Vineyard views

Wines & Vines, July, 2005 by Cliff Ohmart

In my Wines & Vines column entitled "Research and Extension at a Crossroads?" (March 2004), I painted the grim picture of the decline in public financial support of research and extension in the wine industry in the United States. This situation has developed at the worst possible time, with intense global competition emerging from countries such as Australia, Chile, Argentina and South Africa, which are producing high quality, reasonably priced wines, as well as the appearance of new pest challenges such as the Pierce's disease/glassy-winged sharpshooter complex and vine mealybug.

In the April 2005 issue, Dan Berger outlined some highlights of the National Grape and Wine Intiative (NGWI). Because this is one of the most significant developments for the U.S. grape and wine industry in a very long time, and as an active participant in the program, I would like to present a more in-depth history of the program and an update of the most recent developments.

In August of 2003, a group of about 20 concerned wine industry leaders in California and UC Davis viticulture and enology researchers felt it was time to meet to discuss the erosion of financial support for viticulture and enology research and extension while competition in the industry steadily increased. They adopted the name Wine Growers Critical Research Investment Initiative (WCRII), which would eventually evolve into NGWI. WCRII quickly recognized that even though California dominates the U.S. grape and wine industry, much more could be accomplished if they joined forces with the grape and wine industries in other states. One of the major reasons to do so is because the growth of the wine industry in the U.S. in the last 30 years has been nothing short of phenomenal. The number of wineries has increased 649%, and the farmgate value of grapes now ranks fifth in the U.S. If you include the value added from wine, then it moves to third, behind only corn and soybeans. (1)

Furthermore, the congressional wine caucus has grown quite large through the hard work of wine and grapegrower organizations such as Wine America, Wine Institute, California Association of Winegrape Growers and others. It appeared to WCRII that the time was right to seriously explore leveraging the grape and wine industry's position to enhance funding for research and extension.

WCRII invited 35 key grape and wine industry leaders and stakeholders from around the U.S. to a brainstorming session in Chicago in May of 2004. They gave the meeting the title of National Grape and Wine Research and Extension Strategy Session (NGWRESS), and the attendees were given the task of developing vision and mission statements as well as a set of desired outcomes for the strategy.

During the meeting, two programs were featured as case studies of commodity groups which developed strategies for dealing with the same issues facing the U.S. grape and wine industry. One program was developed by the U.S. tree fruit industry; the other was the research and extension program funded by a public/private partnership between the Australian wine industry and its federal government.

I briefly described the Australian program in the Wines & Vines column referred to at the beginning of this column. The Australian model is truly inspirational. Government and industry jointly fund a cohesive Australian Grape and Wine Research and Development Council with about US$11 million spent on research investments each year, as part of an overall grape research commitment of about US$25 million. It was clear to all those in attendance that the Australian program was a very impressive model from which much could be learned.

Governance of the grape and wine initiative was also discussed at the meeting, and many were attracted to the idea of approaching the American Vineyard Foundation (AVF) with the proposal that it serve as a temporary umbrella under which NGWI could exist as it develops its strategies and funding sources. AVF is a California corporation formed in 1978 by the American Society of Enology and Viticulture (ASEV) as a vehicle for raising funds for research in viticulture and enology. Funding for AVF comes from donations by California growers and wineries, and therefore the board membership consists only of California wine industry leaders. If AVF were to oversee the NGWI, its board would need to change its representation to reflect the national scope of the initiative. AVF has been approached with this suggestion and is giving it serious consideration.

As the Chicago meeting progressed, excitement grew as attendees realized the power of the entire U.S. grape and wine industry approaching funding sources with a united front and developing national research priorities. It also was clear the critical role played by successful extension of research results to the end-users, whether they are growers, wine-markers or marketers, and that the erosion of support for extension was reaching a crisis stage.

Furthermore, there was a general feeling that a large amount of research results has never been published. The group resolved that extension must be emphasized in all research programs, and given adequate financial support. Subcommittees were formed to pursue important tasks such as identifying regional research priorities in viticulture and enology, and beginning to consolidate them where possible into national priorities, summarizing funding for viticulture and enology research and extension throughout the U.S. and identifying ways to improve extension programs.