How ‘Sustainable is the wine industry?

Last week’s expensive Winegrowers ad on sustainability (“Press Democrat” and elsewhere) offers no proof and no third party verification. The Winegrowers self-assess, thus co-opting and green-washing the word, like fox guarding the chicken coop. Being “sustainable” requires having a triple bottom line: profit, environmental protection, and social justice. The Wine Empire certainly profits.

It cuts off hilltops, converts redwood forests, oak woodlands, and apple orchards into regimented, industrial mono-crop rows. It fences out wildlife, poisons bees and other critters, and hoards water. Big Wine does not pay workers living wages.

Their wine may be “world-class,” as they claim. Wall Street and foreign investors own most of it, so most money leaves the county. Multi-national alcohol corporations—like Altira, Brown-Forman, Constellation, and The Wine Group—own much of the wine production. Winegrowers received a $377,282 federal grant in 2014 to fund their “branding campaign.” That followed a state grant that brought their total to $756,000. Tax dollars fund their publicity.

“We’re growing a better place for us all to live, work, and play,” the ad claims. Meanwhile, they spray poisonous chemicals and crowd narrow, rural roads with tipsy drivers. The wine industry digs 1,000-foot wells and takes as much water from streams as they want, even during the drought, sometimes shutting down neighbors wells. That’s why a growing number of residents are raising their voices against the Wine Empire.

“Sustainable?” Not really. More like propaganda and false advertising.

Shepherd Bliss,
Sebastopol