‘We need more trees, not bougie vineyards’: Napa winery gets heat over Redwood lawsuit
Polarising views emerged after db shared the news that a Napa winegrower was suing its neighbour for planting Redwood trees near its vineyard, which the vintner said would “contaminate the flavour” of its wine. Sarah Neish delves deeper into the debate.
Earlier this month, the drinks business reported that Quantum Limit in Napa Valley has filed a lawsuit against its neighbour Okell Holdings for planting a row of Redwood trees, which Quantum’s owner said is the equivalent to “dropping a bunker buster bomb” into his prized Cabernet Sauvignon vineyard.
Quantum’s owner Glenn Rice argues that the 60-100 Redwoods, which can grow to heights of up to 100 feet when fully mature, would cast his vineyard into shade. He also expressed concern that the debris and expansive root system of the trees would influence the flavour of his wine, which he sells for up to US$145 per bottle.
Those slamming Rice’s lawsuit say that both Redwoods and grapes are grown in close proximity to each other all over California and manage to flourish, and that the shade caused by the tree canopy may even end up benefitting the wines in today’s warming climate, helping to produce fresher expressions.
db takes a look at some of the opposing views in the debate.
“Malicious intent”
“What would be the purpose of planting one row of (fast growing) Redwood trees, other than malicious intent?” Jim Bourque asked in the comments section underneath db’s original story. “Anyone doing the minimal amount of research will find that Mr. Rice is absolutely right in his assessment of the situation.”
Bourque wasn’t the only one to come out in force on behalf of Quantum. “I have to agree with the winery. This is obviously done to hurt them,” wrote Nancy Poelstra. “I would be interested in how tall the Redwoods are that the neighbour planted, and how fast they grow. But in the end that doesn’t matter, the neighbour is doing this on purpose. I would install security cameras on the area as the neighbour may do even more aggressive actions.”
A further commenter implied that the lawsuit could lead to retaliation in the form of the defendant choosing to plant still more damaging trees on its property, such as Eucalyptus. “I agree with the removal [of the Redwoods]… but don’t insult the neighbour,” cautioned Gregg Gay. “You know you’re not going to like what goes up there next. I bet those are the type of people you’re dealing with. Good luck!”
Napa resident Bill Bowen suggested that: “It does not matter where you live in this world, there will always be issues with some neighbours. You have some that help and support this valley and others you have never seen.”
Expressing his support for one (unspecified) party in the dispute, Bowen added: “I know one party to this, and they are amazing neighbours, always helping and friendly. The other party I have never met, and I would tend to believe the two we as a community know and respect.”
“More trees, not bougie vineyards”
However, not all are in agreement with Quantum’s lawsuit, with critics contesting its rights over property borders and sunshine, and accusing the claimant of throwing a “tantrum”.
“Redwood are pretty good and attractive visual screens in their first decade or three, so it’s reasonable for a land owner to plant them as a screen,” commented one author with the user name Antoni. “I have planted Redwoods, Cedars and Eucalyptus as both a screen and windbreak. We need more trees; we don’t need more bougie vineyards.”
The real question we should be asking, said Rudy Von Strasser, is “why does one property owner have a greater right to a border than another? These things have been litigated often in the Berkeley and Oakland Hills in terms of a property’s view shed, noise from a school or playground etc. In the end I am not sure the vineyard owner has a strong legal position.”
According to William Sawtell, “the idea that wine vineyards deserve UNESCO status is absurd. It’s sad that neighbours can’t get along, it’s even sadder when rich people use their money to throw tantrums.”
Top arborists
The issue of whether or not the presence of Redwoods might influence the flavour of Quantum’s wines is a hotly debated topic.
Tim K, who claims to have “worked with many of the top arborists and tree experts in the California area for years, most of which have been in the Napa, Sonoma, Mendocino, and Lake County regions”, wrote: “I know for a fact there are only a very small handful of tree cultivars that will affect wine grapes with flavour, root kill and suffocation. Redwood trees are not one of them… grapes and Redwoods grow together all over Mendocino County in spectacular fashion (because there is no issue combining the two).
“From what I can tell, these two properties are located in the southern part of Napa where Redwood trees do not flourish and would be super slow-growing. Most of this area is considered Oak woodland which means there are likely Oak trees all around these properties. Now that is a much bigger problem for grapes than a Redwood tree…”
Partner Content
Throwing shade
Shade was also thrown on Quantum’s claim that the trees would consign its vineyard to darkness, preventing grapes from being able to ripen.
“Sure, shading may be an issue if extensive, but no one is entitled to the sun, and depending on the cultivar of Redwood (I’m guessing Aptos Blues), they may be considerably smaller than a standard Coastal Redwood, smaller framed and cover a much smaller cylindrical foot print,” added Tim K.
Condemning California as the “land of boring, low-acid, demented ‘fruit bomb’ wines”, a commenter with the username 595 Sommelier added: “California wineries are pushing grapes’ maturity from increasing heat and sunburn. Those Cab vines just may benefit from some offset shade in the years to come. Maybe make a slow, matured, complex wine, rather than the standard ‘cotton candy’, one-dimensional, no personality wines…. That’s a thought.”
Concerned conservationists
One reader made the point that the damage being done to the environment by non-organic viticulture is more concerning than whether or not Redwoods are planted in the region.
“Considering what non-organic vineyards are doing to the natural environment with their chemical pesticides, herbicides, and fertilisers… and the fact that they are not growing food, but an arguably expendable commodity that, in actuality, benefits no-one but the owners, I’d have to say, “I feel your pain—but Tough Titty!!!”, wrote Torsolino Vittorio Rotanti.
Meanwhile, concerned conservationists also put forward their views, fighting for the Redwoods’ right to remain.
