Organic Viticulture Creates Jobs
It's time wineries stop trying to eliminate the number of workers needed to tend a vineyard and bring in a grape harvest. I dare say in fact, despite the recent dire shortages of harvest workers in Sonoma and Napa, that we need to re-envision grape farming as an opportunity to increase the number of people who can be employed. Am I crazy?
Organic viticulture, as it turns out, provides this opportunity, and the potential solution to the worker shortage.
Unfortunately the ability of organic viticulture to create jobs has often been mentioned as one of its down-sides.
You'll hear or read many arguments along the lines of: One worker on a tractor spraying RoundUp can rid the weeds from 20 acres of vines in one day, while it takes a team of workers several weeks to hoe out the weeds from the same 20 acres. The latter, organic approach requires multiple cars driving to and from the vineyard every day for those weeks. So which is worse for the environment?
The RoundUp is worse! It's not even a question. It's a red herring argument.
Just because we eliminate the need for those workers to drive to this 20 acre vineyard doesn't mean we've eliminated the need for them to work. They're going to drive somewhere everyday. They have to make a living.
Why not have them drive to an organic vineyard where they will not have to work with cancer-causing agro-chemicals?
The point is that organic viticulture does often require more work than conventional viticulture, and this has been seen as a bad thing. The reality is that increased labor needs may be one of the best things about organic viticulture.
Aside from the huge benefit to the workers, and the world, in not having to work in a poisoned environment, organic viticulture creates the opportunity for year-round, full-time employment for vineyard workers.
In late winter the vines must be pruned and sprayed. New vines will need to be grafted and propagated from cuttings, and a nursery tended to ensure healthy new vines are ready to replace older vines that succumb to Eutypa or other disease. Repairs to trellising and other vineyard maintenance and cleaning tasks abound.
In spring, the vines may need to be protected from frost. The cover crop may need to be hoed, mowed, or grazed. Shoot thinning and tying must be done. Early spraying begins with Stylet oil or sulfur.
In early summer the workers are busy managing the canopy, pulling leaves, training canes. Workers look for pest and fungus issues, and deal with them as they are discovered. Spraying continues.
In late summer bird netting may be deployed. Fruit may be dropped. Predator habitat needs to be fostered. Irrigation must be managed.
Then comes harvest, and there goes autumn.
In early winter cover crops and beneficial insect habitat may need to be sown. Well deserved rest needs to be taken.
Are there holes in this schedule? Times when full-time vineyard workers may not have too much to do? Yes, possibly, depending on the size of the vineyard.
So why not cross-train vineyard workers as winery workers? Why create a false and - let's be honest - class-based division between vineyard and winery workers?
The same people who spray the vineyards can do the testing, racking, bottling, topping-up, and blending throughout the year. The grape pickers can also do punch-downs, pressing, cleaning, and barreling.
If we want our wines to be truly about terroir, we need to integrate vineyard and winery work, rather than think of them as separate - and hierarchically stratified - parts of the process. If our vineyard workers aren't also working in the cellar, we are merely paying lip service to the truism that wine is made in the vineyard.
It stands to reason that this approach will increase wine quality as well. If your vineyard workers are also your winery workers, they are invested in every step of the process.
Additionally, you allow those crafting your wine to gain expertise by full-time, year-round experience of every step in the winemaking process. How can this not be better for wine quality than having two separate sets of temporary workers - migrant pickers and harvest interns - handling some of the most vital vineyard and winery duties?
I haven't even mentioned the benefit to the workers themselves. They can acquire valuable skills and have security, benefits, and a sustainable income. Rather than take their pay and leave, they can become part of a community, invest in it, and help raise the standard of living there. This is the essence of sustainable wine.
This, we could speculate, will attract more workers to this field. And that may just help with the vineyard worker shortage.
The biggest argument against this is of course one of economics. The average price per ton of grapes in California is right around $850. That's far too low to have many full-time, year-round employees if all you are doing is growing grapes. On the other hand, the price per ton of Napa Cabernet, and the amount that can be charged by a Napa estate winery per bottle, would seem to diminish this economic argument. Of course costs of operation and real estate are much higher in Napa too, so it's hard to say. It will likely depend on the individual winery.
But there are some wineries, like Stolpman Vineyards in Santa Barbara County and others, who are already doing this. It works, likely, because they use a variety of profit-sharing and partnership opportunities with their workers, and they sell their wine for over $25 per bottle, up to almost $100.
Making vineyard workers an integral part of a winery's year round operations does not have to apply only to organic viticulture, but organic viticulture does necessitate more work in and around the vineyard. Why not capitalize on this and see it as an asset, rather than a liability?
***
Please use this form to join our mailing list if you want to support positive change in wine and the world, as well as be the first to get access to our new wine releases and special offers.