, calcium, potassium, phosphorous, magnesium, boron, or zinc. Soil pH also varies from region to region (roughly from 5.2 to 7.0) and is mostly due to differences in climate and parent rock material. In general, the soils found in the Illinois Valley are slightly more acidic due to more rainfall and greater leaching potential, while the Bear Creek Valley soils tend to be less acidic, and the Applegate Valley soils somewhat intermediate between the two.

While the Rogue Valley AVA boasts 30 years of post prohibition winegrape growing, very little is known about the overall make up of the vineyards in the region (i.e., vineyard development, management, and physical makeup). Most of the quality research done in the region has been carried in specific trials (Oregon State University Research and Extension Service) and for statewide agricultural assessment (Oregon Vineyard and Winery Reports, 1987-2000). Therefore, the overall purpose of this study was to create the first comprehensive mapping of vineyards in the region and the creation of a database that will facilitate future research. Complete knowledge of the spatial locations and structure of the vineyards lends itself to a better understanding of the regional aspects of viticulture and can facilitate current management practices and

future development decisions. The specific goals of this research are three-fold; 1) to geo-locate and map the individual vineyard sites in the Rogue Valley AVA using a Global Positioning System (GPS); 2) to combine the geo-referenced vineyard data with existing spatial data in a Geographic Information System (GIS) to create map products that can be used for further analysis and promotion; 3) to create a comprehensive database containing information regarding each vineyard that will facilitate current and future temporal and spatial analyses. The sections that follow describe the methods of data collection and analysis, followed by a description of the results and future prospects for the database.

Data and Methods

The research described in this report consisted of building a Geographic Information System (GIS) database of the individual vineyard sites in the Rogue Valley AVA. Each vineyard was surveyed via two methods: 1) using a Global Positioning System (GPS) to geographically-locate each vineyard (required a visit to each vineyard), and 2) a paper survey to gather information specific to each vineyard. Data from both surveys was then combined with a larger geographical database at Southern Oregon University that contains region-wide information on elevation, slope, aspect, soils, and climate. To collect the data regarding each vineyard2 a survey was constructed asking vineyard specific questions on varietals (type, acreage, clones, rootstocks, and phenology), vineyard management practices (pruning, trellis type, irrigation, and frost protection), vineyard site characteristics (topography and soil), and viticultural strategies (historical development, knowledge base, and future directions). The survey was administered as both a paper document mailed to the growers (Appendix A.1) and an online document (http://yosemite.sou.edu:82/geography/vineyardsurvey.htm). The survey announcement was mailed in mid May 2000 and data collection started soon thereafter.

2 A mailing list was provided by the Oregon Wine Advisory Board, which contained contact and location information for growers in the region.

During the summer of 2000 the field portion of the research started with visits to each vineyard to conduct the GPS work. A Trimble GPS Pathfinder® Pro XR receiver, a GIS data collection and data maintenance system that provides real-time sub-meter accuracy, was used during the fieldwork. The GPS data collection was done over the following dates – 6/20, 6/22, 6/27-29, 7/5-6, 7/11-13, and 9/7 all in the summer of 2000. The vineyards were surveyed either by the perimeter of the entire acreage or by block where feasible. The coordinates were collected using a 3-5 foot buffer around each end row or post and by either walking or riding in available farm vehicles. Once the data was collected in the field, it was processed using sophisticated GPS/GIS data processing software (Trimble's GPS Pathfinder® Office) using the local base station at Pacific Survey and Supply (http://www.pacificsurvey.com/GPSfiles/) for differential correction of the data (a process by which potential errors in the points are corrected to a known location). Once processed, the data were combined into a GIS database using Environmental Systems Research Institute’s ArcView® software. The GIS allowed for combining the vineyard location data with existing data and provided a multiple layering and analysis tool. Existing geophysical data from the Jackson County Smartmap (2001), Josephine County GIS Services (2001), the Oregon Geospatial Data Clearinghouse (OGDC, 2001), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS, 2001) was acquired to facilitate the research. The data consists of various boundary files (e.g., counties, National Forests, etc.), surface features (e.g., soils, roads, rivers, etc.), and a digital elevation model for the Jackson/Josephine county region. The digital elevation model was further processed, producing slope and aspect layers from which to summarize the vineyard characteristics. In addition, the Rogue and Applegate Valley AVA boundaries were digitized from their legal descriptions and associated maps (Code of Federal Regulations, 2000 and Federal Register, 2000) producing the first accurate electronic form of the boundaries. To examine vineyard soil types, the digital soils database from the National Resource Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center for Josephine and Jackson Counties were used (NRCS, 2001: formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service). The soil surveys contain information describing soil types, their properties

including drainage and water-holding capacity, and detailed maps of soil locations. While the data from soil surveys tend to be spatially limited in their accuracy, they describe the general pedon3 that can be found in a given area. The results from the examination of the digital soil survey data will be compared with owner supplied soil sampling information in the results section. The vineyard location and characteristic data were then summarized over the whole region and by sub-region within the AVA. In addition, maps of the important spatial characteristics were produced for the region. In the sections that follow, the results of the survey and spatial depiction of the data are described.

Results

GPS Survey The Rogue Valley AVA, including the Applegate Valley AVA, encompasses a total of 1,147,000 acres in both Jackson and Josephine counties in Oregon (Figure 1), of which nearly 34% is agriculturally zoned. The Applegate Valley AVA encompasses 276,630 acres and is divided roughly between the two counties (Figure 1). The GPS survey resulted in 80 vineyards being geo-referenced with an average horizontal and vertical precision of all points of less than two and three feet, respectively (See Figure 5 as an example of the survey). Geographically, vineyards in the area are found as far north as Sunny Valley, within 5 miles of the California border in the Illinois Valley, near the eastern border of the AVA just east of Ashland, and near the western AVA border in the Illinois Valley. Overall, the 80 vineyards consist of a total of 1297 acres with a median vineyard size of 5.7 acres and range from one acre or less to nearly 200 acres. However, a size distribution shows that the majority of the vineyards (73%) in the region are from 1 to 15 acres in size (Table 3). A comparison by sub-region4 reveals that the Applegate and Bear Creek Valleys have roughly the same number of vineyards, total

3 A pedon is the smallest body of one kind of soil large enough to represent the nature and arrangement of horizons and variability in the other properties in that area (NRCS, 2001).

4 For ease of description and interpretation, the sub-regions have been designated as the Applegate Valley (an AVA itself), the Bear Creek Valley (Ashland to the divide SE of Gold Hill), the Illinois Valley (from the southern AVA boundary near O’Brien to Hayes Hill north of Selma), and the Valley of the Rogue (from Gold Hill, along the Rogue River, to west and north of Grants Pass).

acres, and average vineyard size (Table 4). The Illinois Valley, while having fewer vineyards, has larger vineyards on average. The Valley of the Rogue has the fewest number of vineyards but maintains a relatively high average vineyard size due to one large property (Table 4).

Table 3 – Size distribution for all vineyards in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Number of Acres Vineyards 0-5 36 5-15 22 15-30 12 30-60 6 60+ 4

Table 4 – Vineyard statistics for individual sub-regions in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Sub-Region Number Total Acres Average Size Applegate Valley 30 335 11.2 Bear Creek Valley 34 384 11.3 Illinois Valley 10 296 29.6 Valley of the Rogue 6 282 46.9* *Note that one large vineyard skews the average size for this region.

Combining the vineyard coordinate information with the USGS digital elevation model (USGS, 2001) reveals the topographical characteristics for vineyards in the region. The average elevation across the entire region is 1566 feet with a standard deviation across all vineyards of 314 feet (Table 5). Vineyards are found from a minimum elevation of 898 feet along the Rogue River just west of Grants Pass to a maximum elevation of 2488 feet at a site just south of Talent. Summarized for each region, elevations are highest in the Bear Creek Valley averaging 1752 feet, followed by the Applegate Valley at 1540 feet, the Illinois Valley at 1474 feet, and the Valley of the Rogue at 1102 feet (Table 5).

Upper Bear Creek Valley Vineyard Locations

PHOENIX

TALENT

W A G N E R N C R E E K W E E ASHLAND M IG R A N T S C R E E K

Vineyard Sites Rogue AVA Boundary Rivers & Lakes EMIGRANT City Limits LAKE

Sources: Jackson County GIS Services Josephine County GIS Services Oregon Geospatial Data Clearinghouse (OGDC) BATF Approved Viticultural Area (Digitized) Rogue Valley Chapter of the OWA

Cartographers: Gregory V. Jones Lea Light Southern Oregon University 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 Miles 1/18/01

Figure 5 – Example of vineyard locations surveyed using GPS in the upper Bear Creek Valley.

