So How Big is Heathcote, after all?

Right now I don’t envy Ernie Sullivan anything. He’s head of the Geographical Indications Committee GIC, the segment of the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation that seems to be perpetually under siege. He’s the one fending off over forty objections to the GIC’s determination of Coonawarra’s boundaries, in an issue that never seems to go away.
Right now, albeit on a much smaller scale, Ernie Sullivan is now confronted by a problem, which, while being considerably smaller, is no less important or contentious than the Coonawarra issue. That problem is Heathcote in central Victoria.
Heathcote made its name in the late 1970s and early 1980s as a region with exceptional potential for cabernet sauvignon and shiraz, although it is for its shiraz that it is most valued today. The early wines of Mount Ida, which has since become a Mildara Blass label, Jasper Hill, Huntleigh, McIvor Creek and The Heathcote Winery were rustic and simplistic, but did suggest the area had something special.
Much of the district’s early plantings were centred on the township of Heathcote itself, focused on the outcrops of rare Cambrian soils located on and around the McIvor/Mount Ida fault and Heathcote/Knowsley East fault. There is virtually no supply of water for irrigation purposes. I remember as if yesterday the occasion several years ago when an impassioned Ron Laughton of Jasper Hill showed me on a geological map the precise correlation of vineyard plantings with the Cambrian soils. His opinion was that there was no logical or justifiable way in which the Heathcote region, yet to be delineated as it was, could ever be extended beyond its then small and precise geological characteristics.
How things have changed.
The last six years have seen an unprecedented expansion of vineyards well to the south and to the north of what was the accepted if not legislated boundaries of the Heathcote region. Vineyards now extend on a long straight line from south of Tooboorac virtually to Rochester, onto soil types and into mesoclimates substantially different to that of Heathcote itself. Most of the larger of these new developments have considerable access to irrigation water.
Furthermore, growers around the township of Graytown, twenty-five kilometres to the north and east of Heathcote, are also attempting to join the larger proposed region. These vineyards were formerly considered to be part of the Goulburn Valley region and are considerably closer to Nagambie than they are to Heathcote. The Graytown vineyards are in an entirely different valley and their wines are substantially different in texture, style and taste to those of Heathcote.
The Heathcote District Winegrowers Association comprises the group of growers lobbying for the Heathcote name to become the name of the entire region at large, encompassing even five vineyards as far south and west of Heathcote as Redesdale and Mia Mia, plus the new lobby from Graytown. Their proposed region is just under ninety kilometres in length from north to south and over thirty-five kilometres at its widest point from west to east.
The active membership of the Heathcote District Winegrowers Association includes Brown Brothers whose vineyard is substantially north of Heathcote, David Traeger owner of vineyards in Graytown and a former champion of the Goulburn Valley cause and John Ellis of Hanging Rock. One of its key personnel is Steven Shelmerdine, Chairman of the Victorian Wineries Tourism Council and Treasurer of the Victorian Wine Industry Association and a former Chairman of the Winemakers Federation of Australia, who owns vineyards at either extremity of the proposed larger region, immediately to the south of Tooboorac and another past Colbinabbin. BRL Hardy has provided written support to the Heathcote District Winegrowers Association and at this point in time, despite the reputation of its individual vineyard Mount Ida Shiraz, Mildara Blass appears to be supporting the concept of the larger region. I hope this does not mean the imminent dilution of the Mount Ida concept. And, not unsurprisingly to me, another of the proponents of the expanded region is Ron Laughton himself.
One can understand that given the lustre of the Heathcote name, it is a very attractive option to these parties as the name by which the entire region should be called. But before the GIC grants this option, some very serious questions need to be considered:
1. How similar are the geology, landform and climate between the original plantings around Heathcote with that of the recent expansions and the older plantings around Graytown?
2. How similar are the wines from the original Heathcote plantings with those of the proposed additions to the region?
3. Is it justifiable to give a wine region GI the name of a town whose original wines and very limited and specific circumstances of climate and terroir bear little to no resemblance to the overwhelming majority of the region?
The Heathcote Vignerons Association Inc is the voice of the small number of owners of the older Heathcote vineyards who are fighting what they consider to be an uphill battle against the heavily financed interests which own the new developments to the north and south of the region. It is their view that the name of Heathcote should remain as a small and finite sub-regional name that would be a discrete part of a larger region that includes the newer plantings. It is their wish that a new name be found for the wider region.
My view is this: if the GIC submits to the not inconsiderable pressure being applied by the parties wishing to adopt the name of Heathcote for much of central and northern Victoria, it is setting as dangerous a precedent as it could possibly do. What justification will it then have to restrict the name of Coonawarra to its latest determination? How will it then be rationally able to argue that Coonawarra’s name, for instance, should not just be given to virtually all of South Australia’s southeast?
The GIC has no choice but to resist the plea of the Heathcote District Winegrowers Association and insist that a name be found for this large area of central and northern Victoria, but that name should not be Heathcote. Instead, the new region should comprise several distinct sub-regions, namely Heathcote, Redesdale, Mount Camel, Colbinabbin and Graytown. All we need to do is to figure a new name for the larger region. Geographically speaking, it is centred on a small village called Redcastle. Not a bad starting point for a name of a region whose speciality will be shiraz.
The alternative to the new name is a total loss of credibility for the GIC and the AWBP which would represent a crushing blow to those who value the integrity and authenticity of nomenclature of wine region and origin.
Should the GIC not deliver a strong message to the wine industry and the wine market about its serious intent to wisely deal with the matters before it, the day is nigh when it will become little other than an apologist to the industry and a message boy of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which, as in the case of the Coonawarra issue, is again left to pick up the pieces. There is a time when the wine industry needs to show to all concerned that it is willing and able to put its own house in order, and that time is now. Please login to post comment