Terroir 1996 banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 Terroirs and legal protection

Terroirs and legal protection

Abstract

[English version below]

Le concept AOC permet, par une délimitation précise, la mise en valeur de terroirs particulièrement adaptés à la viticulture. Seuls les terroirs ainsi identifiés peuvent produire des vins portant le nom de l’AOC. Le nom de cette AOC ne peut être utilisé que pour des vins issus de terroirs compris dans l’aire d’appellation, sous peine de sanctions pénales. La délimitation ainsi opérée participe à la protection du nom de l’AOC. A l’inverse, le terroir délimité n’est pas protégé.
Pourtant, il est victime d’agressions régulières :
– agressions matérielles : création de routes, autoroutes, lotissement, carrières….qui réduisent l’aire d’appellation;
– agressions intellectuelles : implantations d’usines, de centrales nucléaires, de centre de transit de carcasses d’animaux, de station d’épuration…qui nuisent à l’image de l’appellation et risquent parfois de porter atteinte à la qualité de la production (pollution du vignoble).
Ces menaces sont permanentes et les outils de protection juridique sont insuffisants.

La protection devrait intervenir :
– au moment de l’élaboration des documents d’urbanisme ;
– lors de l’instruction des dossiers concernant les projets menaçants.
Les procédures existant actuellement prévoient :
– un simple rôle consultatif de l’INAO dans certains cas déterminés ;
– la possibilité pour les syndicats de défense des appellations, dès qu’ils estiment qu’une atteinte est possible, d’obliger l’autorité décisionnaire à consulter le Ministre de l’Agriculture avant toute prise de décision. En aucun cas, les décisions ne doivent être conformes aux avis rendus.
Récemment, le législateur a créé la notion de «zone agricole protégée » destinée à limiter les autorisations de construire dans ces zones. Mais, aucune ZAP n’a encore été créée.

Face à ces carences, certains professionnels s’orientent vers une protection via les outils de protection des paysages ou sites exceptionnels : ZPPAUP, inscription au patrimoine de l’UNESCO. La rédaction de chartes paysagères se développe également bien qu’elles ne constituent que des documents prospectifs. La mise en œuvre de ces protections passe bien souvent par la réalisation d’un nouveau zonage.

Thanks to a precise delimitation, the AOC concept enhances the value of terroirs particularly suited to viticulture. Only the terroirs thus identified can produce wines with an AOC label. The name of the AOC can only be used for wines from the terroirs within the area of appellation; misuse is subject to legal sanctions. The delimitation thus established is designed to protect the AOC name. Conversely, the terroir delimited is not protected.
It comes, however, under regular attack :
– in practice: creation of roads, highways; housing estates, quarries…which reduce the appellation area;
– in theory : creation of factories; nuclear power plants, animal carcass transit centers, waste water treatment plants…that undermine the image of the appellation and may even impair the quality of production (pollution of the vineyard).
These threats are permanent and the tools for legal protection insufficient.

Protection should apply:
– when town and country planning documents are being drafted;
– when threatening projects are subject to legal inquiry.
Current procedures provide that :
– the INAO may play an advisory role only in certain specific cases;
– unions for the defense of appellations, in the event they deem harm may occur, may oblige decision-making authorities to consult the minister for agriculture prior to any decision.
Under no circumstances do decisions have to be in keeping with the opinions handed down. Legislators recently created the concept of “protected agricultural zone” (ZAP) designed to limit the number of building permits in these areas. However, not a single ZAP has as yet been set up.

In light of these shortcomings, certain professionals are turning towards protection via instruments to protect landscapes or exceptional sites: ZPPAUP, designation as UNESCO heritage. The drafting of landscape charters is also developing, although they are merely prospective documents. The actual implementation of these forms of protection often calls for new zoning.

DOI:

Publication date: February 15, 2022

Issue: Terroir 2002

Type: Article

Authors

Charlotte ASSEMAT

Syndicat Général des Vignerons Réunis des Côtes du Rhône, 6, rue des 3 Faucons, 84000 AVIGNON

Contact the author

Keywords

Terroir viticole, AOC, protection juridique
Terroir, legal protection

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Terroir 2002

Citation

Related articles…

The impact of leaf canopy management on eco-physiology, wood chemical properties and microbial communities in root, trunk and cordon of Riesling grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.)

In the last decades, climate change required already adaptation of vineyard management. Increase in temperature and unexpected weather events cause changes in all phenological stages requiring new management tools. For example, defoliation can be a useful tool to reduce the sugar content in the berries creating differences in the wine profiles. In a ten-year field experiment using Riesling (Vitis vinifera L, planted 1986, Geisenheim, Germany), various mechanical defoliation strategies and different intensities were trialed until 2016 before the vineyard was uprooted. Wood was sampled from the plant compartments root, trunk, cordon and shoot for analyses of physicochemical properties (e.g. lignin and element content, pH, diameter), nonstructural carbohydrates and the microbial communities. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of reduced canopy leaf area on the sink-source allocation into different compartments and potential changes of the fungal and prokaryotic wood-inhabiting community using a metabarcoding approach. Severe summer pruning (SSP) of the canopy and mechanical defoliation (MDC) above the bunch zone decreased the leaf area by 50% compared to control (C). SSP reduced the photosynthetic capacity, which resulted in an altered source-sink allocation and carbohydrate storage. With lower leaf area, less carbohydrates are allocated. This for example resulted in a decreased trunk diameter. Further, it affected the composition of the grapevine wood microbiota. SSP and MDC management changed significantly the prokaryotic community composition in wood of the root samples, but had no effect in other compartments. In general, this study found strong compartment and less management effects of the microbial community composition and associated physicochemical properties. The highest microbial diversities were identified in the wood of the trunk, and several species were recorded the first time in grapevine.