Summarizing the vineyard slopes finds that they average 7.5% across all vineyards in the AVA, but that the majority varies from gradual slopes of near 2% to over 12% (standard deviation of 5.2%). Although the maximum average vineyard slope is just over 21%, one vineyard is planted on a slope of over 45% (Table 5). It is also interesting to note that, on the average, vineyards have a site range of 15% in slope (meaning that slopes vary greatly across most properties). Averaged across the sub- regions, the slopes of vineyards vary from nearly 10% in the Bear Creek Valley, to 5-7% in the Applegate and Valley of the Rogue sub-regions, and slightly over 3% in the Illinois Valley (Table 5).

Table 5 – Descriptive statistics for topographical variables of elevation, slope, and aspect derived from a digital elevation model for all vineyards in the Rogue Valley AVA and sub-regions.

Statistic/Region Elevation (feet)* Slope (%)* Aspect* Mean 1566 7.5 155°, SSE Applegate Valley 1540 6.6 181°, S Bear Creek Valley 1752 9.6 142°, SSE Illinois Valley 1474 3.3 126°, ESE Valley of the Rogue 1102 5.9 149°, SSE Median 1570 6.3 170°, SSE Standard Deviation 314 5.2 72° Maximum 2488 21.6 285°, WNW Minimum 898 FLAT 11°, NNE *Note that the values given are first summarized for each vineyard (not shown) and then for the AVA or sub-region (an average of an average). Also, note that the maximum slope found on any one vineyard is 47% and that, on the average, the vineyards have a range of 15% in slope from the flattest to the steepest portion. To derive slope in degrees, divide the number given above by 100 and take the arctan-1 of that value.

Vineyards in the area are planted on aspects (dominant slope direction) that range from NNE to WNW, averaging roughly SSE and varying generally from SE to SW (72°). By region, average vineyard aspects tend to be more southerly in the Applegate Valley, SSE in the Bear Creek and Valley of the Rogue sub-regions, and ESE in the Illinois. Dividing the vineyard aspects into the cardinal direction quadrants (e.g., a south quadrant is all aspects from SE to SW, a west quadrant is all aspects from SW to NW, etc.) finds that 73% of the vineyards are planted to south or west aspects (Table 6). In

addition, the results reveal that nearly one fifth of all vineyards are planted on flat sites (no dominant aspect).

Table 6 – Summary of cardinal directions for all vineyard aspects in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Aspect Percent of the Vineyards Flat 16% North 7% East 4% South 60% West 13%

An examination of vineyard soil types finds that over 100 different soil series or units occur within the Rogue Valley AVA vineyards. However, nearly 80% of the vineyards contain 12 dominant soils (Table 7). The four most common vineyard soils in

Table 7 – The most common soil series or units, the acres encompassed, and the number of vineyards with that soil type for the entire Rogue Valley AVA (NRCS, 2001; Soil Conservation Service, 1983 and 1993).

Soil Series/Unit Acres # of Vineyards Ruch Gravelly Silt Loam 245.7 17 Central Point Sandy Loam 142.3 6 Manita-Vannoy Complex 106.3 22 Darow Silt Loam 77.0 8 Takilma Cobbly Loam 66.9 6 Brockman Clay Loam 61.8 2 Shefflein Loam 58.2 6 Foehlin Gravelly Loam 47.0 5 Medford Silty Clay Loam 43.6 9 Abegg Gravelly Loam 43.2 6 Carney Clay 42.8 10 Pollard Loam 42.1 9 Of note is that the Brader-Debenger and Debenger-Brader units, while not encompassing much vineyard acreage, do occur in 15 vineyards.

the region, which are found in nearly 70% of the vineyards, have the following general characteristics (all other soils are as described in Soil Conservation Service, 1983 and 1993): 1. Ruch – a soil series with widespread fine-loamy soils that formed in mixed alluvium. They are generally very deep, well-drained, with medium to rapid runoff, and moderately slow permeability. The typical pedon for Ruch soils is a gravelly silt loam found in mixed to open woodlands. Much of the Ruch soils planted to vines can be found on high stream terraces, alluvial fans, and footslopes with slopes of 2 to 60 percent. 2. Central Point – a soil series with mostly coarse-loamy soils that formed in alluvium weathered from granitic and metamorphic rocks. They are mostly deep, well- drained, experience slow runoff, and moderately rapid permeability. Generally, a water table is present at 4 to 6 feet during the winter months. The typical pedon is a sandy loam, usually found on flat land to gradual slopes in cultivated areas. Most Central Point soils used for vineyards are found on low stream terraces and alluvial fans and have slopes of zero to 3 percent. 3. Manita-Vannoy - a complex of soils from both the Manita and Vannoy series with spatial variations in the percentage of each. The Manita series formed in residual material from altered sedimentary and extrusive igneous rocks. The soils are mostly deep, well drained, with slow to rapid runoff; and moderately slow permeability. The typical pedon for Manita soils consist of a well-mixed loam found on fans and hillslopes at 800 to 4000 feet with a wide variation in slope gradients of 2 to 50 percent. The Vannoy series formed in residual material weathered from metamorphic and sedimentary rocks and consists of soils that are moderately deep, well-drained, with medium to rapid runoff; and moderately slow permeability. Vannoy soils have a typical pedon of silt loam and are found on uplands at roughly 1000 to 4000 feet with slopes of 2 to 60 percent. 4. Darow – a soil series consisting of soils that formed residual rock material at the base of a slope that weathered from siltstone or shale. The soils are moderately deep, moderately well drained, having medium to rapid runoff, and slow

permeability. The typical pedon is a silty clay loam, usually found on hillsides with slopes of 1 to 35 percent and at elevations of 1,200 to 3,000 feet.

Soil types by sub-region reveal spatial variability due mostly to the underlying geology (Table 8). In general, the dominant soils found in the regions are similar for the

Table 8 - The most common soil series or units, the acres encompassed, and the number of vineyards with that soil type for the sub-regions of the Rogue Valley AVA; a) the Applegate Valley, b) the Bear Creek Valley, c) the Illinois Valley, and d) the Valley of the Rogue (NRCS, 2001; Soil Conservation Service, 1983 and 1993). a) Applegate Valley b) Bear Creek Valley Soil Series/Unit Acres N Soil Series/Unit Acres N Ruch Gravelly Silt Loam 99.9 12 Darow Silt Loam 77.0 8 Shefflein Loam 58.2 6 Manita Loam 44.9 10 Central Point Sandy Loam 53.1 4 Carney Clay 42.8 10 Medford Silty Clay Loam 24.4 6 Ruch Gravelly-Silt Loam 36.7 4 Camas Gravelly Sandy 15.5 5 Coleman Loam 29.3 5 LoamVannoy Silt Loam 12.6 4 Medford Clay Loam 24.2 2 Manita Loam 12.2 3 Provig-Agate Complex 20.8 3 Abegg Gravelly Loam 8.8 4 Brader-Debenger Loams 25.0 9 Copsey Clay 7.9 3 Medford Silty Clay Loam 19.2 3 Kerby Loam 5.0 1 Debenger-Brader Loams 15.1 2

c) Illinois Valley d) Valley of the Rogue Soil Series/Unit Acres N Soil Series/Unit Acres N Brockman Clay Loam 61.8 2 Ruch Gravelly-Silt Loam 109.1 1 Takilma Cobbly Loam 57.8 5 Central Point Sandy Loam 77.3 1 Pollard Loam 38.8 9 Vannoy Silt Loam 24.1 2 Foehlin Gravelly Loam 35.7 4 Manita Loam 12.4 3 Abegg Gravelly Loam 34.4 2 Banning Loam 12.0 1 Banning Loam 17.8 4 Foehlin Gravelly Loam 11.3 1 Kerby Loam 16.9 2 Takilma Cobbly Loam 9.1 1 Evans Loam 13.9 1 Selmac Loam 4.8 1 Central Point Sandy Loam 12.0 1 Ruch Silt Loam 4.4 1 Selmac Loam 6.7 1 Cove Silty Clay Loam 4.2 1

Applegate Valley, the Bear Creek Valley, and the Valley of the Rogue with the Ruch gravelly silt loam occurring frequently in each. Differences between the three are: 1) the

Applegate Valley has a high percent of Shefflein loam, which is not found in the other areas to any major degree; 2) the Bear Creek Valley has a high percent of Darow silt loam and clay soils (e.g., Carney clay which has slow permeability and high winter water tables); 3) the Valley of the Rogue region, while having few vineyards, reveals a mix of loam soil types that are intermediate between the regions. The Illinois Valley, while having some of the same soil types as the Applegate Valley and Valley of the Rogue, reveals its character from the geologically distinct Siskiyou Mountains. The majority of the soils in the Illinois Valley are more mixed gravelly and cobbly to clay loams with the Brockman clay loam covering the most acres and the Pollard loam found in more vineyards (Table 8).

