We have posted some of the online comments to the fictitious, defensive PD Close to Home "...Defense of Grape Industry" by wine industry managers, not "growers," in the Nov. 4 edition. You can read them at www.winewaterwatch.org.
I also just received the following letter to the PD editor from Donald Williams of Calistoga. I am including it, since it refutes the contention that it is merely we west county people who are objecting to the over-expansion of the wine industry as events centers in our rural areas. We do not oppose vineyards or wineries, unless they do unsustainable things, such as displace food agriculture, sprawl out into our rural places, damage the environment, underpay farmers, and hoard water.
In the interests of professional journalism, we hope the PD editors will allow someone to refute that fallacious Close to Home, thus adding some balance and objectivity to this debate.
You can read the offensive PD article at the following link. We hope you will consider making a comment.
https://www.pressdemocrat.com/opinio...-growers-speak
Dear Editor,
Regarding Close to Home "Growers Speak Out in Defense of Grape Industry": The industry is under scrutiny because, like an intemperate drinker, it won't admit when it's had too much.
But if the alcohol industry would control its own---acknowledge how event-centers masquerading as wineries are an excessive indulgence and collectively destroy the rural quality of the north bay---it wouldn't have to play defense on questions about exploiting or respecting the landscape.
It's a matter of degree. When the indulgence affects too many other people; when local governments ignore their concerns and proceed with business as usual; when residents feel obliged to organize, protest, write letters, etc. about traffic and the loss of rural character---then the alcohol and tourism industry has taken a good thing too far.
Sincerely,
Donald Williams, Calistoga, CA