Better understand the soil wet bulb formation with subsurface or aerial drip irrigation in viticulture

The gradual change in rainfall patterns experienced in the south of France vineyards, especially around the Mediterranean sea, means that the vines are increasingly subject to summer drought. The winegrowers developped the use of irrigation techniques to ensure the maintenance of competitive yields in the production of wines under Protected Geographical Indication label. In practice, drip irrigation pipes can be installed above the ground or buried into the soil as well as at different distances from the vine row. The objective of this study was to examine the profiles of the wet bulbs of the soil obtained from two drip irrigation systems : aerial drip located under the vine row and subsurface drip placed in the middle of the inter-row. This experiment took place over two consecutive seasons (2020-2021) on a 3.4 ha Viognier plot in the Mediterranean region (PGI Oc, France) on sandy clay soil. The annual rainfalls were less than 400 mm. Soil water content probes were installed at different depths (20 – 40 – 60 – 80 cm) and at different lateralities from the vine row (30 – 60 – 90 – 120 cm) to control the formation of the soil wet bulb during irrigation. The mapping and the analysis of the data allowed a better understanding and differentiation of the water percolation when irrigating with subsurface or aerial drip. For the same amount of water and without differences of vine water status, it is shown that in a subsurface drip irrigation situation, the size of the wet bulb formed is larger than in aerial drip irrigation system.

Optimizing stomatal traits for future climates

Stomatal traits determine grapevine water use, carbon supply, and water stress, which directly impact yield and berry chemistry. Breeding for stomatal traits has the strong potential to improve grapevine performance under future, drier conditions, but the trait values that breeders should target are unknown. We used a functional-structural plant model developed for grapevine (HydroShoot) to determine how stomatal traits impact canopy gas exchange, water potential, and temperature under historical and future conditions in high-quality and hot-climate California wine regions (Napa and the Central Valley). Historical climate (1990-2010) was collected from weather stations and future climate (2079-99) was projected from 4 representative climate models for California, assuming medium- and high-emissions (RCP 4.5 and 8.5). Five trait parameterizations, representing mean and extreme values for the maximum stomatal conductance (gmax) and leaf water potential threshold for stomatal closure (Ψsc), were defined from meta-analyses. Compared to mean trait values, the water-spending extremes (highest gmax or most negative Ysc) had negligible benefits for carbon gain and canopy cooling, but exacerbated vine water use and stress, for both sites and climate scenarios. These traits increased cumulative transpiration by 8 – 17%, changed cumulative carbon gain by -4 – 3%, and reduced minimum water potentials by 10 – 18%. Conversely, the water-saving extremes (lowest gmax or least negative Ψsc) strongly reduced water use and stress, but potentially compromised the carbon supply for ripening. Under RCP 8.5 conditions, these traits reduced transpiration by 22 – 35% and carbon gain by 9 – 16% and increased minimum water potentials by 20 – 28%, compared to mean values. Overall, selecting for more water-saving stomatal traits could improve water-use efficiency and avoid the detrimental effects of highly negative canopy water potentials on yield and quality, but more work is needed to evaluate whether these benefits outweigh the consequences of minor declines in carbon gain for fruit production.

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

Postveraison shoot trimming in Tannat and Merlot: preliminary results on yield components, plant balance and berry composition

There is currently a trend towards the production of wines with low alcohol content. To achieve this, grapes with low sugar content must be used. There are techniques at the vineyard level that can delay ripening and avoid excessive sugar accumulation without, a priori, affecting the final polyphenol content. Postveraison shoot trimming (PVST) is experimentally evaluated for these purposes, but its impact under Uruguayan climatic conditions with high interannual variability is not known. The aim of this work is to assess the PVST in Tannat and Merlot cultivars and their impact on yield components, plant balance and berry primary composition. In this study, two commercial vineyards of 10 years old Tannat and Merlot (grafted on SO4) at Canelones Department were selected. During the 2020-201 growing season, grapevines were submitted to PVST when grapes reached 15º Brix. In a randomized block, trimmed (T) and control (C) plants were evaluated with three repetitions each cultivar. Evaluation of the evolution of primary berry composition during ripening, measurement of yield components and plant balance were performed. For both cultivars, PVST did not affect yield components. Merlot reached 5.4 kg per plant and Tannat 7.1 kg, with not statistical significance between treatments. However, statistical differences were observed in terms of plant balance. In Merlot Ravaz Index reached a difference of 5.3 (12.0 in T and 6.7 in C) meanwhile Tannat reached 3.5 of statistical difference (13.7 in T and 10.2 in C). The tendency to imbalance for the treated plants had an impact on the final grape composition. Merlot grapes showed statistical difference in final total acidity (0.3 g of difference between treatments) while treatments impact final sugar content on Tannat grapes (10.0 g of difference between treatments). Further studies are needed to assess the impact of different canopy management techniques in our conditions.