Vineyard Survey The vineyard survey (Appendix A.1) resulted in 71 of 80 (89%) GPS-surveyed vineyards responding. Of the pool of respondents, 42 returned the paper survey while 29 completed the online survey (59 and 41%, respectively). Of the remaining vineyard owners, most either simply did not respond while others did not wish to participate. The timeline of initial vineyard establishment in the region reveals that eleven vineyards were started during the 1970s, followed by 21 during the 1980s and 34 during the 1990s, 191 and 106% increases, respectively (Table 9). Since the survey took place

Table 9 – The number of vineyards established by decade in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Time Period Number of Vineyards Established 1970-1979 11 1980-1989 21 1990-1999 34 2000 4 during the summer of 2000, only four vineyards had been developed earlier that year but if the trend were to continue throughout the 2000s, then 40+ new vineyards could be realized in the region5.

5 In June of 2001, a grape-growing workshop was held in the region and the survey from the event revealed that 23 individuals were establishing a vineyard in 2002 and eleven were planning a vineyard in the next ten years.

Survey questions focused on the main varieties normally summarized in the Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service reports as those most commonly grown in the region (Oregon Vineyard and Winery Reports, 1987-2000). Data regarding acreage, clones, rootstocks, trellis, and pruning were collected by the main varieties and numerous other varieties grown in smaller quantities. The 71 respondents to the survey resulted in 1220 of the 1297 GPS-surveyed acres being quantified (94% of all acreage). For the entire Rogue Valley AVA, Merlot is the most planted variety with 315 acres (26%) planted on 47 vineyards (Table 10 and Figure 6). The other leading red varieties planted in the AVA include Pinot Noir (176.7 acres, 14.5%), Cabernet Sauvignon (176.3 acres, 14.4%), Syrah (87.3 acres, 7.2%), and Cabernet Franc (59.4 acres, 4.9%). Chardonnay is the most planted white variety with 145.4 acres (11.9%) followed by 111.5 acres of Pinot Gris (9.1%) and less than 3% each of White Riesling, Gewurztraminer, Muller Thurgau, and Sauvignon Blanc. Other varieties make up the remaining 76.6 acres or 6.3% of all planted acreage (Table 10 and Appendix A.2). Average vineyard sizes are greatest for Pinot Noir (7.4 acres), Merlot (6.7 acres), and White Riesling (6.1 acres) while the lowest average sizes are found with some of the minimally planted white varieties (i.e., Gewurztraminer and Sauvignon Blanc) and other miscellaneous varieties, which are mostly experimental plantings (Table 10). Dividing the AVA into the four main areas of the Applegate Valley, the Bear Creek Valley, the Illinois Valley, and the Valley of the Rogue gives insight into regional differences in varieties planted. For the Applegate Valley, the relative percent of each variety planted is similar to the whole region with Merlot planted the most (30.1%) for red grape varietals and Chardonnay for white grape varietals, although at a higher relative percent of 18.6% (Table 10). The other major differences from the entire region are that the Applegate is planted to nearly 80 acres (26%) of Cabernet Sauvignon, while Pinot Noir and Pinot Gris are scarcely planted in the region (4.6 acres; 1.5% and 0.2 acres; 0.1%, respectively). The Bear Creek Valley follows the general varietal make up as the entire region and the Applegate Valley (both more warm climate regions), but contains significant differences in the relative amount of Merlot planted (149.7 acres,

Table 10 – Surveyed acreage of all varietals grown, summarized for the Rogue Valley AVA and each sub-area.

Cabernet Cabernet Char- Gewurz- Merlot Muller Pinot Pinot Sauvignon Syrah White Othera Total Region Statistic Franc Sauvignon donnay traminer Thurgau Gris Noir Blanc Riesling Acreage

Total Acres 59.4 176.3 145.4 24.5 315.0 6.0 111.5 176.7 11.0 87.3 30.6 76.6 1220.1 Entire Number of Vineyards 27 37 32 12 47 2 22 24 7 22 5 74 Region Average Size 2.2 4.8 4.5 2.0 6.7 3.0 5.1 7.4 1.6 4.0 6.1 0.3 Percent of Total 4.9 14.4 11.9 2.0 25.8 0.5 9.1 14.5 0.9 7.2 2.5 6.3 Total Acres 6.7 78.8 56.8 2.3 91.8 0.0 0.2 4.6 0.4 26.6 20.0 17.2 305.4 Applegate Number of Vineyards 10 17 13 2 20 0 2 5 2 13 1 30 Valley Average Size 0.7 4.6 4.4 1.2 4.6 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.2 2.0 20.0 0.6 Percent of Total 2.2 25.8 18.6 0.8 30.1 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.1 8.7 6.5 5.6 Total Acres 30.1 48.2 25.8 4.6 149.7 2.0 35.4 6.7 4.1 31.2 0.1 22.8 360.8 Bear Creek Number of Vineyards 14 14 9 3 23 1 9 6 3 8 2 31 Valley Average Size 2.2 3.4 2.9 1.5 6.5 2.0 3.9 1.1 1.4 3.9 0.0 0.7 Percent of Total 8.4 13.4 7.2 1.3 41.5 0.6 9.8 1.9 1.1 8.7 0.0 6.3 Total Acres 0.0 4.0 44.8 17.6 0.0 4.0 54.9 160.4 1.5 0.0 10.5 10.0 307.6 Illinois Number of Vineyards 0 2 8 7 0 1 9 12 1 0 2 7 Valley Average Size 0.0 2.0 5.6 2.5 0.0 4.0 6.1 13.4 1.5 0.0 5.3 1.4 Percent of Total 0.0 1.3 14.6 5.7 0.0 1.3 17.8 52.2 0.5 0.0 3.4 3.2 Total Acres 22.5 45.3 18.0 0.0 73.5 0.0 21.0 5.0 5.0 29.5 0.0 26.4 246.2 Valley of Number of Vineyards 3 4 2 0 4 0 2 1 1 1 0 5 the Rogue Average Size 7.5 11.3 9.0 0.0 18.4 0.0 10.5 5.0 5.0 29.5 0.0 5.3 Percent of Total 9.1 18.4 7.3 0.0 29.9 0.0 8.5 2.0 2.0 12.0 0.0 10.7 a For a complete breakdown of the "Other" varieties, see Appendix A.2

Percent of Acreage Planted by Variety in the Rogue Valley AVA

White Other Cabernet Syrah Riesling 6% 7% 3% Franc 5% Sauvignon Cabernet Blanc Sauvignon 1% 14% Pinot Noir 14% Chardonnay 12% Pinot Gris 9% Gewurz- traminer Muller Merlot 2% Thurgau 27% 0.5%

Figure 6 – Survey acreage percent by variety for the Rogue Valley AVA.

41.5%) and has more Cabernet Franc (30.1 acres, 8.4%). In addition, in comparison to the Applegate, the Bear Creek Valley also has very little Pinot Noir planted (6.7 acres, 1.9%), but has more Pinot Gris (35.4 acres, 9.8%) and less Cabernet Sauvignon (48.2 acres, 13.4%) (Table 10). The Illinois Valley planted acreage clearly is indicative of its cooler climate with the vast majority of its acreage devoted to Pinot Noir (160.4 acres, 52.2% of the Illinois’s acreage and 91% of the entire AVA acreage), Pinot Gris (54.9 acres, 17.8%), and Chardonnay (44.8 acres, 14.6%). The region also grows the majority of the AVA’s Gewurztraminer, Muller Thurgau, and White Riesling. The Valley of the Rogue area consists of only six vineyards that are planted to mostly Merlot (73.5 acres, 29.9%),

Cabernet Sauvignon (45.3 acres, 18.4%), Syrah (29.5 acres, 12.0%), and Cabernet Franc (22.5 acres, 9.1%). Pinot Gris (8.5%), Chardonnay (7.3%), and other miscellaneous varieties (10.7%) make up the bulk of the rest of the planted acreage (Table 10). Surveyed data by variety for the plant characteristics and management practices reveals the relative percent of each used in the region. Across all varieties and sites, self-rooted plants and rootstocks 101-14 and 3309 make up nearly 85% of those used (Table 11). Self-rooted plants are the most common at 39.9% of all reported acreage in this survey. Six trellis styles represent over 97% of all types used in the AVA with vertical shoot positioning (VSP) being the most commonly used (63.6%) (Table 11). In terms of general pruning strategies, cane pruning is most common, representing 55.1% of all reported acreage in this study (Table 11). By variety, there are many similarities and some variations in plant material used and management decisions (Table 12). In addition, the main varieties listed in Table 12 were also summarized by their respective vineyard elevation, slope, and aspect as derived from the GPS survey discussed previously (Table 13). The process produces a region wide average and range of the topographical characteristics by which each variety is planted6. The average characteristics for the main varieties are:

 Cabernet Franc – Planted to 27 vineyards generally between 1400 and 1900 feet, on slopes ranging from 2.5 to 9.4%, and ESE to SSE aspects. The most common clonal material is UC01 and 312/332. The majority of the vineyards report being self-rooted or using 3309 or 101-14 rootstocks. Vertical shoot positioning is the most common trellis system, with an almost equal number of vineyards using cane, spur, or cordon pruning methods.  Cabernet Sauvignon – Planted to 37 vineyards from 1400 to 2000 feet in elevation, on slopes ranging from 2.7 to 13.1%, and aspects from SE to S. The most common clonal material reporting being used is 337. The majority of the

6 All vineyards with one or more acres of each variety are included in the analysis. The same procedure is not applied to the soils data since the precise locations of varieties within each vineyard is not known.

vineyards report being self-rooted or using 3309 or 101-14 rootstocks. Vertical shoot positioning is the most common trellis system, with cane pruning.

Table 11 - Survey results summarized over all varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA for the types of rootstocks, trellis styles, and pruning styles used.

Rootstock Percent Trellis Percent Pruning Percent Used Used Used Own 39.9 VSP 63.6 Cane 55.1 101-14 22.7 SH 13.1 Spur 24.7 3309 21.9 Lyre 9.7 Cordon 17.0 R. Gloire 3.0 GDC 4.7 Other 3.2 SO-4 3.0 SD 3.8 5C 2.6 Guyot 3.0 Other 2.6 other 2.1 5BB 2.1 44-53 1.3 Schwarzman 0.9 Items listed as “other” are for the most part single responses. For the trellis styles, VSP is vertical shoot position, SH is Scott Henry, GDC is Geneva Double Curtain, and SD is Smart/Dyson.

 Chardonnay – Planted to 32 vineyards from 1250 to 1725 feet in elevation, on slopes of 2.5 to 8.7%, and on SSE to S aspects. The most common clonal materials used are 108, Draper, 76, and 95/96. The majority of the vineyards report being self-rooted or using 3309 or 101-14 rootstocks. Vertical shoot positioning is the most common trellis system, although Scott Henry and Lyre are widely used. Cane is the most common pruning method.  Gewurztraminer – Planted to 12 vineyards that average 1250 to 1925 feet in elevation, on slopes from nearly flat to 9.5%, and aspects that range from SSE to S. Not enough clone information was provided to summarize. The majority of the vineyards report being self-rooted and using vertical shoot positioning as the most common trellis system, with cane the dominant pruning method.  Merlot – Planted to 47 vineyards that range from less than 1300 to nearly 1900 feet in elevation, on ESE to SE facing slopes that range from 2.3 to 9.3%. Clones UC03 and 181 the most commonly used. The majority of the vineyards

Table 12 – Survey results summarized for the eleven main varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Acres Clone Rootstock Trellis Pruning Variety Number of Vineyards Cabernet 59.4 27 UC01–6 Own–10 VSP–19 Cane–10 Franc 332–5 3309–12 SH–3 Cordon–8 312–2 101-14–8 Lyre–3 Spur–7 UC04 –1 R.Gloire–2 SD–2 Other–1 SO-4–1 GDC–1 5C–1 Guyot–1 Cabernet 176.3 37 337–6 Own–15 VSP–25 Cane–17 Sauvignon UC15–3 3309–8 SH–3 Cordon–8 UC07–2 101-14–8 Lyre–1 Spur–11 UC01–2 5BB–1 SD–1 Other–1 Others–3 SO-4–1 GDC–4 5C–1 Guyot–2 Chardonnay 145.4 32 108–14 Own–9 VSP–16 Cane–25 Draper–6 3309–3 SH–7 Cordon–3 76–6 101-14–3 Lyre–6 Spur–9 95–5 5BB–1 SD–1 Other–1 96–5 GDC–2 352–4 Guyot–1 Others–4 Gewurz- 24.5 12 UC04–1 Own–8 VSP–6 Cane–9 traminer 456–1 5BB–1 SH–2 Cordon–1 Lyre–1 Spur–1 GDC–1 Other–1 Merlot 315.0 47 UC03–31 Own–17 VSP–30 Cane–21 181–24 3309–18 SH–6 Cordon–12 UC06–7 101 -14–17 Lyre–7 Spur–14 UC01–7 5C–4 SD–2 Other–2 314–2 SO-4–3 GDC–1 Others-7 44-53–3 Guyot–2 Others–5 Muller 6.0 2 NR Own–2 VSP–2 Cane–2 Thurgau

Pinot Gris 111.5 22 152–5 Own–10 VSP–14 Cane–14 146–5 3309–4 SH–4 Cordon–4 151–1 101-14–5 SD–2 Spur–5 UC01–1 5BB–2 Guyot–1 Other–1 UC04–1 Others-5 Pinot Noir 176.7 24 Pommard–9 Own–12 VSP–18 Cane–19 Wadenswil –8 3309–2 SH–3 Cordon–2 113–5 101-14–2 Lyre–1 Spur–7 114–2 R.Gloire–1 SD–1 Other–1 115–4 Others–4 GDC–1 29–3 Guyot–1 Others-8 Sauvignon 11.0 7 UCVF4V8–1 Own–3 VSP–3 Cane–6 Blanc Unknown–3 Lyre–2

Syrah 87.3 22 UC01–5 Own–4 VSP–15 Cane–8 Hermitage–4 3309–4 SH–3 Cordon–4 UC02–3 101 -14–11 Lyre–1 Spur–7 UC07–1 R.Gloire–4 GDC–1 Other–1 Others–4 Others–2 White 30.6 5 NR Own–4 VSP–4 Cane–5 Riesling Lyre–1

Othera 76.6 74 a For a complete breakdown of the "Other" varieties, see Appendix A.2. For the trellis styles, VSP is vertical shoot position, SH is Scott Henry, GDC is Geneva Double Curtain, and SD is Smart/Dyson.

report a nearly equal number of self-rooted, 3309 or 101-14 rootstocks. Vertical shoot positioning is the most common trellis system, with cane the most common pruning method, although spur and cordon are also widely used.  Muller Thurgau – Planted only on two of the reporting vineyards, therefore topographical characteristics may not be representative of potential. No information given for clonal material, but both vineyards are self-rooted, using VSP, and cane pruning.  Pinot Gris – Planted to 22 vineyards ranging from 1180 to nearly 1700 feet in elevation, on slopes that average 1.4 to 7.4% with aspects of ESE to SE. Clones 152 and 146 are reported most commonly used. Self-rooted plants are the most common while some use of 3309 and 101-14 rootstocks are found. Vertical shoot positioning is the most common trellis system, although a few vineyards also use Scott Henry. Cane is the dominant pruning method.  Pinot Noir – Planted to 24 vineyards on elevations ranging from 1280 to 1635 feet and ESE to SE aspects with 1.0 to 7.0% slopes. A variety of clonal material is used, however Pommard and Wadenswil are the most common. Self-rooted plants that are trained with vertical shoot positioning and cane pruning are the most common systems used.  Sauvignon Blanc – Planted to seven vineyards from 1250 to 1400 feet in elevation, on slopes of 2.6 to 8.6%, and aspects of SSE to S. No dominant clone information was reported. The variety is mostly self-rooted, grown via vertical shoot positioning or Lyre trellising, and mostly cane pruned.  Syrah – Planted to 22 vineyards at elevations ranging from under 1350 to over 1950 feet that have aspects from SE to SSE on slopes of 3.2 to 11.4% on average. Growers report using a variety of clones, with UC01, UC02, UCO07, and Hermitage being most common. Syrah is mostly planted on 101-14 rootstock with less, but equal amounts, of self-rooted, 3309, and Riparia Gloire. The majority of the vineyards report using vertical shoot positioning and about equal amounts of cane and spur pruning.  White Riesling – Planted on only five of the reporting vineyards at elevations ranging from above 1200 to just over 1400 feet and on mostly ESE slopes from

less than 1 to 3.5%. No specific clonal information was given. Vineyards in the survey indicated that the acreage was mostly self-rooted and trained via vertical shoot positioning with cane pruning.