“Please leave those beautiful, majestic Redwood trees alone,” wrote Monique Lundienza. “These trees contribute to our environment, unlike grape vines. Napa and all the surrounding area have enough grape vineyards. As an environmentalist and a lover of nature I will make sure to not buy your [Quantum’s] wine products.”
There were some shared beliefs that Redwoods are a more natural fit for the indigenous Californian land than winegrapes.
“Grapes aren’t protected as they are non-native, but the Redwoods probably are,” commented Rick Fitzpatrick. “Maybe the trees will give the grapes a truly unique flavour, for every cloud has a silver lining.”
Razzle dazzle
A small number of people also took Quantum to task in the comments section over its US$145 per bottle price tag.
“As a 70-year-old man who has farmed in this valley for generations, both dairy cattle and had a vineyard, let’s let the people know that you are putting on the razzle-dazzle!” wrote Farrell Borges.
“No wine is worth $145.00 a bottle. That’s about $40.00 a glass, are you off your rocker? I’m Portuguese and my father, grandfather and great grandfather have all made wine in this valley for over 100 years… drinking wine should be a pleasure. But guys like you only care about the money…Let me tell you something, it won’t last. Redwood trees will…So back off redwoods are sacred!”
Tim K added: “What I can say is that I have personally had the Cabernet Sauvignon wine of Quantum Limit vineyard on multiple occasions and my opinion is I cannot believe it is $145 a bottle as I would have trouble purchasing it for even $45 a bottle, but to each his own.”
According to Silicon Valley Bank’s Direct To Consumer Wine Report, the average price of a bottle of Napa wine in 2023 was $108, meaning Quantum’s prices are higher than average, though may be in line with inflation, given the economic pressures of the last two years. The $145 price is also specifically for its top expression, with lower priced wines also available in the collection.
db has been unable to reach Okell Holdings for comment as neither a website, phone number, email, or LinkedIn profile can be found for the company. Should a representative from Okell wish to get in touch with the drinks business they can do so by emailing info@thedrinksbusiness.com.
Related news
Pernod Ricard sells Mumm Napa to Trinchero in portfolio shake-up
Beyond the price tag: what's in store for the 'new' Napa?
Marriott brings AI concierge to Napa, transforming how guests pick wine
Who owns the land and environment in California ? Not just wine producers. Learn to get along with your neighbors !
Insanity. By the time those redwoods could conceivably be a problem, there won’t be any more California wine.
Those redwoods are either going to die from lack of water, improper planting, and improper maintenance or they will live enough to grow their root out into the vineyard and take as much water possible
Redwoods aren’t native to this region.
Wine consumption is down considerably in the US while visits to parks have skyrocketed. Read the room vintners!
I have lived in this neighborhood for 35+ years, century’s more than either one of these two owners and am very familiar with these two properties and owners. I know and have talked with them both on many occasions. I have been told things as well as witnessed things regarding them both. I also have my opinions which some may disagree with. Factually Glenn Rice is skewing the narrative and the real truth needs to start emerging. Glenn implies that the neighbor (Okell Holding/Jason Anderson) has planted a 60-100 tree Redwood Forest right next to his vineyard. This is completely incorrect and inaccurate. What I have witnessed and what is easily viewable on Google earth is 20-25 Redwood trees were planted along the property line. Instead of Okell Holdings filing a lawsuit for the landslide that in all probability was caused by the installation of the Vineyard Block Glenn Installed they chose to plant trees to mitigate the issue. These trees run east/west and will have no or very limited effect of shading to this vineyard area 30-40 years from now! What is ironic and hypocritical is that Glenn also has a few Redwood trees planted next to his vineyard in another location and just as close.
The owners of Quantum Limit, Glenn Rice and his wife, are not even California residents (permanent residents in Ft. Lauderdale) and have come to this area to take advantage of the small neighborhood and its surrounding community. Glenn Rice is your typical Arrogant, Greedy, self-centered POS who feels he is above everyone around him and entitled to bully and take whatever he wants, including not following local and state government ordinances. They are not well liked by almost all of the local community (brought to my attention during a conversation with the Napa County Sherriff’s department). He has all but stripped and converted most of his land to planted Vineyards, even cutting down a huge number of Heritage Oak trees, yet he implies he is some steward of the land (according to Quantum’s website). I was once told by Glenn that he plans to ruin these particular neighbors and sue them until they have nothing left and force them to give him their property. Rice’s have done nothing positive for the community, neighbors, or Napa County.
Now on the other side of the fence, you have this small family-owned vineyard, Okell Holdings that are California residents and have stood up against this bully of a neighbor Rice. In fact, the husband Jason Anderson was born and raised in California. Other immediate neighbors who can’t fight back for fear of retaliation as Glenn’s MO has been “I’ll sue you or else” tactic has made his other neighbors stay quiet. Now to top things off, since the day Okell/Anderson moved to this property they have done nothing but help and give back to the neighborhood, community, and Napa County including helping these very neighbors (Quantum/Rice) who continue to file predatorial lawsuit against them. Jason Anderson is also a Napa County Fire Fighter who has helped save many homes, lives, while putting his life on the line to protect his local community, surrounding communities, Napa County and beyond. Glenn Rice of Quantum Limit Vineyards is trying to drive these good people out to make a name for himself out of what can only be defined as pure greed and hatred toward these good people. We cannot afford to lose neighbors like Okell Holdings and Jason Anderson as it would be a significant loss and have a catastrophic impact on the community and Napa County. What our community does not need is a non-contributing, environmentally toxic, and greedy bougie vineyard and owner like Quantum Limit/Glenn Rice who is negatively impacting local residents, the community and Napa County!