Registering an organic winery

This month I have been increasing my knowledge of organic politics and the views taken by the European parliament on the matter of organic winemaking. The fact is that they don’t acknowledge that winemaking can be organic. Apparently all processed organic foods have to list ingredients and this was not thought suitable in the case of wine. Non-organic producers were concerned that a requirement for listing ingredients would be spread over to them. In a typically convenient solution it was decided to ignore the problem and so there are no official EU rules governing organic winemaking – it doesn’t exist. DEFRA told me that the interpretation of the rules were down to the registering body (in our case the Soil Association). After a year dealing with the Soil Association this idea did not fill me with joy. The Soil Association has devised a set of standards that generally exceed EU standards for organic agriculture. They have devised their rules to include extra items that agree with their principles. They also are unable to sort out problems with any speed. I knew that it could take a year before I can feel that I am back in control.

I should explain that they have two different types of license: a producer license is for farmers, while a processor license is for those who convert farm produce into another product. As a vineyard and winery we need to have both licenses, otherwise we would not be eligible to use the Soil Association name and symbol. An organic vineyard can refer to their wine as “made from organically grown grapes”, even without a licensed winery. The term “organic wine” is not allowed because the EU doesn’t recognise that winemaking can be organic, even if the winery is licensed and inspected by the Soil Association. The Soil Association will only allow the use of their valued symbol on products that are checked from start to finish, thereby recognising a difference between organic and non-organic winemaking.

So after speaking to DEFRA, I contacted the Soil Association to ask about their standards for winemaking. Predictably they don’t employ an expert in this field, and so everything has to be explained in detail. I have been given a list of allowed ingredients and additives, which seems to include most of the basic requirements. All ingredients have to be certified as free of any genetically modified organisms, with certificates signed by the manufacturer. It does feel a little silly asking your bentonite supplier to complete one of these forms, but hopefully they understand. Sugar has to be organic and have the relevant documents to prove it.

There is one omission that I am trying to persuade them to add to their list: they have no permitted yeast nutrient. Diammonium phosphate is not allowed. I have suggested the use of Thiamine (vitamin B1) as an alternative (kindly suggested by Geoff Taylor of Corkwise). This had to be put into a written request for discussion by their committee on processor certification. I wrote a letter explaining the need for yeast nutrients and the consequences on quality if they are not allowed. We managed to get through the harvest using clean yeast lees as nutrients for fermenting wines – labour intensive but effective. However as we are now looking towards bottling our sparkling base wines for secondary fermentation I am more concerned.

The reply I received asked me to research into the effects on health, environment and product quality involved in the manufacture and use (in winemaking) of both DAP and Thiamine. This information-gathering exercise is something that a busy vineyard owner doesn’t really have time for. My views would then be considered by the next meeting of the committee. Except that the next meeting has a full agenda, so the meeting after that will discuss it, on the 13^th of September! As I hope to bottle the wine in May, this is little help. Any ideas for alternative yeast nutrients would be appreciated.

Other matters that have arisen were as expected. The concern that we are processing grapes for other vineyards, some of which are not organic, has required us to implement a code of practice to ensure organic wines are kept separate. This means that all equipment has to be clean before being used for organic wines (tanks, pressing equipment, filters, hoses, pumps, the lot) and we must keep the paperwork to prove this. This is not as bad as it sounds because we already keep daily cellar record sheets, so I have added an extra section to record cleaning systems. A clearly separated area of the bond store has to be marked off for organic wine storage only, to avoid accidental mix-ups. It should be remembered that the rules are designed for all processors. I can understand how a vegetable packer could confuse a bin of organic cabbages with a non-organic bin of the same vegetable. However wine, bottled and labelled, is difficult to lose, even if it is placed at the other end of the store.

Use of sulphur dioxide is severely restricted. I used to worry about this one, and have been practising over the last few vintages to see how low the total sulphur levels can be kept. So far the lowest recorded is a total sulphur of 49 mg/L, with a free SO2 of 34 mg/L. We have to rack slightly later, delaying the first addition of SO2 and bottle earlier, constantly being vigilant on checking SO2 levels. Potassium metabisulphite is not permitted, so only liquid or gaseous SO2 can be used, although PMS can be used for cleaning equipment provided it is thoroughly rinsed afterwards with water.

Throughout this process I must constantly remind myself that the rules have a purpose – to provide a guarantee to the consumer. It will take time, but the lack of EU rules leaves the field open to interpretation, and if I can be persuasive enough, maybe they can change their standards a little.