Numerous other varieties were listed in the survey responses and tabulated as “other.” While the majority of these varieties are clearly experimental as evidenced by the small acreage per vineyard, some have considerable acreage and may replace some of the lesser common varieties (Appendix A.2). The “other” varieties with the most acreage include Viognier (19.4 acres on 12 vineyards), Sangiovese (11.7 acres on 7 vineyards), Pinot Blanc (11.5 acres on 4 vineyards), Zinfandel (6.1 acres on 9 vineyards), Grenache (5.85 acres on 4 vineyards), Tempranillo (5.49 acres on 8

Table 13 – Topographical characteristics of the major varieties planted in the Rogue Valley AVA. Variety Statistic Elevation (ft.) Slope (%) Aspect* Cabernet Franc Mean 1666 5.9 ESE Std. Dev. 230 3.5 63 Cabernet Sauvignon Mean 1701 7.9 SE Std. Dev. 316 5.2 64 Chardonnay Mean 1485 5.6 SSE Std. Dev. 247 3.1 63 Gewurztraminer Mean 1593 5.1 SSE Std. Dev. 335 4.4 63 Merlot Mean 1582 5.8 ESE Std. Dev. 298 3.5 50 Muller Thurgau Mean 1600 4.2 SSE Std. Dev. 407 3.1 65 Pinot Gris Mean 1438 4.4 ESE Std. Dev. 255 3.0 48 Pinot Noir Mean 1459 4.0 ESE Std. Dev. 176 3.0 37 Sauvignon Blanc Mean 1330 5.6 SSE Std. Dev. 72 3.0 61 Syrah Mean 1650 7.2 SE Std. Dev. 312 4.2 47 White Riesling Mean 1312 1.9 ESE Std. Dev. 94 1.6 24 * Aspects are given in median 16 point cardinal directions and degrees of variation. Also note that Gewurztraminer, Muller Thurgau, Sauvignon Blanc, and White Riesling have small acreage, therefore are less reliable.

vineyards), and Malbec (5.3 acres on 4 vineyards). Clonal information on the miscellaneous varieties can be found in Appendix A.2, as well as rootstocks, trellis styles, and pruning methods. With the exception of the clones used, each variety generally follows the same trend as the major varieties in being self-rooted, on mostly vertical shoot positioning (although Scott Henry is prevalent also), and using a mix of cane, spur, and cordon pruning. Surveyed information regarding the major phenological events of the grapevines was less reported than other variables. In general, the number of responses of phenological dates follows the relative percentages of acres reported across all varieties (i.e., Merlot is the most planted and the most reported for phenology). In terms of individual phenological events, harvest date is most observed followed by budburst, flowering, and véraison. While mentioned by many as an important phenological event, bunch closure was not reported with enough regularity to report on further. Anywhere from 8-25 vineyard responses of phenology were given for the seven main varietals and a few as one or two for the lesser-grown varieties including the miscellaneous “other” varieties. Summed over all varieties and growing areas, budburst occurs on 11 April on average (Table 14), but was observed as early as 28 March and as late as 22 April

Table 14 - Survey results summarized for the phenological timing average over all varieties, red varieties, and white varieties grown in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Parameter Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest All Varieties 11-Apr 12-Jun 26-Aug 10-Oct Latest Date 22-Apr 03-Jul 09-Sep 24-Oct Earliest Date 28-Mar 04-Jun 09-Aug 21-Sep Range 25 days 29 days 31 days 33 days Red Varieties 12-Apr 11-Jun 27-Aug 13-Oct Latest Date 22-Apr 20-Jun 09-Sep 24-Oct Earliest Date 28-Mar 04-Jun 09-Aug 21-Sep Range 25 days 16 days 30 days 33 days White Varieties 09-Apr 12-Jun 25-Aug 06-Oct Latest Date 14-Apr 03-Jul 09-Sep 18-Oct Earliest Date 05-Apr 06-Jun 13-Aug 25-Sep Range 9 days 27 days 27 days 23 days Note that the data presented here offer the best estimate of the average date of each phenological event for the entire AVA. The earliest, latest, and range of dates are less reliable due to the short period of record for some varieties and site variations.

(note that the extremes indicate varietal differences). Flowering averages 12 June, but was observed as early as 4 June and as late as 3 July. Véraison occurs 26 August on average, but occurs as early as 9 August and as late as 9 September. Harvest commences most often on 10 October across the region, with the earliest being 21 September and the latest being 24 October on average (Table 14). Differences between red and white varieties are somewhat masked by the averaging procedure, but do reveal that white varieties tend to budburst and harvest 3 and 7 days earlier on average, respectively (Table 14). Flowering and véraison tend to be quite similar in terms of timing across all red or white varieties; however, the variability in the number of days is generally less for white varieties. A comparison of the differences (Table 15) indicates that most of the major varieties experience budburst between the second and third weeks of April with Sauvignon Blanc the earliest and Cabernet Sauvignon the latest. Flowering is generally a second or third week in June event with only 5 days separating all of the major varieties. The change in berry color and composition, véraison, occurs in mostly the last week of August, however, Sauvignon Blanc does occur in mid August. Harvest dates in the region happen over a three-week period from 1 October for Sauvignon Blanc to as late as 22 October for Cabernet Franc (Table 15). From the combined information in Tables 13 and 14, it appears that the intervals between phenological events average 59-65 days from budburst to flowering (a mean of 62 days), 66-81 days from flowering to véraison (a mean of 76), 40-58 days from véraison to harvest (mean of 45 days), 116-125 days from flowering to harvest (a mean of 121 days), and 176-186 days from budburst to harvest (a mean of 182 days). By individual area, phenological events vary slightly due to climatic differences, however the data are less reliable as the number of observations per varietal decreases (phenological data for each area is presented in Appendix A.3-A.6). The survey also asked for phenological data for the “other” miscellaneous varieties, however due to the smaller number of vineyards reporting data, the numbers are also less reliable than the region-wide averages given in Tables 14 and 15. There is some indication that a few of the lesser planted varieties experience budburst earlier

than the region-wide average (e.g., Malbec in late March) and others harvest earlier (e.g., Tempranillo in late September and Dolcetto in the first week of October) than the region-wide average (for a complete listing see Appendix A.7)

Table 15 - Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Entire Region Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest

Cabernet Franc 14-Apr 13-Jun 28-Aug 22-Oct Cabernet Sauvignon 16-Apr 12-Jun 28-Aug 20-Oct Chardonnay 08-Apr 08-Jun 30-Aug 09-Oct Gewurztraminer 11-Apr 10-Jun 27-Aug 05-Oct Merlot 12-Apr 11-Jun 27-Aug 14-Oct Muller Thurgau* Pinot Gris 11-Apr 12-Jun 23-Aug 08-Oct Pinot Noir 11-Apr 13-Jun 26-Aug 05-Oct Sauvignon Blanc 07-Apr 09-Jun 14-Aug 01-Oct Syrah 14-Apr 09-Jun 25-Aug 15-Oct White Riesling* Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years; therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. *Muller Thurgau and White Riesling did not have enough observations.

While the survey requested general information on the site characteristics (Appendix A.1), the data obtained was not compiled for the region but used to help ground truth the GIS/GPS analysis previously mentioned. For example, for the majority of respondents listing a dominant soil type, the responses generally matched the pedon given for that property as derived from the NRCS digital soil survey data (similar results were found with elevation, slope, and aspect). Differences are undoubtedly due to within property variations in soil type. Of the 71 respondents to the survey, when asked “Was a Soil Survey conducted and if so by whom?” 46 said yes and 25 said no, 65 and 35%, respectively (Table 16). Of those that did mention conducting some form of a soil survey, the majority (41%) used the county soil survey (SCS, 1983 and 1993), which provides only a general overview for the pedon considered to dominate the property. The remaining

59% used either a lab service or private consultant to conduct a more in depth soil survey. It is also noteworthy to mention that many of the responses to this question indicated that a lab soil analysis is an annual or biannual part of their vineyard management.

Table 16 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Was a Soil Survey conducted and if so by whom?”

Soil Survey Method/Lab Number of Owners using the Method/Lab

Jackson County Soil 19 Survey, NRCSa Albion Labs 8 UAP Northwest 6 OSU 5 Agri-Check, Inc. 4 Monarch Laboratory, Inc. 3 Private Consultant 4 Other (other growers or self 8 analysis) a National Resources Conservation Service, also known as the Soil Conservation Service.

When asked, “Is the site irrigated and if so what type of irrigation is used?” 68 of the respondents indicated yes and only three indicated no, 96 and 4%, respectively (Table 17). Of the different methods of irrigation used, the majority (67%) use drip irrigation, while 13% use overhead sprinklers and 14% use a combination of overhead sprinklers and drip. Three owners indicated using various forms of underground drip systems. In a related question, owners were asked, “Does the site have any sort of frost protection and if so what type is used?” Of the 71 respondents, 34 use some form of frost protection (48%) with the majority using overhead sprinklers (56%) and the remainder using wind machines (21%), heaters (1%), or some combination of the three methods (12%) (Table 18). Of note is that a few responses indicated that choosing a site that would be minimally affected by frost was the most important form of frost protection.

Table 17 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Is the site irrigated and if so what type of irrigation is used?”

Irrigation Method Number of Owners using the Method Drip 46 Overhead Sprinklers 9 Combination of Drip and 10 Overhead Sprinklers Underground Drip 3

Table 18 - Survey responses summarized for the question, “Does the site have any sort of frost protection and if so what type is used?”

Frost Protection Method Number of Owners using the Method Overhead Sprinklers 19 Wind Machines 7 Heaters 2 Combination of Methods 4

The next section of the survey focused on asking general questions that would help provide an historical overview of how the industry has developed in the region. For the question of “what came first, land ownership and then growing grapes, or buying land specifically to grow grapes”, 38 of 71 respondents (54%) owned the land first and decided to grow grapes, and 33 of 71 respondents (46%) bought the land specifically to grow grapes. Of note is that nine of the 71 respondents who fell into the “bought” category, actually bought existing vineyards. The question, “Is the site solely dedicated to grape growing or are there other uses (i.e., home, other businesses, other crops, etc.)” results indicate that over 2/3 of all respondents have a site that is dedicated to the vineyard (or winery), a personal residence, and a garden of varying sizes. Other responses reveal that many grape growers in the region also have other crops on the same land with nearly 1/5 indicating either a personal or commercial orchard. In addition, other uses include field

crops such as alfalfa, hay, barley (20%) and numerous responses of woodland or managed forest resources (i.e., Christmas trees, pulp wood, firewood, commercial timber). The question, “Where did you obtain your initial knowledge of grape growing (i.e., other growers, formal training, etc.)?” resulted in a wide range of responses from the vineyards owners with many indicating the “school of hard knocks” or “being self taught”! The most common response was that of “other growers” (nearly half of all responses) revealing the strong networking and congeniality that occurs between grape growers. The second most common response was that they had used the OWAs’ Oregon Winegrowers Handbook (various editions). Other multiple responses included an array of viticulture books by various authors (e.g., Winkler, Mullins, Smart, Gladstones, Coombe and Dry, and Morton7), formal education in viticulture or enology at University of California at Davis, Sonoma State University, or Santa Rose Junior College, and various seminars put on by the Rogue Chapter of the OWA, Southern Oregon Research and Extension Center (Oregon State University), and Rogue Community College. Single responses included apprenticeships in other regions, travel, curiosity, product vendors, nursery managers, consultants, and family. The question, “Now that you have experience in the business, what would you change about your operation and why?” brought forth a vast array of responses that mostly indicate three broad themes; 1) “better planning, site selection, and site preparation", 2) “plant more red varieties and less white varieties,” and 3) “alter row spacing, vine spacing, and trellis type.” Most of the responses indicated that they may have rushed into the business too quick and really should have put forth a better management plan or chose the site more carefully. Many indicated that they would change the mix of varieties to better suit their site and/or the market (especially in regard to replacing white with more red varieties). In terms of vineyard layout and

7 General Viticulture (1974) by A.J. Winkler, James A. Cook, W.M. Kliewer, and Lloyd A. Lider Biology of the Grapevine (1992) by Michael G. Mullins, Alain Bouquet, and Larry E. Williams. A Practical Ampelography: Grapevine Identification (1979) by Pierre Galet, translated by Lucie T. Morton Sunlight into Wine (1991) by Richard Smart and Mike Robinson. Viticulture and Environment (1992) by John Gladstones. Viticulture - Volumes 1 and 2 (1990) Editors B. Coombe and P. Dry.

management, many responses indicated the desire to plant their vines more densely in the rows, but spread the rows further apart (no values were given) and change the trellis type to better suit the clone/rootstock and soil type combination. Others indicated wanting to alter the block size and row lengths to maximize labor and minimize management. Still others indicated that they would probably not get into the business altogether. The question, “With more acreage and resources, what would you plant and why?” reflected a similar pattern from the previous question with the majority of the interest in planting more red and less white varieties. However, the common theme that ran through most of the responses was related to “marketability” and “profitability” in terms of deciding to increase plantings. The most common red varieties listed as those that they would plant and are best suited to the region include (in order of the number of responses), Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Zinfandel, Pinot Noir, Syrah, Cabernet Franc, more “Bordeaux Varieties” in general, Tempranillo, Sangiovese, Dolcetto, and Malbec. Although most responses indicated that they would plant more reds, a relatively large number of responses (22) indicated that they would plant more white varieties such as Pinot Gris, Viognier, Gewurztraminer, White Riesling, and Pinot Blanc (in order of the number of responses). A few responses indicated that there was too much Merlot in the region and that the growers should diversify into other reds, most notably Syrah. More cautious responses indicated that adding any new acreage was not prudent at this time and would most likely remain so in the near future, with some simply saying that they “would not under any circumstances plant any more grapes.”

Conclusions The results of this research have helped document the varietal and spatial characteristics of grape growing in the Rogue Valley American Viticultural Area. A ground survey using Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and a varietal survey submitted to growers in the region has produced an in depth database from which documentation concerning planted acreage, varietal plant material used, vineyard management practices, grapevine phenology, site characteristics, and overall historical and future development information has been derived. At the time of the survey (during the summer of 2000), there were 80 vineyards totaling 1297 acres surveyed via ground GPS. Vineyards range in size from one acre or less to nearly 200 acres with a median size of 5.7 acres. Most vineyards in the AVA are from 1-15 acres in size (73%) with the Bear Creek and Applegate Valleys similar in the number of vineyards, acreage, and average size. The Illinois Valley, while having fewer total vineyards, has larger vineyards on average. Vineyards are found from just less than 900 feet to nearly 2500 feet in the AVA. Average elevations are 1566 feet over the entire region with the highest being in the Bear Creek and Applegate Valley areas and the lowest in the Illinois and Valley of the Rogue areas. Topographically, the average vineyard has a 7.5% slope with southerly to westerly aspects. Average slopes tend to be steepest in the Bear Creek Valley, intermediate in the Applegate Valley and Valley of the Rogue, and most gradual in the Illinois Valley. Aspects average SE to SW across the region, but are more SSE in the Bear Creek Valley and Valley of the Rogue, ESE in the Illinois, and south in the Applegate Valley. In addition, nearly 20% of all vineyards are found on flat sites. Using the digital National Resources Conservation Service soils data reveals that over 100 different soil units are found in the region’s vineyards. While many of the soil pedons are isolated, nearly 80% of all vineyards have 12 dominant soil types. The Ruch, Central Point, Manita-Vannoy, and Darow soil complexes are the most common and are generally deep, well-drained soils found on stream terraces, alluvial fans, footslopes, and hillsides in the majority of the grape growing areas of the AVA. Variations in vineyard soils between areas are mostly due to the underlying geology

with mixed loams varying from clays to silts in the greater Bear Creek and Applegate Valleys and a greater portion of gravely loams in the Illinois Valley and Valley of the Rogue areas. For the vineyard survey, 89% of the growers returned their surveys (71 of 80) with the majority completing the paper form versus the online form (59 and 41%, respectively). The respondents represented 94% of the GPS surveyed acreage, providing a sound look at grape growing in the region. The first post Prohibition vineyards in the area were established in the early 1970s with 190 and 106% growth during the next two decades, respectively. Merlot is the most planted variety with 315 acres (26%) planted on 47 vineyards while Pinot Noir, Cabernet Sauvignon, Syrah, and Cabernet Franc round out the most planted red varietals. Chardonnay is the most planted white varietal, making up nearly 12% of all acreage (145.4 acres) followed by Pinot Gris, White Riesling, and Gewurztraminer. Regional differences in planted varietals indicate that the Applegate Valley is mostly planted to Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, and Chardonnay; the Bear Creek Valley has the vast majority of the region’s Merlot and relatively large amounts of Cabernet Sauvignon, Cabernet Franc, Syrah, and Pinot Gris; the Illinois Valley is mostly planted to cooler climate varieties with 92% of the entire AVA’s Pinot Noir acreage, and the majority of the region’s Pinot Gris, and Chardonnay; the Valley of the Rogue is planted to wide mix of varieties with the greatest percent in Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, and Syrah. Respondents also listed a large collection of other varieties planted in the region, giving some indication that growers are experimenting with different types of grapes. From the collection of data, varieties with the most acreage include Viognier, Sangiovese, Pinot Blanc, Zinfandel, Grenache, Tempranillo, and Malbec (in order of acres planted). Plant and vineyard management characteristics given in the survey indicate that, across all varieties and sites, self-rooted plants (nearly 40% of all responses) and rootstocks 101-14 and 3309 are most widely used (85% total). While six trellis styles are used in the region, vertical shoot positioning is by far the number one method (63.6%). While numerous respondents indicated using multiple pruning methods, cane pruning is used on 55.1% of all reported acreage.

Individual varieties are planted across a wide range of elevations, slopes, and aspects in the region. Red varieties tend to be planted on higher elevation sites with steeper slopes, while white varieties are generally planted at lower elevations. Aspects do not vary much by variety with most being planted on SE to SW facing slopes. Warm versus cool climate varieties are also evident with Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Syrah being found at higher elevations and steeper slopes, while Chardonnay, Pinot Gris, Pinot Noir, Sauvignon Blanc, and White Riesling are planted at lower elevations and moderate slopes. These characteristics are indicative of the regional topographical differences found between the growing areas of the Rogue Valley AVA. Phenological information was requested for all varieties reported in the survey and, although less reported than other characteristics, provides region-wide guidelines of the dates of budburst, flowering, véraison, and harvest. Averaged over all varieties and growing areas, budburst occurs 11 April on average; flowering occurs 12 June on average; véraison occurs 26 August on average, and harvest dates commence on 10 October on average. Some differences are noted between red and white varieties with average budburst and harvest dates occurring 3 and 7 days earlier for white varieties, respectively. Overall the phenological data provided in the surveys give average intervals between phenological events of 59-65 days from budburst to flowering, 66-81 days from flowering to véraison, 40-48 days from véraison to harvest, 116-125 days from flowering to harvest, and 176-186 days from budburst to harvest. In terms of individual phenological events, harvest date is most observed followed by budburst, flowering, and véraison with bunch closure not sufficiently observed to provide region-wide averages. It must also be noted that many respondents indicated that they did not keep the information, but should. For the region as a whole, 65% of the growers conducted some form of soil survey before they planted, although the majority (41%) used the county soil survey, which provides only a general overview of the soil pedon. Of those that utilized a lab service or private consultant, many indicated that a lab soil analysis is an annual or biannual part of their vineyard management.

When asked about site irrigation and frost protection, 96% of all growers responding used some form of irrigation while 48% used some form of frost protection. The results indicate the importance of having some form of irrigation in place in a relatively dry summer climate and that frost protection is more important on some sites than others. The most common form of irrigation used is a drip system and the most common forms of frost protection are overhead sprinklers and wind machines. It is important to note that a few responses indicated that choosing a site that would be minimally affected by frost was the most important form of frost protection. A series of general questions in the survey provides an anecdotal tool from which knowledge regarding the development and potential of the grape growing industry can be obtained. Growers were asked if they specifically “bought the land to grow grapes” or “whether they owned the land and then decided to grow grapes.” The majority of growers (54%) owned the land and then decided to grow grapes, which may mean that many might have planted on less than ideal grape growing lands. Results to other questions indicate that nearly 2/3 of all growers have sites solely dedicated to their vineyard and home, while many others have orchards (mostly commercial), field crops (e.g., hay, alfalfa, etc.), and managed forest resources (i.e., Christmas trees, pulp wood, firewood, commercial timber). In response to the question of “where did you obtain your knowledge of grape growing,” many indicated that it came from the “school of hard knocks.” Nearly half of all respondents indicated that “fellow growers” were the source of most of their knowledge, indicating the strength of support among grape growers. Others indicated various amounts of formal training at regional universities and colleges, local seminars put on by the OWA chapter, the OWA Guidebook to Growing Grapes in Oregon, and numerous other viticulture books. When asked “what would they change about their operation and why,” three broad themes were evident, which included better planning, site selection, and preparation, planting more red varieties, and altering their vineyard management strategies (row and vine spacing, layout, trellis, etc.). In addition, when asked, “what they would plant with more acreage and resources,” the growers indicated that some level of knowledge had been gained relative to what grows best on their site or in their

region and would plant more but would need to pay better attention to the “marketability” and “profitability” of the varieties. Many indicated that planting more reds was the thing to do (Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon, Zinfandel, Pinot Noir, Syrah, Cabernet Franc, more “Bordeaux Varieties” in general, Tempranillo, Sangiovese, Dolcetto, and Malbec), but a large percentage mentioned planting more white varieties such as Pinot Gris, Viognier, Gewurztraminer, White Riesling, and Pinot Blanc (in order of the number of responses). Some responses gave an indication of the tightening market and potentially poor decisions made during the initial planning stages by saying that “they would probably not get into the business altogether,” or “that adding any new acreage was not prudent at this time and would most likely remain so in the near future,” or they “would not under any circumstances plant any more grapes.” Overall, the combined ground and paper survey research for the Rogue Valley grape growing region has documented the locations, characteristics, and general background of vineyards in the region. The results have provided a baseline of knowledge, from which existing and future grape growers can better understand the overall nature of grape growing and make informed decisions when establishing new sites or altering existing ones. The results are not meant to supplant the knowledge gained from grower to grower interactions, but to add a level of knowledge not well established in any one grape-growing region in the United States. While many useful relationships between topography, soil types, varietal choices, and general husbandry have been documented, it is hoped that the results also stimulate growers to keep better records of their operations especially in regard to plant characteristics (i.e., clonal material used, rootstocks, and phenological timing). In addition, the data derived in the research should be viewed as the initial establishment of a database that can be immediately useful, but better served for longitudinal studies of the changing nature of grape growing in the region. As the Rogue Valley AVA continues to grow in terms of acreage planted (both established varietals and new ones that are discovered to do well here), the number of growers, and production, it will be important to continually document the nature of the industry so as to be more viable economically.

References

Brown, Willard (1999): Wine in the Rogue Valley: Peter Britt and the Beginning. Unpublished manuscript.

Brown, Willard (1999): Wine in the Rogue Valley: From Peter Britt to Rebirth. Unpublished manuscript.

Code of Federal Regulations (2000): Alcohol, Tobacco Products, and Firearms (Title 27, Parts 1-199), Part 9 – American Viticultural Areas pp. 101-223.

Federal Register (2000): Rules and Regulations (Vol. 65, No. 241/Thursday, December 14, 2000, pp. 78099.

Jackson County Smartmap (2001): Jackson County Geographic Information System (GIS) Services, Jackson County, Oregon–http://www.smartmap.org

Josephine County GIS Services (2001): Josephine County, Oregon http://www.co.josephine.or.us/planning/gis/index.htm

Natural Resources Conservation Service (2001): National Soil Survey Center. http://www.statlab.iastate.edu/soils/nsdaf/

Oregon Climate Service (OCS, 2000), Office of the State Climatologist, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR–http://www.ocs.orst.edu/

Oregon Climate Service, (1993): Climatological Data for Oregon Agricultural Regions. Special Report #912, Taylor, G. H., Agricultural Experiment Station, Oregon State University.

Oregon Geospatial Data Clearinghouse (OGDC), (2001): Department of Administrative Services, State of Oregon–http://www.sscgis.state.or.us/

Oregon Vineyard and Winery Reports (1987-2000), Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service, Salem, OR. http://www.oda.state.or.us/oass/vinewine.htm

Soil Conservation Service (1983): Soil Survey of Josephine County, Oregon. R. Borine, editor. USDA, December 1983.

Soil Conservation Service (1993): Soil Survey of Jackson County Area, Oregon. D. R. Johnson, editor. USDA and Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station, August 1993.

United States Geological Survey (USGS, 2001): 1:250,000 Scale Digital Elevation Models (DEM)–http://edcwww.cr.usgs.gov/doc/edchome/ndcdb/ndcdb.html

Western Regional Climate Center, (WRCC, 2000), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Reno, NV–http://www.wrcc.sage.dri.edu/

Appendix

A.1 – Copy of the survey that was sent to growers and administered online.

Page 1

Owner Name(s): ______Vineyard Name: ______Year Planted (initial site development): ______

Variety Characteristics: Pruning Variety Total Acreage Clones Rootstocks Trellis Styles (training styles)

Cabernet Franc

Cabernet Sauvignon Chardonnay Gewurztraminer Merlot

Muller Thurgau Pinot Gris Pinot Noir

Sauvignon Blanc

Syrah White Riesling Others (please list)

A.1 Continued,

Page 2

Phenology (average dates of events and number of years observed, if known - e.g. 3rd of May/observed over 8 years): Variety Budburst Flowering Bunch Closure Véraison Harvest

Cabernet Franc Cabernet Sauvignon Chardonnay

Gewurztraminer

Merlot Muller Thurgau Pinot Gris Pinot Noir

Sauvignon Blanc Syrah White Riesling Others (please list)

A.1 Continued

Page 3 and 4

Site Characteristics:

Topography:

What is the dominant site aspect (slope direction)? ______

What is the average site elevation? ______

Soil:

Was a Soil Survey conducted and if so by whom? ______

Is there one dominant soil type and if so what is it? ______

Irrigation:

Is the site irrigated and if so what type of irrigation is used?______

Frost Protection:

Does the site have any sort of frost protection and if so what type is used? ______

General Questions (this information will help provide an historical overview of how the industry has developed in the region):

Which came first … Ownership of the land, then decided to grow grapes? Decided to grow grapes, then purchased the land?

Is the site solely dedicated to grape growing or are there other uses (i.e., home, other businesses, other crops, etc.)

Where did you obtain your initial knowledge of grape growing (i.e., other growers, formal training, etc.)?

Now that you have experience in the business, what would you change about your operation and why?

With more acreage and resources, what would you plant and why?

A.2 – Survey results summarized for each of the reported “other” varietals grown in the Rogue Valley AVA.

Variety Acres Number of Clone Rootstock Trellis Pruning Vineyards

Aligote 0.10 1 01 NR NR NR Dolcetto 0.82 5 UC01–2 Own–4 VSP–3 Spur–3 101-14–1 SH–1 Cane–1 GDC–1 Cordon–1 Gamay Noir 0.86 4 UC02–2 Own–2 VSP–3 Spur–0 5BB–1 Cane–2 Cordon–1 Grenache 5.85 4 UC01a–2 Own–2 VSP–3 Spur–2 5BB–1 SH–1 Cane–2 Cordon–0 Malbec 5.30 4 UCD04–2 Own–3 VSP–3 Spur–0 Others–2 101-14–1 Lyre–1 Cane–2 Cordon–2 Morestal 0.01 1 NR NR VSP Cordon Mourvedre 0.10 1 NR NR SH Spur Muscat 4.00 4 NR Own–3 VSP–2 Spur–0 Lyre–1 Cane–2 Cordon–0 Pendelbogen arc-cane–1 Nebbiolo 2.36 4 UC04–2 Own–2 VSP–3 Spur–0 Michet, 5BB–1 Guyot–1 Cane–3 UC-Lampia 5C–1 Cordon–1 Petit Verdot 0.26 2 NR Own–2 VSP–1 Spur–1 SD–1 Cane–1 Cordon–1 Pinot Blanc 11.45 4 159–1 Own–2 VSP–2 Spur–0 R.Gloire–1 SH–1 Cane–2 101-14–1 Guyot–1 Cordon–1 Pinotage 0.01 1 Rodino–1 SD Spur Sangiovese 11.71 7 SV4–1 Own–4 VSP–6 Spur–3 UC02–2 R.Gloire–1 GDC–1 Cane–2 101-14–2 Cordon–1 5C–1 Semillon 2.71 3 UC05–2 5C–2 SH–1 Spur–1 Guyot–1 Cane–2 SD–1 Cordon–0 Tempranillo 5.49 8 UC01–4 Own–4 VSP–3 Spur–2 UC02–1 3309–1 SH–3 Cane–2 101-14–2 GDC–1 Cordon–2 5BB–1 Viognier 19.42 12 UC01–2 Own–4 VSP–9 Spur–4 642–1 R.Gloire–1 SH–3 Cane–5 101-14–2 Cordon–1 3309–1 Zinfandel 6.14 9 NR Own–6 VSP–3 Spur–2 420A–1 T–3 Cane–6 GDC–1 Cordon–2 NR indicates that no response was given for the parameter. For the trellis styles, VSP is vertical shoot position, SH is Scott Henry, GDC is Geneva Double Curtain, and SD is Smart/Dyson.

A.3 – Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Applegate Valley.

Applegate Valley Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest

Cabernet Franc 15-Apr 16-Jun 04-Sep 23-Oct Cabernet Sauvignon 22-Apr 18-Jun 21-Oct Chardonnay 09-Apr 06-Jun 07-Sep 14-Oct Gewurztraminer 14-Apr 14-Jun 29-Sep Merlot 15-Apr 16-Jun 27-Aug 18-Oct Muller Thurgau* Pinot Gris 09-Apr 09-Jun 01-Sep 15-Oct Pinot Noir 09-Apr 06-Jun 01-Sep 07-Oct Sauvignon Blanc 28-Sep Syrah 15-Apr 04-Jun 26-Aug 15-Oct White Riesling* Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years (even more so by region); therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. A ‘*’ or blank space indicates that not enough data was submitted for that event or variety.

A.4 – Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Bear Creek Valley.

Bear Creek Valley Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest

Cabernet Franc 16-Apr 14-Jun 26-Aug 22-Oct Cabernet Sauvignon 16-Apr 10-Jun 27-Aug 21-Oct Chardonnay 08-Apr 06-Jun 14-Aug 04-Oct Gewurztraminer 08-Apr 03-Jul 21-Aug 27-Sep Merlot 10-Apr 09-Jun 25-Aug 13-Oct Muller Thurgau* 09-Oct Pinot Gris 12-Apr 14-Jun 13-Aug 06-Oct Pinot Noir 12-Apr 18-Jun 19-Aug 03-Oct Sauvignon Blanc 01-Oct Syrah 16-Apr 15-Jun 24-Aug 15-Oct White Riesling* Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years (even more so by region); therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. A ‘*’ or blank space indicates that not enough data was submitted for that event or variety.

A.5 – Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Illinois Valley.

Illinois Valley Budburst Flowering Version Harvest

Cabernet Franc* Cabernet Sauvignon 11-Apr 20-Jun 01-Sep 16-Oct Chardonnay 10-Apr 16-Jun 08-Sep 18-Oct Gewurztraminer 14-Apr 14-Jun 09-Sep 16-Oct Merlot 11-Apr 11-Jun 01-Sep 09-Oct Muller Thurgau* Pinot Gris 13-Apr 13-Jun 04-Sep 15-Oct Pinot Noir 12-Apr 16-Jun 31-Aug 07-Oct Sauvignon Blanc* Syrah* White Riesling* Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years (even more so by region); therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. A ‘*’ or blank space indicates that not enough data was submitted for that event or variety.

A.6 – Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for each of the eleven main varietals grown in the Valley of the Rogue.

Valley of the Rogue Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest

Cabernet Franc 12-Apr 11-Jun 24-Oct Cabernet Sauvignon 15-Apr 11-Jun 24-Oct Chardonnay 07-Apr 07-Jun 01-Oct Gewurztraminer* Merlot 09-Apr 08-Jun 11-Oct Muller Thurgau* Pinot Gris 05-Apr 07-Jun 03-Oct Pinot Noir 05-Apr 09-Jun Sauvignon Blanc 07-Apr 09-Jun 14-Aug 04-Oct Syrah 09-Apr 06-Jun White Riesling* Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years (even more so by region); therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. A ‘*’ or blank space indicates that not enough data was submitted for that event or variety.

A.7 – Survey results summarized for the phenological timing for the “Other” varietals grown in the Valley of the Rogue.

Entire Region Budburst Flowering Véraison Harvest

Dolcetto 10-Apr 09-Jun 20-Aug 04-Oct Gamay Noir 04-Apr 07-Jun 04-Sep 19-Oct Malbec 28-Mar 09-Jun 09-Sep 14-Oct Morestal 19-Apr 10-Jun 01-Sep 21-Oct Muscat 09-Apr 23-Jun 19-Aug 25-Sep Petit Verdot 14-Apr 18-Jun 02-Sep 18-Oct Pinotage 06-Apr 05-Jun 14-Aug 24-Sep Sangiovese 09-Oct Semillon 12-Oct Tempranillo 14-Apr 10-Jun 09-Aug 21-Sep Viognier 11-Apr 10-Jun 22-Aug 07-Oct Zinfandel 06-Jun 27-Aug 10-Oct Note that the information presented here is derived from a limited number of vineyards over a varying number of years (even more so for the miscellaneous varieties); therefore the dates given are broad averages and should be used only as a guide for decision making. A ‘*’ or blank space indicates that not enough data was submitted for that event or variety.